Draft press lines are not necessarily the same as meetings or decisions. I can see how that might have happened, but I think that records were kept of everything significant. That is the point. It is about what is significant in terms of decision making and who knew what and when, et cetera. There is far more acute awareness of that now than there would have been previously.

Again, that is the committee’s conclusion and position. Obviously, it is part of your responsibility to set out your position and your view. You went into some detail about the appropriateness of that with the former First Minister, and you have good evidence as to where things were, which has been laid out a number of times.

I will need to reflect on the chain of events and the evidence that you have on that. It was not a recommendation to me, as the current Minister for Transport, for action. I do not know whether officials have better recall of it.

So many things are judgment calls. With hindsight, there might be a lot of things that people would not want to do or that they would want to rethink.

I try to avoid communicating during live procurements, although I have not had many in recent times. There is the “safety first” thing, but there are also MSPs who demand responses to their letters, and if they do not get them they will stand up in Parliament and ask why a minister has not responded to their letter. That is the call that we have to make. We want transparency and openness—that is what the committee is asking for—but it is a judgment call. He made that judgment. Looking back on that, knowing what he does now, would he have done the same thing? I do not know.

The content was a factual reflection on what had happened, as opposed to an opinion on a procurement, and he probably saw it in that way. I do not want to second guess how somebody decided on things or judged them, but that is my reflection. I think that the committee is looking for some reflections on your conclusions, as opposed to asking us to respond on what we are being asked to do as a Government now.

There is constant dialogue on all those issues. It is good that we have regular dialogue with unions and management about how to improve the railway and other modes of transport.

On the national conversation, you might be aware that, around April, we had a change of First Minister and of ministers and that, subsequently, my appointment took place. There has been quite a lot of flux and change.

In coming into post, my view is that we should focus on delivery instead of general conversation—we do not need a national conversation for us to engage with all those issues. An opportunity exists for regular dialogue, particularly with the management, the operators and the interest groups. Monica Lennon referred to mobility access groups and the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland, which has particular leads on rail and has been quite clear about its needs and views. We are also embarking on the peak fare removal pilot, so a lot of activity is happening in this area.

As minister, I am keen to focus on delivery and I do not think that the national conversation will take place in the way that previous ministers envisaged. Now that I am the minister, my view is that I need to focus on delivery, which is what I will do.

I agree, and that is why accessibility is as important as affordability. From the figures that I have seen, I suspect that the evaluation will demonstrate that, although take-up is fantastic, particularly among people who can travel independently—the figures are very strong for the over-12s—take-up is lower in areas where buses are less available. That includes my constituency.

I know that you have a constituency interest in the matter and I know how important it is to you, but I am not going to engage in expressing different opinions. You might want to say that. I am not going to say that.

I am not going to speak on behalf of the community board—it is perfectly capable of speaking for itself. That is not something that I have raised or discussed with it.

Yes, convener, it will be brief. Good morning. It is good to see familiar faces from my time as deputy convener of the committee. I also recognise and acknowledge the two new members. I am pleased to be making my first appearance at the committee as a minister following my appointment to the new role in June.

A fortnight ago, the First Minister presented the 2023-24 programme for government to Parliament. Our transport package represents a clear focus on the First Minister’s priorities of equality, opportunity and community, and it builds on our previous record of delivery for all of Scotland.

We are making our transport system more accessible. We know that good public transport is a key economic enabler that provides opportunities in training, education and employment. We recently introduced regulations to enable the bus franchising and partnership options of the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019. They will come into force on 4 December and will allow transport authorities to begin developing their preferred options for improving their local bus services. We intend to introduce further regulations before the end of this year to begin to give those powers full effect.

Other regulations are also planned in relation to pavement parking, road works and zero-emission vehicles, and we also expect a number of United Kingdom statutory instruments to come before the committee.

Starting in October, we will undertake a six-month pilot to remove ScotRail peak time fares. The pilot will make rail travel more affordable and accessible during that period of time, and it will help to identify longer-term steps to reduce car use.

To support our island communities, which rely on our ferry services, we have frozen fares on the Clyde and Hebrides and Northern Isles routes, and we will continue with the construction of six major vessels.

The fair fares review will report by the end of this year. It will recommend a package of measures and actions for the future of public transport in Scotland.

We are continuing to improve our infrastructure. Progression of the A9 dualling continues to be a Government priority, as demonstrated by the First Minister’s announcement of new procurement for the dualling of the A9 between Tomatin and Moy. We will also reopen the railway line to Levenmouth, including new stations at Cameron Bridge and Leven.

This month, I confirmed funding of £140 million that will ensure that the delivery of the East Kilbride enhancement project and the Barrhead route electrification improvement works remains on track for completion in December. We plan to publish a refreshed rail services decarbonisation action plan.

Measures such as those demonstrate our determination to make our transport system ever more accessible and reliable, and to reduce the impact that we have on the environment and climate. I look forward to working with the committee as a minister and, I hope, to building a constructive relationship as I account for Scottish Government policy and action and, importantly, receive advice and recommendations from the committee.

As the committee will know, many such issues stem from the need for resilience in the fleet. The focus on delivery of the six ferries is absolute.

However, within that, there is the issue of operation and how that could be improved by driving up standards of management and communication. There are issues in relation to CalMac’s communication and relationships, and it knows that. When I met CalMac, I made clear my views and concerns about its lack of customer focus, and it has acknowledged that and is making steps to improve what it does. At the end of the day, that is an issue for the board that has oversight of CalMac.

The way in which we can address some of the issues is through the standards for the CHFS 3 contract and the expectations of whoever will be delivering that. The ferries community board report made strong points about what the expectations would be, and we can try to build those into the contract. The committee’s report raised a number of other issues and listed the principles by which any new contract should be judged.

Driving change and improvement can and should be done through the contract change as well. Change and improvement also require acute and fastidious ministerial oversight, although there should not be any interference in things that are a matter for the board or for management. I reassure the committee that, having spent a considerable amount of time looking at the ferries issues, I will take a keen and active interest in that.