Seòmar agus comataidhean

No, that is not the case. Strathclyde Partnership for Transport is part of the on-going process that the officials—

The process that you talk about being used down south is the Nexus process, which was different from this one. That looked at financial aspects; we are looking at the entire effect of franchising.

I will give you an example from my area. There are cross-border issues with bus provision in my constituency, and I give this as a purely random example of a possibility. If we decided in my area to go down a franchising route, we would be required to talk to all the other areas in our locality, so that there was joined-up thinking.

The process that was used down south failed the scheme on finances. My understanding is that the business case was not robust enough, so the proposal was then rejected.

One of the beauties of what we are proposing to put in place is that anyone who wants to go down the franchising route—it will be entirely their choice whether to do so—will have to be absolutely clear in their mind that they have put forward the strongest business case, that they have consulted everyone who has a stake and a vested interest in what the franchise looks like and that they have spoken to their neighbours, because everyone knows that if you want to plant a hedge, that will affect your neighbour, and this is a similar kind of thing. Those involved will have to ensure that they have taken the biggest possible picture that they can in deciding that they want to do this and that they are going to go down this route.

You talk about correction, but what does that mean? It means that we would go back to the primary legislation, and I can only see that creating a much longer delay, going into the next session of Parliament.

They can slide me a bit of paper with the current timelines. I am sorry, Mr Lumsden; ask me the question again.

Yes. When we consider the legislative options, I would take that back to the cabinet secretary.

Clearly, this is the first one that we have done, so we do not have evidence. As I said, a scheme could still be legally challenged, but this is a safeguard to ensure that everything has been scrutinised to the fullest extent and therefore that any cause for a legal challenge would be lessened. It means that everything that is required to be done in order to provide the services that we are looking to be supplied has been scrutinised at every level.

Strathclyde Partnership for Transport.

We are in the process of working towards getting stuff done now. We are a long way down the road. I was not in the Parliament when the act was passed, so I do not know why it has taken us so long to get to this point from 2019, but we are where we are and work is being done right now. Conversations are being had about allowing the memorandums of understanding to be established so that we know what the guidance looks like.

If the regulations are passed, we will proceed at pace to get the work done as quickly as we can. I ask Sharon Wood or Bridget Bryden to speak about the timescale for progress. If we get the regulations through today, what will be the timescale for the next stage? Where would we go from here?

I would need to consider that.

I could turn that round and ask, “If it is not the traffic commissioner, then who?” Who would be the decision maker? Do you want the decision to come back to ministers? That would bring the matter back into the political sphere. It was decided in 2019 that it would be taken out of the politicians’ hands, and that is where we are.

I am sorry, but what was the second part of your question, Monica? I did not write it down. I apologise.