Skip to main content
Loading…

Chamber and committees

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Filter your results Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 4 May 2021
  6. Current session: 13 May 2021 to 2 December 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 1766 contributions

|

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Cairngorm Funicular Railway

Meeting date: 17 September 2025

Jamie Greene

That is helpful, and it is good to hear. I hope that word of mouth will help to propagate traffic.

I have one final question about the long-term vision, and it might be a joint question for you and HIE. Investment has been very much piecemeal, for obvious reasons, because of the remediation works and adding bits to the resorts to improve it, such as car parking, the potential toboggan run and other improvements. It does not sound like a long-term strategy with a big-ticket ask at the top of it. What is the long-term plan? What sort of numbers are you looking at for long-term investment to ensure that, in 20 to 30 years, there is still a buoyant, self-sufficient, popular and busy resort?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Cairngorm Funicular Railway

Meeting date: 17 September 2025

Jamie Greene

I presume that you will be knocking on ministers’ doors next year, whoever forms the Government.

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

“Flooding in communities: Moving towards flood resilience”

Meeting date: 17 September 2025

Jamie Greene

Is it correct that eight of the cycle 1 schemes are not going ahead?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

“Flooding in communities: Moving towards flood resilience”

Meeting date: 17 September 2025

Jamie Greene

That was helpful clarification. It makes sense that, where very few spades went in the ground, the costs in question were associated with the development, planning and design of the schemes that did not come to fruition. I am sure that local communities will reflect on that.

If the 40 projects that were originally planned had been delivered ahead of significant storm events, would those events have had less impact or could any of the substantial damage that communities faced been avoided had those schemes been in place? Has any analysis been done of that?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

“Flooding in communities: Moving towards flood resilience”

Meeting date: 17 September 2025

Jamie Greene

That is a short timescale.

Auditor General, your report is quite stark in its findings. It states explicitly that money that was supposed to go towards funding flooding schemes was redirected by councils. Was that a Scottish Government decision or a COSLA decision, or did individual councils take decisions to divert money from flooding to, for example, settle local government pay settlements? I think that you alluded to that. In other words, who made the decisions to divert that money away from vital flooding schemes?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Cairngorm Funicular Railway

Meeting date: 17 September 2025

Jamie Greene

Let me bring you back to some financial questions. Mr Black, you have stated three times over the course of this morning—it is also in your written submission—that you are keen to stress that Balfour Beatty has absorbed the cost of the remediation work on the funicular. I presume that Balfour Beatty has not sprouted a charitable arm. In what circumstances is it undertaking that work? Presumably, it was paid to do it—that is why you are telling us that.

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Cairngorm Funicular Railway

Meeting date: 17 September 2025

Jamie Greene

It was paid to do the job, and it is doing the job, but who paid for it? Where did the £18 million come from?

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Cairngorm Funicular Railway

Meeting date: 17 September 2025

Jamie Greene

You get the crux of my question, though. A huge chunk of public money has been paid to a private contractor to deliver the project and get it up to speed. It is clear that some work is still going on, although you say that it is minor rather than substantive. My point is that, as the Public Audit Committee, we are trying to work out what the overall potential liability to the public purse is.

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

Cairngorm Funicular Railway

Meeting date: 17 September 2025

Jamie Greene

I appreciate that, and thank you for the additional information.

In the light of the convener’s previous question, if the costs of starting afresh, rebuilding or building a new funicular were established, it sounds to me that the cost of doing the remediation was double the cost of putting in a new funicular. Who made the decision to remediate and why?

10:30  

Public Audit Committee [Draft]

“Flooding in communities: Moving towards flood resilience”

Meeting date: 17 September 2025

Jamie Greene

That information was helpful. The bigger concern, though—I am playing devil’s advocate here, because I have sympathy with the Government on this—is that if the original costs of cycle 1 have more than trebled to more than £1 billion, and if, as one might presume, cycle 2 is going to come with a huge price tag, where will the Government find the money to implement the cycle 2 schemes? After all, no Government can magic £2 billion out of nowhere. Where is the money going to come from? We have to invest in those schemes, so the Government will have to find that money from somewhere within its overall capital budget. We are talking about huge sums of money. Having seen eight of the previous 40 schemes being dropped, people will be concerned about the next tranche of schemes actually being delivered. When the worst happens, people will feel let down.