Chamber and committees

Work is under way, as I said in my previous answer, to consider the possibility of deploying average speed cameras on the A75. The outcome of that process will be identified through the conclusions that flow from the annual safety camera site prioritisation exercise. It is under way and Police Scotland’s west safety camera unit is considering a change to the enforcement strategy. When we have those results from Police Scotland, I will be more than happy to relay them to the member, as the First Minister communicated in his visit in December.

This year, as part of a £1.1 billion investment in maintaining and improving Scotland’s road network, the Scottish Government is investing a record £36 million in road safety initiatives across key routes. That includes £7.5 million of investment in the safety camera programme to ensure the continued deployment of safety cameras across Scotland, including on the A75 and A77. To maximise the impact of that technology, an annual site prioritisation exercise is undertaken each year, and as part of the process, consideration is being given to a change in the enforcement strategy on the A75.

In addition to those considerations, a range of engineering improvements is programmed on key routes in the south-west of Scotland. That includes the signalisation of the Cuckoo Bridge roundabout on the A75 and of the A77 Doonholm road junction.

I have listened carefully to the range of points that have been raised in the course of the debate. As I am sure that all members will have done, I have reflected on Maurice Golden’s contribution on the impact of fatalities on families and local communities. Before I turn to addressing members’ other points, I want to highlight the strategic importance of the delivery plan that the Government announced in December 2023, which was the first such plan ever to be published setting set out the milestones, dates and actions for progressing delivery of the A9 project. I will comment further on the progress that has been achieved and on what is expected in the year ahead, because we are getting on with all those actions.

I have absolutely learned the lessons about transparency and certainty. Edward Mountain seemed to be surprised that I focused on those aspects in my opening remarks, but I did so because those were the committee’s themes and the focus of its recommendations for improvements. While I am on the subject of Edward Mountain, I also reflect on his point about the work capacity of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee—and that was before land reform matters were allocated to it. A future Parliament might want to consider those points when looking at transport and infrastructure.

If the member had listened to my previous point, he would have heard me say that there is merit in transport and infrastructure being dealt with separately. It would be for a new Parliament to decide where those areas should be dealt with, precisely because of the workload issues that he has mentioned.

The delivery plan that we produced in December 2023 was developed to balance three key factors: market capacity to bid for and construct the projects making up the A9 dualling programme, disruption to road users and challenging financial constraints. The delivery plan provides much-needed certainty for road users, local communities and the construction industry on when works are expected. It transparently identifies key milestones when critical decisions are required to progress with procurement or make a contract award, and it identifies when dualling works on individual contracts are expected to become operational. The delivery plan was, and continues to be, supported by a Cabinet decision to prioritise completion of the A9 dualling programme within its budgets. It remains the Government’s focus to complete the A9 dualling programme in line with that plan.

On progress, in addition to the significant milestones that have been achieved, which I mentioned earlier, a number of advanced contracts have been procured for works such as ground investigations. Those are each important in helping to de-risk the main construction contracts.

The Government has also taken steps to engage with interested parties. In January 2024, a briefing was held for MSPs, and in February 2024, a stakeholder briefing was held in Inverness, followed by a public exhibition that visited Inverness, Aviemore, Dalwhinnie, Pitlochry and Perth. At the end of February 2024, the dedicated A9 dualling website was launched, and quarterly newsletters were issued in spring, summer and autumn 2024. In November 2024, the first of what will be regular updates on progress was issued to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee, and a briefing for MSPs was held in December 2024, where there was extensive discussion with Fergus Ewing on the pros and cons of framework contracts. I heard the points that he raised on framework contracts during the debate. I am prepared to continue that conversation, but, in the spirit of candour, I cannot imply that that will definitely happen, but we want to go ahead and provide certainty with the plan that we have. I am open to those discussions.

I am already accountable to Parliament. I answer questions and I respond. I have given statements and will continue to do so. I report to the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee. It would be wrong for the Government to tell Parliament what to do in carrying out its scrutiny and accountability responsibilities. I, and anyone else related to this issue, will absolutely respond and be accountable to the relevant committee. Having been the deputy convener of the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee under the convenership of Edward Mountain, I know that it is a very strong committee, and I am happy to report to it unless the committee and Parliament decide otherwise. It is for the Parliament and not the Government to decide whom the Government is accountable to. That is how Parliament works.

So did I.

Although some of Scotland’s ports are publicly owned or owned by communities, most are owned by commercial entities such as Peel Ports. It is for port owners to determine how best to manage their assets and utilise their resources, within the boundaries of any statutory requirements or limitations. In relation to fees and dues, how, when and what to charge forms part of that consideration. However, I am aware that the proposal has raised a number of concerns from vessel owners across Scotland who access the Clyde estuary. I therefore wrote to Peel Ports on 18 December regarding that issue.

Ship, passenger and goods dues are charges that can be levied under the Harbours Act 1964. The levels at which such dues are set is, in essence, a commercial matter for the relevant port authority. Section 31 of the act provides that Scottish ministers have a right of objection to the imposition of such charges if certain criteria are met, but that right has never been used in the past 25 years. Therefore, any person who is considering making a formal objection should take independent legal advice. Given that ministers might have an adjudication role, it might not be appropriate for me to meet directly with anyone who seeks to make such a legal objection. However, I am sure that, as he is doing today, Mr McMillan will represent the interests of his constituents in the boating community.

I understand that Peel Ports has committed to conducting a consultation before considering introducing any new charges, so I encourage members of the boating community to engage with that. I am sure that, as he is doing today, Mr McMillan will continue to represent the interests of his constituents in the area.

I was about to close, but, if I have time, I will take the intervention, Deputy Presiding Officer.

I begin by thanking all who contributed to the committee’s work on this inquiry, which arose from its consideration of petition PE1992, which was lodged in 2022. In my response to the committee, which was issued on 9 January, in my covering letter and again today, I welcome the committee’s consideration of the issues relevant to the future progress of the dualling programme.

Much has changed since the committee began its consideration of the petition, and its report recognises that. The delivery plan for completion of the A9 dualling programme was announced in December 2023. That plan involves the procurement of four design and build contracts as well as, subject to further decisions to be made in late 2025, the procurement of two mutual investment model—MIM—contracts. That approach was supported by a Cabinet decision to prioritise the completion of the A9 dualling programme within its budgets.

Since the announcement of that plan, the Government has made good progress, including through commencing procurement of the Tay crossing to Ballinluig project in May 2024; the awarding of the contract for the Tomatin to Moy project in July 2024; publication of orders for the Killiecrankie to Glen Garry and Dalraddy to Slochd projects; and progression of the land acquisition processes for the Tay crossing to Ballinluig, Pitlochry to Killiecrankie, Glen Garry to Dalwhinnie and Dalwhinnie to Crubenmore projects.

I will say more in my closing speech about the progress that has already been made and the further progress that is expected during 2025.