���˿���

That might be a question for Gail Macgregor.

Just to keep the focus in this session on the report, I should say that it is clear that we have to reduce car use—full stop—whether we are talking about EVs or otherwise. Obviously, we do not want to disincentivise people from using EVs. We want to encourage that sort of thing, which is the point of your question.

As for promoting such moves, I was speaking only yesterday at a net zero event at Dynamic Earth that involved industry, and that issue was part of the discussion. We want people to switch to EVs, but we also want to reduce car use in general, because that will help to alleviate congestion and will lead to people using public transport more, as it will be more affordable, reliable and accessible.

It is that combined picture that we are working on, but on your specific question about whether we are working with industry, the answer is yes.

Sometimes.

Separately from the context in which you put that question, I think that we do need to improve and change things, and there is a constant drive for improvement. However, you should not diminish the changes that we are making and have made already. For example, when it comes to rail traffic, 75 per cent of passenger journeys are on electrified lines. The electrification of the East Kilbride line is coming, and we have completed the electrification of the Barrhead line.

We are also seeing the latest iteration of the vehicle emissions trading scheme—on 7 April, the UK Government issued its response to the UK-wide consultation on that. A load of different things are happening that are resulting in a shift to electric transportation. As I mentioned, there is the increasing electrification of our bus system.

However, we are talking about how people travel, and giving them alternatives. It is interesting to see the data in the report, including data from the Glasgow south city way, where we are seeing significant changes in commuting times and in how people are using the new provision there to cycle, with investment support from the Scottish Government.

Do we need to see quite a change? Yes. Are we taking steps to bring about that change? Yes. Do we need to do more? Yes. That is the whole point—we want to drive forward that agenda. However, it is not without its challenges. In particular, to reflect on Councillor Macgregor’s point, if we look at the geography of Scotland, we see that there are big challenges in rural areas. That is one of the reasons why we think that, if there is going to be a continuing reliance on cars, we need to invest in advance of demand. We have worked with local authorities on funding and support for electric vehicle charging, such that we have match funding from the private sector, which is good. However, in our budget that has just been approved, we have funding for rural and island EV charging in particular, because we might not get the same market uptake there as we might do elsewhere.

We have not got our advice yet, but our reading of the climate change advice that was given to the UK Government in February leads us to think that the level of car use reduction that is indicated by the target will not be needed in order to meet the emissions reductions that we need. That is probably the core issue. We still want and need to reduce car use—that has a variety of impacts—but, as I said at the beginning, I want to be clear that the vehicle emissions trading scheme and the switch to EVs will probably do far more to reduce emissions than was anticipated in December 2020. That is what leads me to say that the target is not only unachievable but unnecessary.

That does not mean that we do not need to reduce car use. We still do, but we should do it in a different way.

The project has short, medium and long-term aspects. The option that will be proceeded with has been chosen and we are now embarking on its initial design, which is going through the processes that are set out in the design manual that we talked about earlier.

Some of the short-term improvements relate to the catchment area. Funnily enough, we were in Inveraray at an A83 task force meeting—I think that Jackie Baillie was one of the ���˿��� who dialled into that meeting—that took place just before Storm Babet, so we were hearing directly from Amey about what was going to happen with the rainfall that was expected, and, a couple of days later, we saw the consequences. There have been some landslides in areas beyond the areas that were initially identified, so, in the short term, there has been investment in those areas.

Significant work has been done on the medium-term aspects, which involves strengthening the old military road and improving bends on it. Quite a lot has been invested in the old military road to help with the current diversions and in relation to what will be required for the final design as part of the long-term project, which involves the covering that will ensure the long-term sustainable future of the A83.

In terms of capital budgets, the committee will be aware that we do not keep pots of money aside and say, “That’s marked for the A83 and is only to be opened at such a time as it will be invested.” We are only starting with the initial aspects of the DMRB. We have just issued the draft orders—perhaps my colleagues can remind me when that took place.

Clearly, this proposal has completed certain of the phases. There are still issues as to whether, in the next phase, there will be any objections or, indeed, a public inquiry. There are strong feelings about the proposal, but there are strong feelings about most roads in most places. The issue probably relates to the landscaping and the loch’s natural environment.

As part of the process, environmental and economic issues have to be addressed not only at the strategic outline business case stage, but at all five stages. One of the key things to relay is that, although the petitioners do not like the route that has been chosen, consideration is being given to the feasibility and attractiveness of combining with adjacent schemes to make sure that the tree line and other environmental aspects are considered. There is still time left in the process to address that point.

There is an important point to be up front and candid about, which is that, because of the interaction between the A82 and the A83—in particular, the A82 being used when there are problems with the A83—we do not think that it would be appropriate to do work on the A83 and the A82 at the same time. Because of the safety issues and the road’s importance to the economy and the people of Argyll in particular, we would prioritise the A83 over the A82. It is probably important to put that on the record.

Thank you, convener. Good morning. I have opening remarks to provide a bit of context, which might be helpful. I thank the committee for inviting me to discuss the petitions relating to the A75, the A77, the A83 Rest and Be Thankful, the A82 between Tarbet and Inverarnan, and the A96 Inverness to Nairn bypass.

The Scottish Government recognises the crucial role of transport infrastructure in supporting sustainable economic growth and access to essential services, and we are committed to improving transport infrastructure across Scotland. The Scottish Government has a strong record of delivering major infrastructure projects, including the £745 million Aberdeen western peripheral route and the £1.34 billion Queensferry crossing on the Forth estuary, which was a complex engineering feat that put our workmanship to the front and centre of global engineering. We have also delivered the Borders railway and electrified the rail route between our two largest cities through the Glasgow to Edinburgh improvement programme. In addition, since 2012, we have invested more than £475 million in the A9 dualling programme, which has enabled statutory processes to be completed for 10 out of the 11 projects, delivered the first two projects into operational use and supported procurement on the third and fourth contracts.

On the A82, a new viaduct has been built at Pulpit Rock on the side of Loch Lomond, which has helped to remove traffic signals that had been there for nearly 30 years, and a much-needed bypass at Crianlarich has reduced traffic in the town by half. Both improvements benefit road users and local communities along the A82.

At a total cost of £64 million, we have completed five major improvements on the A77, including the £29 million Maybole bypass. We have also completed six major roads improvement projects on the A75, with a total value of more than £50 million.

Following an initial meeting with the A77 campaign team in November, I met A75 and A77 campaigners, including the two petitioners, on Friday 21 March. I am happy to report that my offer to establish a regular six-monthly meeting to bring them together with Transport Scotland and Amey was accepted.

Although the United Kingdom autumn budget marked a step in the right direction, it did not make up for 14 years of underinvestment—austerity cannot be undone in one year. We still face significant pressures on our capital budget, which are significantly affecting our ability to maintain investment in all Scotland’s transport infrastructure.

Despite the significant pressures on our capital budget, we continue to progress improvements to the trunk road network. That includes dualling the A96 from Inverness to Nairn—including the Nairn bypass—and the procedural steps for the acquisition of land have now been concluded, which has delivered a further key milestone for the scheme. We continue to progress work to determine the most suitable procurement option for delivering the scheme, after which a timetable for delivery can be set.

Development work on the A83 Rest and Be Thankful continues at pace, with draft orders having been published last December for medium-term and long-term solutions. In addition, following the allocation of funding from the UK Government, we have wasted no time in progressing the design and assessment work to consider the options for realigning the A75 trunk road at the villages of Springholm and Crocketford, with almost 180 people having attended the meet-the-team events that were held three weeks ago.

I thank the committee for giving me the opportunity to make those opening remarks, which provide a bit more current context, and I will be happy to answer any questions that committee members have on the petitions.

I just want to say thank you. I know that everybody wants their part of the county to be seen as a priority. The south-west wants to be seen as a priority, as do other parts of the country. The challenge for any cabinet secretary, particularly the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, is that members feel passionately about their area and want to pursue the best for their constituents. I know that I cannot please everybody all the time, but I reassure the committee that, since becoming the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, I have given every attention to getting momentum and making progress in a number of areas, including the ones that you have identified in these petitions.

The estimated cost for the permanent long-term solution is between £408 million and £510 million in quarter four 2024 prices. We will need to identify how long the construction will take. There has been significant investment in the old military road, which I have inspected and which anyone who is driving on that road will be able to identify. As I said, even with the improvements that have been made, there are on-going issues in the short term, with challenges such as increasing wet weather and ground saturation. A lot of science has been involved in monitoring the water levels, which also allows us to activate in advance the old military road when it is required.

I want to say publicly that we are also working very hard with the BBC and STV so that, when they make announcements about the impact of weather, they indicate that the A83 is still open, even if the old military road is being used as a diversion, which is important. In the past—and this still happens sometimes—they have said “The A83 is closed”, which implies that Argyll is closed, but it is not. As I said, things such as that can also make a difference, although I acknowledge that that addresses a different point to your question.

My officials might be able to talk about what is required and when with regard to the roll-out of spend.