Official Report 1038KB pdf
I ask members who are leaving the chamber and our visitors who are leaving the gallery to please do so quickly and quietly as we move on to the next item of business. Thank you for your co-operation.
The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-15883, in the name of Ash Regan, on expanding Scotland’s connectivity from Edinburgh and beyond. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament recognises what it sees as the importance of enhancing connectivity for communities, economic empowerment and Scotland’s global competitiveness; welcomes the reported ambition of Edinburgh Airport in seeking US preclearance status to streamline international travel and support economic growth; notes the view that there is a pressing need to address reported current access congestion by creating a second entry via Gogar, to ensure that the airport remains accessible and fit for purpose; further notes the view that it is urgent to ensure that Glasgow, as a major city, is not left behind due to a lack of an integrated and efficient transport system; notes the calls for strategic investment in developing port infrastructure in Dundee, Aberdeen, Gourock and Leith to enhance maritime connectivity and economic opportunities; further notes the view that there is a need to upgrade major road routes, including addressing critical safety and capacity issues on the A9 in the Highlands, and notes the calls for the Scottish Government to prioritise sustainable and inclusive infrastructure development that connects Scotland internally and to the world, supporting growth and opportunity for all.
12:47
I am delighted to announce to members that this is my party’s first members’ business debate. I have chosen to use it to address the future of our great nation’s connectivity by air, rail, sea and road. When we enhance our connections within Scotland and outwardly to the world, we secure economic empowerment and the prospect of opportunity for all, with no community left behind.
I will begin with the skies. Edinburgh airport is one of our key gateways to the world, and it has set its sights on obtaining US preclearance status. That is more than just a stamp on a piece of paper; securing preclearance would put Scotland on a par with some of the world’s most advanced travel hubs and smooth international departures while sparing travellers the delays and uncertainties that can stifle tourism and business growth.
Removing administrative barriers showcases Scotland as an open and outward-looking nation that is ready to seize global opportunities. However, ambition alone will not suffice, and we need to ensure that access to Edinburgh airport remains unimpeded. Currently, congestion at certain times can bring parts of our capital city to a standstill, which risks our losing out on the benefits of growth.
When people cannot reliably get to and from the airport, that is a problem. We need the second access point via Gogar, which is essential not just as transport infrastructure but as a statement about our forward-thinking approach to planning—planning that accommodates the needs of residents who live in that area, businesses and visitors, and that provides a solid foundation for the next generation of Scots to build on.
We should also continue to invest in the Edinburgh tram line. It is not simply a novelty; over the past few years, it has become a reliable lifeline for many residents across our city and tourists by linking the airport to the heart of our capital city and, I hope, beyond. Extending and upgrading that system would make our capital city more accessible and more dynamic, and it would appeal to investors when they decide where to land their next venture. The Edinburgh tram line can be a model for sustainable, integrated city transport.
Where would Ash Regan like the tram line to be extended to?
The member is probably aware that a number of future lines have been proposed. I am most keen—as he might understand—on the one that would come into my constituency, which would go to the Edinburgh royal infirmary.
On rail, Glasgow—one of the world’s great cities—should not be left behind, either. The city lacks the direct airport connectivity that most other major cities enjoy. The Glasgow airport rail link should be more than an aspiration; it is a necessity. That was understood more than 50 years ago when the Clyde metro was first discussed in the 1970s. The link would spur increased tourism and economic development. A traveller should be able to disembark a flight and board a train that carries them swiftly and efficiently into the heart of Scotland’s largest city. Glasgow, with its growing reputation for hosting major sporting events, should be hamstrung no longer by the lack of integrated transport systems that we all expect in a modern major city.
Equally important is the Edinburgh south suburban rail line. That project could elevate the quality of life for thousands of residents, expand the city’s liveable footprint and promote balanced development that does not rely purely on car-based commuting.
I agree whole-heartedly with Ash Regan’s comments about the connectivity of Glasgow airport. Does she agree that work involving the Glasgow metro going as far out as Glasgow airport and taking in the Queen Elizabeth university hospital must be done at a much faster pace, so that we get connectivity across the city?
The member makes a good point.
Meanwhile, the west Fife rail link has the potential to revitalise local communities and amplify the region’s economic prospects while creating a back-up line between Dunfermline and Glasgow.
We also live in a world that is increasingly driven by digital convenience. It is crucial that we integrate our rail networks with modern technologies such as Apple Wallet and Google Wallet. That is not a minor detail; it is a strategy that will allow for a seamless modern experience in order to attract new generations of public transport commuters. If we want residents and visitors alike to choose our public transport, we must meet them increasingly where they live. That is, as we know, on their smartphones. We must make every journey as frictionless as possible.
Scotland’s ports also hold immense untapped potential and serve as natural gateways to maintain maritime trade and tourism. I refer to Leith, Gourock, Rosyth, Glasgow, Dundee and Aberdeen. Cruise passengers can be a valuable resource for local economies if they are well managed. Enhancing port infrastructure could catalyse new business opportunities and create job growth in urban centres and remote coastal areas. By reimagining and revitalising those sites, we would again signal to the world that Scotland is open for business, whether by cargo ship or cruise liner.
We must also urgently address our road network, particularly in the Highlands and in the south of Scotland. Too often, safety concerns and limited capacity on routes such as the A9 and the A96 hinder the flow of goods and people and create a barrier between our rural communities and the advantages of wider economic participation. Upgrading those critical corridors is not only a matter of economic convenience but about fairness, equity and the dignity of living in any part of Scotland without feeling disconnected or being overlooked.
Then, there is the Forth road bridge—a structure that has immense potential. Currently, it has only a supporting role, alongside its newest neighbour, but I think that we need a fresh vision for that iconic structure, whether it is as a dedicated route for electric and commercial vehicles, a venue for innovation or a catalyst for modern tourism. By transforming what might be deemed to be surplus into a valuable asset, we demonstrate the innovative thinking that keeps Scotland at the forefront of progress.
My call to the Parliament is clear: we need to think bigger by investing strategically, sustainably and inclusively in our infrastructure. Let us realise that every airport upgrade, port improvement, rail link and road expansion is a promise to our people that we believe in them and in Scotland as a competitive force on the global stage.
My debate today is not just about improving travel times or building better transport stations; it is about the kind of country that we want Scotland to be in the 21st century: open, confident and prepared to lead. Let us champion connectivity as a national priority by uniting our urban and rural communities and forging new global links that allow our people to flourish. In doing so, we will honour our responsibility to foster growth, open doors of opportunity and showcase to the world the very best that Scotland has to offer.
Let us send that clear message to the people of Scotland and the world, which is summed up well by paraphrasing the inspiring words of the MSP who reconvened this very Parliament: stop the world—Scotland is getting on.
12:56
I warmly congratulate Ash Regan on bringing this topic to the chamber. Improving connectivity is largely reliant on the delivery of strategic transport projects. Over the past four years, there has been, in my view, no other area of devolved policy in which so much has gone wrong at such exorbitant cost and so frequently as the maladministration of our major transport projects. I say that with great sadness. That is in contrast to the records of previous Administrations of different hues.
We have seen the motorway network around the west of Scotland being made about as good as anywhere. The Forth crossing is a national icon of international standard. The Aberdeen western peripheral route and the Borders railway have improved lives immeasurably for those communities. As for Edinburgh, well, as we heard, they decided to choose the trams.
The past four years have seen vital projects flounder and fail. That includes the A9 dualling, which was promised to be completed this year, but which, we are now told, will require 10 more years. That is just not acceptable, as a delegation made clear to the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for Transport last June, when we asked for the work to be accelerated. It also includes the equally long-promised dualling of the A96. Some £90 million has been spent on that project so far and not one metre of tarmac has been laid. A freedom of information request for the detail of that project has been denied because of the exemption that relates to internal candour or discussion. The justification for that is to maintain
“high quality policy and decision-making”.
If that is high quality, what does poor quality look like?
I want to be positive. I have always tried to offer constructive criticism, even though it seems to have fallen on deaf ears. We need a fresh approach to strategic project delivery—a tabula rasa, as they might say. I will briefly set out four components of an entirely fresh approach, which I can talk about only at a very high level.
First, we must take the partisan party politics out of our approach. There is consensus among the main parties, so let us negotiate and work with the main parties and not pander to our absent wine bar revolutionaries.
Secondly, put local community people, who know their communities best, in charge and involve them at all times in decision making—not just in some synthetic and bogus consultations, especially in the Hebrides with regard to Caledonian Maritime Assets Ltd and Caledonian MacBrayne. I recognise the work that Brian Wilson has done on that and the various salient points that he has made.
Thirdly, there should be far more reliance on industry and civil engineering experts, and there should be more collaboration. Let such experts, independently of Transport Scotland, advise, probe, quiz, challenge and question projects—not as paid consultants in the pocket of quangos but as independent experts who know far more than politicians about what they are doing.
Fourthly, there should be candour and accountability and an end to the secrecy of the freedom of information regime. Sadly, whether it is CMAL on ferries or Transport Scotland on roads, these quangos, which should be quasi-autonomous, have become almost fully autonomous—the “quasi” has gone and there is no accountability. Everybody can see it, and it really must change, and change radically.
I am afraid to say that, for my constituents, the past four years have been wasted years. However, the cabinet secretary—who, I know, has the best of intentions—has one year left before the next election to put things right. I urge her to do so.
13:01
I congratulate Ash Regan on securing enough support to hold this debate. I might be wrong about this, but I may have been the first member to support her motion. It is certainly one of the most comprehensive motions that I have seen in some time—Ms Regan covers a lot of bases in it. I will not cover them all but will concentrate my remarks on aviation and the Clyde metro, which will impact on the region in which I live and that I represent.
The cross-party group on aviation’s February 2023 report argued for a policy regime that is “supportive of aviation”, with
“Stronger engagement around route development and airline support”.
The inbound and outbound aviation and tourism sectors are crucial enablers for the Scottish economy. Outbound travel is worth more than £3.6 billion a year to the Scottish economy and supports the employment of more than 30,000 people across Scotland. Research conducted by Edinburgh Napier University found that air links are the most influential transport factor in the location decisions of most overseas-based businesses that invest in the United Kingdom. Aviation matters to the local and national economies, and Scotland being connected to the world matters to us all.
The motion mentions the ambition of Edinburgh airport to have a US preclearance facility such as Dublin airport has. That means that we will have to work closely with the US Government and President Trump to persuade them that they should fund such a base here, in Scotland. The boost to the economy would be fantastic and, clearly, Edinburgh airport would benefit hugely. Having flown to America through Dublin, I can tell members that it is massively more convenient to clear customs on this side of the Atlantic than it is on the other.
I wish Edinburgh airport well, but I also want Glasgow airport to thrive. There is no doubt that Glasgow airport would do even better if the transport links to and from the airport were improved. Talk of a light rail link to the airport has gone on for too long. I can think of no other major airport anywhere that does not have better connections, and fixing that for Glasgow must be a priority.
It appears that that issue might be addressed through the ambitious but, as yet, quite woolly Clyde metro project. The programme-level business case for that network is expected by 2026, and it is estimated that timescales for the project could be as long as 25 years, which is way too long.
Having an integrated transport system in the Strathclyde region is too important to be kicked this far down the road. We need Governments to commit to it. It is too big for local government to fund, and we need to get moving. We know that a region with strong connectivity will enjoy increased levels of trade. The development of Glasgow airport represents a unique opportunity to drive economic growth and prosperity in that region.
Lastly, aviation needs to decarbonise. Scotland should be at the forefront of making the new fuels of the future, but we are not at the races yet. There was an event in Parliament last night looking at sustainable aviation fuel, and we really ought to be making sustainable aviation fuel here, in Scotland. I have spoken about that many times, and the cabinet secretary knows that. We need to do better. Transport can be the engine of growth, but too often it is the opposite.
I thank Ash Regan once again for allowing the chamber to discuss these matters.
13:05
I, too, thank Ash Regan for lodging the motion. It is incredibly important, and I was pleased to be one of the signatories to it, because it makes points that need to be made in the chamber more often. Not only am I happy that she lodged the motion, but I do not disagree with a single word that she said in her speech, nor do I disagree with any of the contributions thus far.
I say that so forcefully because the motion makes the important point that transport is not detached from the rest of public policy but is central to it. I made that point at a reception that I hosted on behalf of the Road Haulage Association. Transport is the economy—it is the fundamental connective tissue. That is true of any economy, but it is particularly true of the Scottish economy, given that what we make and produce in remote places—whether we are talking about the energy industry in the north-east, the whisky industry, which has distilleries in the Highlands and Islands, or the aquaculture industry—is so important to what makes our economy distinctive. Those places with productive capacity that make our economy distinctive and give it a competitive edge must have links with places in the central belt.
Let us take whisky, for example. It is distilled in remote parts of Scotland, but it is often bottled in the central belt. We export 43 bottles of whisky a second, and 1.5 billion bottles are produced every year. Fergus Ewing is right to talk about the importance of the A9, because the problems with that road are not simply an inconvenience. When there is a lane closure on the A9, that creates the mother of all bottlenecks and the flow of whisky that is so important to our economy gets interrupted.
It is not only the whisky industry that is affected. All industries need transport links. I believe that, fundamentally, the economy is about moving things from point A to point B. Whether we are talking about getting supplies from suppliers to places of business or finished products to customers, goods need to be transported. If we want workers to be able to get from where they live to where they work, we need to ensure that transport is available. Transport is the lifeblood and the fundamental foundation of the economy, and we need to start talking about it as such. It is not a peripheral topic or just another policy area; it is the foundation of the economy. That is especially true in Scotland, where we have so many remote areas of production.
Of the comments that Ash Regan made, the one that I support the most is her point about the link between urban and rural. We must end the practice of talking about the urban economy or the rural economy and start talking about the urban economy and the rural economy. Our economic advantages rely on urban and rural working together, and the issues with transport get in the way of that.
I recognise that I do not have much time, but I make the point that we need to have a renewed conversation about roads. Again, far too often, we talk about roads in binary terms—we say either that roads are good or that they are bad. We should not. Roads are vitally important in providing transport links between urban and rural areas. That involves delivering the major transport projects—Fergus Ewing is absolutely right to highlight the issues with those projects—but it also involves getting the basics right.
The other night, I was talking to a haulier who told me that he is spending £30,000 a month on tyres, which wear out more quickly on the outside because we are not cutting back vegetation at the sides of our roads and our roads are not wide enough. He also said that there are not enough secure resting places for drivers.
We should have a renewed debate about transport, stop talking about roads in binary terms and get the basics right, as well as delivering strategic projects.
13:10
I congratulate Ash Regan on securing today’s debate and commend her for the wording of the motion, which provides something for everyone in terms of location, by mentioning Edinburgh, Glasgow and Aberdeen, and in terms of connectivity, by including road, rail and air while also highlighting how important connectivity is to our economy and communities.
That infrastructure is just as important as energy infrastructure, which is why it is disappointing that the Government does not bring those topics forward for debate in Government time. I can understand why the Government did not want to talk about subjects such as air travel and roads when it was shackled to the Greens, but the anti-growth, anti-aircraft, anti-car extremists have been ditched from Government, so those subjects should be at the top of the agenda again.
Infrastructure connections are the veins of our economy, spreading life and jobs to all corners of Scotland and allowing all areas to grow and prosper. That was known by the devolved SNP Government of the past, but the situation has changed completely and I am not sure why. Fergus Ewing pointed out that the Government used to do that but that the situation has changed completely in the past four years.
Let us take Aberdeen as an example. We have seen a huge private investment of £300 million in Aberdeen south harbour. It is a brilliant deepwater facility, but the planned infrastructure improvements to the city have not kept pace to maximise its economic potential. The SNP promised that £200 million would be spent on rail improvements to reduce journey times between the city and the central belt by 2026, and that project was backed by the Aberdeen and Grampian Chamber of Commerce because it would boost economic growth. However, the SNP abandoned that pledge and has supplied only 8 per cent of the funding. We have improved port facilities at Fraserburgh and Peterhead, and there was an SNP promise to dual the roads from Aberdeen to those places, but that project has also been dropped. Fraserburgh and Peterhead have no rail links, so they deserve decent road infrastructure.
There is to be a freeport on the Cromarty Firth to support the renewables sector, and much of the supply chain and skills for that will be in Aberdeen. The A96 was meant to be dualled by 2030, which would help to maximise the economic potential of the freeport, but that is another broken promise from this SNP Government. As has been said, the A9 was meant to be dualled by this year, but that improvement will now be at least 10 years late, which is another broken promise that means that more economic benefit will be lost. People in North East Scotland have had enough of the SNP’s spin and broken promises. They want to see commitments being delivered.
We are in budget season, and improvements to road, rail and air hardly get a mention, but connectivity is important to the economic growth that will create jobs and deliver increased revenue for us all to spend on public services.
Ash Regan was right to highlight the lack of integrated travel. It is an embarrassment that Edinburgh, Glasgow and Aberdeen airports are not connected to the rail network—something that is even more frustrating when we consider how close to those airports the railway lines are.
I have a final point to make about airports. Some years ago, the Scottish Government was looking to get air passenger duty devolved but seemed to bottle it when the Greens started pulling the strings. The devolution of APD would surely be a great opportunity to make Scottish airports more competitive and would be a lever that we could use to boost economic growth.
I thank Ash Regan for securing a debate on a topic that is vital to Scotland’s future prosperity, and I urge the Government again to allocate Government parliamentary time to transport and energy infrastructure, so that we can debate those topics fully.
13:14
I, too, thank Ash Regan for bringing the debate to the chamber. It has been very wide ranging in content, so I hope that members will appreciate that I cannot address all the points that have been raised. I also note for the record that I am recused as a Government minister from commenting on matters relating to airspace expansion plans for Edinburgh airport.
As Cabinet Secretary for Transport, I understand the crucial and evolving role that the transport sector plays in supporting the economy. It is estimated to support more than £9 billion of Scotland’s gross value added and around 150,000 jobs, which is about 7 per cent of the Scottish economy as a whole. Transport literally drives the economy.
I note that, in this short debate, more positive things have been said about transport by Mr Simpson, Mr Johnson and Ash Regan than we normally hear in the chamber. I encourage them to continue to support me in championing the positive role that transport can play. There will always be challenges and frustrations, but there is space in the chamber to champion transport, and its role in the economy, more widely.
I welcome the way in which the cabinet secretary is approaching the debate. She will be aware that Stuart Patrick, the chief executive of Glasgow Chamber of Commerce, has said that, under the aviation strategy, despite the airport-neutral approach, every single route has gone to Edinburgh airport. I am sure that the cabinet secretary can see that, in the context of trying to achieve regional economic balance, that approach might need to change. Will she commit today to doing something about that?
It is really important that we support our airports and our country as a whole. There are commercial issues that mean that we have to—and should—take an airport-neutral position, but we continue to actively support Glasgow airport and its work. I hope that some positive developments can be announced at some point in the future.
I have listened carefully to members’ views and noted their valuable contributions. Edinburgh airport and our other major airports in Glasgow, Aberdeen, Inverness and Prestwick provide vital connectivity to many destinations, helping to deliver significant economic and social benefits. We are committed to working with Scotland’s airports and airlines to help to grow Scotland’s international connectivity, particularly by developing connectivity to key international markets. That is important for tourism, business connectivity and the economy as a whole.
Will the cabinet secretary take an intervention?
I ask the member to let me develop my point. I want to address some of the points that Ash Regan raised, because she led the debate.
We are also happy to provide non-financial support to our airports when they take initiatives that can bring clear benefits to local economies or Scotland as a whole. Ash Regan provided the good example of Edinburgh airport seeking to provide preclearance for passengers travelling to the US, which we have supported for some time and continue to support. That said, preclearance is a commercial matter for Edinburgh airport and, ultimately, it would need to be approved by the relevant authorities in the United States. I and the Cabinet Secretary for Constitution, External Affairs and Culture have already discussed the importance of the issue with the incoming US consul general.
As I mentioned in my speech, the devolution of air passenger duty could be a way of boosting economic numbers and growth and making our airports more attractive. Is the Scottish Government still considering the devolution of air passenger duty?
Part of the agreement is to devolve APD. The issue is how we can do that in a way that does not compromise, in particular, the issues around Inverness airport. I reassure the member that the matter is being dealt with by the finance secretary as a taxation issue, and I take a keen interest in it. It is a live and current matter and we are considering how we can use the powers that have already been devolved.
Ministers are committed to reducing aviation emissions, of course, as well as to increasing our connectivity. The reserved nature of aviation means that we will continue to influence the UK Government so that Scotland can benefit fully from its jet zero strategy for aviation decarbonisation, which applies throughout the UK. We have provided funding to enable Glasgow airport to explore the feasibility of a hydrogen production, storage and distribution hub, which would help to support zero-emissions transport at that airport. MSPs who attended the airport industry rise coalition reception, which was hosted by Jackie Dunbar MSP yesterday evening, heard more about the role that sustainable aviation fuel can play in reducing the industry’s emissions, and they will have heard my positive comments about the role of airports in our economy.
On access to Edinburgh airport, which is mentioned in the motion, the Scottish Government is aware of the plans for a second access road, which are included in the recently adopted Edinburgh city plan 2030, noting that any new road will be subject to the statutory approvals process. Edinburgh airport needs to improve sustainable access. As far as possible, passengers and staff should use existing public transport options to make their journeys to and from the airport.
On Glasgow, ambitious future plans for Scotland’s transport network are set out in the second strategic transport projects review. The review’s recommendations represent a repositioning of our transport investment priorities. The focus is firmly on how transport can help us to protect our climate and improve lives while supporting the economy. As we have heard, the most transformative of the review’s recommendations involves the Clyde metro, which represents a multibillion-pound investment. When complete, that project could better connect more than 1.5 million people to employment, education and health services across the Glasgow city region. It includes integrated public transport connectivity to Glasgow airport. The development of the case for investment is being led by the Strathclyde Partnership for Transport, which is supported by Glasgow City Council and Transport Scotland. On-going work includes the development of the network and consideration of funding options for the project’s delivery. I heard what members said about that during the debate.
We recognise that a diverse and successful port sector contributes significantly to the national, regional and local economies in which ports operate. They are vital in delivering the outcomes of NPF4 and achieving the success of the national development sites that are identified in it. Ports and harbours are crucial gateways to Scotland, and Scottish ministers continue to support a market-driven approach to ports policy and to recognise the contributions of port operators to Scotland’s economy. I have taken a keen interest in supporting and promoting that area of policy since taking on the transport portfolio.
An example of our understanding of the importance of our ports to Scotland’s economy includes the recent granting of pilotage powers to the owners of the port of Ardersier. The harbour order, which was consented to last month, is an important step in a process that will put the port of Ardersier at the front of our offshore renewable sector. Those powers will support significant investment, totalling £400 million, in a remote and economically challenged part of the country.
On ports and the thorny issue of the appointments to CalMac and CMAL boards, the cabinet secretary re-appointed a Danish gentleman as the head of CalMac, and two other executive directors, of whom neither is believed to have visited any CalMac ports. Having visited Stornoway once, the Danish gentleman presumably decided that it was not worth going back to. Why were local, worthy candidates rejected? They are island residents and distinguished, knowledgeable people who know about the islands. Why is the SNP Government replacing the old absentee lairds with absentee quango bosses?
Fergus Ewing quoted Brian Wilson earlier. Mr Wilson was very selective in his reporting on CMAL and CalMac board members and their involvement in sites and how they engage with communities.
I agree that we need to have representatives of islands who have expertise in the required areas, and CMAL and CalMac have people from island communities on their boards currently. As cabinet secretary, I have been active in encouraging that and in advertising such issues widely. As a former Government minister, Fergus Ewing will know that there are particular skills—particularly around audit and risk—that require some experience. That has been the case with some of those appointments.
I am conscious that I have taken quite a few interventions. This is a big and wide debate, so I will continue.
Obviously, our offshore capabilities will place more demands on our ports and harbours.
On road connectivity, we know how important the A9 is. I have engaged with members by providing the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee with updates and, in December, by briefing MSPs who have a continuing interest in the issue. We have invested in and delivered on the Queensferry crossing, the M8, the M73, the M74, the A90 and the hugely important Aberdeen western peripheral route, and we have made a variety of rail investments, including at Levenmouth, Bathgate, Airdrie, Barrhead and East Kilbride.
Considerable investments have been made right across the whole infrastructure, in challenging times and in a fiscal situation in which £6 billion has been taken out of our budget. We cannot ignore the challenges that we have faced.
Should the Parliament pass the budget bill, we will see next year a record-breaking transport budget that breaks the £4 billion level. That said, we face increasing pressures across all our transport systems to ensure that they remain safe and secure, with the most substantial allocation, as members are well aware, going to rail. Of course, there is more that we would like to do, if we had full resources and full powers.
This has been a constructive debate. I assure members that we are committed to investing in our transport networks and connecting our communities; indeed, that is vital to our future economic growth. I hope that, if this debate has done one thing, it has opened a chink not only for absolutely robust scrutiny of me in terms of my accountability as Cabinet Secretary for Transport, but to give us the space to elevate transport to its central role in Scotland’s economy.
That concludes the debate.
13:25 Meeting suspended.Air ais
First Minister’s Question TimeAir adhart
Portfolio Question Time