Hansard

You do not have to wander very far in Inverness or strike up many conversations there to find somebody who has a lot to say about the A9 dualling. I admit to being one of those people. I thank the members of the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee for their work and scrutiny in putting together the report, which has given us the opportunity to discuss it in the chamber. I also thank Laura Hansler, who is a constituent of mine, for lodging the petition and for her wider work locally, with which I am, of course, familiar.

Accidents on the A9 have a huge impact on the communities along it. Not only have dozens of loved ones lost their lives, but every time that there is an accident, people worry that the person who was on their way home might be stuck in traffic or be in an ambulance. Like everyone else, I want accidents to be avoided, livelihoods to be supported and lives to be protected.

Two thirds of respondents to the committee’s question on what the strategy should be said that it should be to dual as quickly as possible, regardless of disruption, which demonstrates the strength of feeling and urgency that exists for the project. That will not be lost on the Scottish Government, given that I and members from different parties and regions have been passing on comments from us and those we represent, saying just as much. A dualled A9 from Perth to Inverness must now be delivered as quickly as possible.

Although I like to focus on the now and the next—and I think that progress is more important than recriminations—it is absolutely right that a committee in this Parliament has scrutinised past delays. That work will not only undoubtedly be useful for other large projects in the future but—I hope—reduce the likelihood of future delays to this project and build resilience in the plan from here on.

Not everything can be foreseen—Covid and Brexit are examples of that—but how events are reacted to and dealt with makes a difference. Delays such as the incredibly disappointing one to the Tomatin to Moy section, which came about due to procurement issues, were, as the report states, avoidable, and reacting to changes in funding with greater speed than we have seen would give certainty to all who are involved in delivering the programme.

In the Highlands, there is a strong sense that the process has not been transparent. People have been let down, and the Government was not up front about the timescale slippage as quickly as it could have been. I agree with the statements in the report on the need for honesty and the duty of candour.

Two years ago, I told a previous minister that trust had to be rebuilt. A lot of trust is still to be rebuilt, but I certainly feel that mine is being steadily rebuilt, in large part due to the cabinet secretary’s approach. On the A9 and the A96, her actions have aligned with her words, and I have found her to be approachable and honest. Most importantly, as I have seen on recent journeys, there are spades in the ground on the A9.

The new A9 safety web portal is a great resource, and I recognise that the £5 million programme of interim safety improvements is to be completed by March. I have already noticed a really positive difference, particularly around Dunkeld and the Slochd.

My focus now will be on continuing to attend, along with colleagues, regular meetings with Transport Scotland and the cabinet secretary to oversee progress, raising the issues that constituents are still bringing to me and ensuring that my voice is one of those that sees the forthcoming progress through. The report gives us a really good foundation as to what those expectations should be.

I will be driving on the A9 on Saturday. When I am going back and forth to the Parliament, I am a fairly loyal train user and I like to keep my car in the Highlands, but, sometimes, due to timings of work commitments or to train timetables, or just because I need to carry more than I can on my own, there is no other option. That is the case for a significant number of people who drive on the A9. For as long as central belters keep inviting us to morning meetings, we will need to drive there.

When I have to drive, I plan my whole week around not doing so at night, because there are places where that can feel dangerous. However sensibly and responsibly we drive, we cannot control the actions of others. On Saturday, I expect to see multiple examples of terrible driving. That is not unique to the A9 but, on the A9, we have to plan for cars that choose to overtake dangerously or for getting stuck on a winding bit of single carriageway behind someone who is doing 45 miles per hour and braking at every average speed camera.

My concern for the dualling of the A9 is based not on a belief that all roads must be dualled but on my knowledge of how that particular road design impacts the way that it is used. The frustration that builds, along with the confusion for those who are not familiar with the road when it swaps from dual to single carriageway, does not lend itself to a safe journey. Many drivers on the A9 are not familiar with it and might not even be familiar with UK roads, so it is important that we make it as easy as possible to drive that road safely.

I return to those whose lives have been most badly affected by accidents on the A9. My heart goes out to everyone who has been impacted, and I firmly believe that the best way to honour the lives that have been lost is for the dualling work to be completed. I look forward to seeing that happen as soon as possible.