 The first item of business this afternoon is a statement by Keith Brown on an update on major infrastructure projects. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of his statement. If anybody wishes to ask a question, I would encourage them to press their request-to-speak buttons now. I would like to provide Parliament with an update on some major infrastructure projects, in particular the Aberdeen, Wesson, Peripheral routes, Balmery to Tipperty project, more commonly referred to as the AWPR. The AWPR is the longest new roads project under construction in the UK and is also the equivalent of building a new road between Edinburgh and Glasgow, when completely it will provide substantial benefits across the whole of the north-east, boosting the economy, increasing business and tourism opportunities, improving safety and cutting congestion, as well as improving opportunities for public transport facilities. The AWPR contract was awarded in December 2014 to Aberdeen Roads Ltd, or ARL, a joint venture comprising Balfour Beauty, Carillion and Galliford Try. When I attended the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee on 24 January, I advised that the intention at that time remained to open the road in the spring but that the date could not be guaranteed. Since then, officials have been closely engaging with ARL to determine likely delivery dates for the project, so it was surprising when Balfour Beauty, one of the partners that is forming ARL, revealed in its 2017 full-year results on 14 March this year that the project, in their view, would be complete in summer 2018. Consequently, I instructed officials to arrange an urgent meeting with ARL on Thursday 15 March to seek clarity on the views that Balfour Beauty, Transport Scotland met with ARL's contract there last Thursday. At that meeting, ARL was asked to formally confirm its position on its intended completion date. On Monday evening, this week, Transport Scotland received that confirmation. Officials instructed their technical advisers to validate the information in order that I could provide clarity to communities and businesses in the north-east on the timescale for completion of this project. Yesterday, I received confirmation that this exercise has been concluded and will now provide an update to Parliament. ARL has confirmed to Transport Scotland that its target is to open the roads during August 2018. The contractor has cited delays that it attributes to factors including the cumulative effects of weather events on the project, such as Storm Frank in 2015, and delays in relation to the timing of public utility diversions. In relation to that last issue, I would advise that Aberdeen road's limited is maintaining a claim against the Scottish Government through which it is seeking to recover substantial costs. Disputes, of course, are not unusual in contracts of this nature, and we are working with ARL to understand the basis of its claim. An additional complicating factor has arisen from the collapse of Carillion, one of the joint venture partners. As we would be expected in such a situation, Carillion's liquidation has had significant impacts across the UK. Delivery of projects such as the Royal Liverpool hospital and the Midland metropolitan hospital have been significantly impacted. As I understand it, new contractors are being considered to complete those projects. In contrast, the contract used for AWPR made provision for such a scenario, with the remaining construction partners, Balford, BT and Galliford Try, being jointly and severely liable for the delivery of the project. Although I am aware from representations made by third parties that there have been supply chain impacts on AWPR in relation to the Carillion situation, I am also aware, however, that the remaining construction partners are continuing to work through such issues to ensure that confidence in the north-east supply chain is maintained. As I announced in February, it is positive that the remaining construction partners on the AWPR have been able to take on more than 90 per cent of the former Carillion employees on the project. I said that the contractor has confirmed that its target is now to open the roads during August 2018. Transport Scotland has evaluated the information received from the contractor, together with its independent assessments undertaken by its technical advisers. I have been advised that the conclusion of the work is that there is effectively a range of dates when the project roads are likely to be ready to open. The earliest that all roads can realistically be open is likely to be towards the end of the summer period, which accords with the contractor's August estimate. Transport Scotland advisers have indicated, however, that they consider that ARL's August estimate is based on somewhat aggressive programming with limited contingency. Although I welcome the efforts being made by the contractor to secure as early an opening as possible, I have been advised that it is prudent to anticipate the potential for a late autumn 2018 opening date for all project roads. However, we are also establishing whether any further measures can be implemented to ensure that the project is not only delivered at the earliest opportunity but to identify if sections of new road can be opened in advance of the whole project. Where that is possible, without impacting on the timetable for completion of the project itself, we will, of course, ensure that roads are opened. As with all complex civil engineering contracts of this scale, delivery and completion of certain elements of work are dependent on a variety of factors, including weather, scheduling of other works and availability of specialist resource. In fact, in the last couple of weeks, we have seen the impact of weather in the local area on the project. As a result of those factors, it is not possible at this point to confirm the exact completion date for those works at this time. In terms of the contract, project, programming and delivery are the responsibility of the contractor. The main payment mechanism for the project is through a unitary charge. In effect, payments are directly linked to the roads becoming open for public use. ARL is therefore contractually incentivised to complete the project efficiently, whilst being obliged to comply with safety requirements. The total scheme cost estimate is £745 million, and that remains unchanged. The project is estimated to generate over £6 billion for the local economy, with an anticipated 14,000 new jobs to follow over the first 30 years after the opening. Once open, the AWPR will cut congestion in and around Aberdeen City, reducing emissions and improving active travel. It will also improve connectivity in the region and provide better journey time reliability, particularly for those travelling from the north of the city to the south side. A route around Aberdeen was first proposed over 65 years ago, and since the legal challenges to the project were set aside in 2012, we have been working hard to deliver this essential project. While I appreciate that residents and businesses of the northeast would wish it to be open as soon as possible, I can assure them that they will enjoy considerable benefits when the AWPR opens, and that will also be at the soon as possible opportunity. I would also like to take the opportunity to provide a brief update on the other major trunkwood projects across Scotland. On the ANI endulling programme, following the completion of the section between King Craig and Elradi, the Lunkarty to Pass of Burnham section is expected to be awarded in the first half of this year. We also expect advance works to start on there later this month. Following the recent publication of draft orders for schemes representing 30 of the 80 miles to be dualled, I can advise that we now expect to publish draft orders for a further four dualling schemes in the coming months. Of course, the ANI endulling is not just about building roads. Just last week, my colleague, the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and the Constitution, Derek Mackay, attended the launch of an ANI tourism app, which has been taken forward as part of the Scottish Government's innovative CivTech challenge, which looks to new technology businesses to solve technological challenges. The app will help tourists to navigate the many visitor attractions and facilities in and around the ANI corridor. On the ANI endulling endulling programme, design work continues. The work that we are progressing includes a rolling programme of regular engagement with local communities and other stakeholders to ensure that those affected by the work are kept fully informed. It will also ensure that the vital feedback that we receive is taken into account as we develop our plans. To date, more than 11,500 people have visited public engagement events on the ANI 96 dualling. Along with our commitment to dualling the ANI between Perth and Inverness by 2025, the ANI 96 will ensure that the road network between all Scottish cities is of dual-carriage-way standard at least by 2030. I trust that that gives members of Parliament an indication of the extensive work that is currently under way across the country to bring forward those critically important trunk road schemes, building connectivity, improving access to opportunities such as education, jobs and tourism, and, of course, improving safety across Scotland's trunk road network. I am happy to try to answer any questions from members. I thank the cabinet secretary for the advance copy of his statement. The announcement of yet another delay to the AWPR will come as a massive disappointment to the people of the northeast. That is a project that has already been significantly delayed. With an original completion date of spring 2017, we have now heard repeated announcements of delays from the cabinet secretary. First, it was a delay from spring 2017 to spring 2018 because of Storm Frank in 2015. Then, it was a delay from spring 2018 to summer 2018 for reasons unknown. We now have a further delay, but the statement itself is not clear whether the latest completion date will be August 2018 or late autumn 2018. The statement refers to both and is unclear. With that background, I have the following questions for the cabinet secretary. What is the latest completion date that he can guarantee? Is it August 2018 or late autumn 2018? Does that really mean winter 2018? Does the latest delayed completion date mean that the route will be fully operational, or will that opening be subject to snagging and other issues? Does the cabinet secretary share our concerns about the impact that this further delay will have on the people and businesses in the northeast? I can say first of all that the basis of Dean Lockhart's question is wrong. There was never a date provided of spring 2017. If he can prove to me that there was a date for spring 2017, I'd be interested to look at that. The first date that I am aware of was the one that was made by the former First Minister, which was spring 2018. It is true to say that, of course, Balfour Beatty, not the Scottish Government, had recently talked about summer this year. I didn't mention that. I mentioned that we believe—for the reasons that I mentioned in my statement—that we expected to be late autumn this year. I have given the reasons partly to do with weather. I went to visit the road recently, and if you looked at the bridge that was affected by Storm Frank, people in that location will tell you that that was weather that they had never seen in decades previously. That had a major impact on the project and, of course, more recently, other weather. Also, in relation to Carillian, two of the projects that I mentioned have stopped completely and are likely to be years behind schedule. That was the effect on Carillian. That has not happened in relation to this project, but it has had an impact. I understand that point. That has been mentioned by the contractor. Those are the reasons. I have said the exact same thing in terms of the fourth crossing. We cannot guarantee those things. We have to work with the contractor. What I am saying is that I do not want to pass on what the contractor has said in this regard. I am saying that they expect to finish in August, September and this year. I believe that, based on the advice from my officials, they think that it may be late autumn. I have given the reasons why they expect that to be the case. Also, in relation to Snagging, I do not think that the member fully understands the basis of those projects. Snagging is typical of all major construction contracts. It happens afterwards. To specifically answer the point raised by the member, yes, when I say opening, what I am referring to is the roads that are open and available for use. Of course that is still possible, but Snagging will continue after that. It is fairly standard, but I am talking about the roads that are open and available for use. Just one last point on delays. Labour and Conservative councillors raised this issue in the local council in 1948. That is when the Labour Party and Tory Party first talked about it. Malcolm Bruce first raised the issue when he was elected in 1983. That is the Government that is delivering the scheme, and people in North East know that the SNP Government is the one that will deliver. Jackie Baillie Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am not old enough to remember that. We have had 10 minutes from the cabinet secretary and not one mention, not one of the rights of workers employed on the Aberdeen Western peripheral route. Last week, Labour raised allegations of bullying and harassment of the workforce on the project, the breach of agency workers regulations, health and safety staff ignored, and a subcontractor who had deployed gangmasters in the past. I would be interested to know what action the cabinet secretary has taken. At First Minister's questions, we raised the use of umbrella companies and bogus self-employment. The First Minister said that it was a matter of choice. Well, it is not a choice if you struggle to pay your mortgage. It is not a choice if you do not get sick pay, and it is certainly not a choice when you do not have a decent pension. So what action is the cabinet secretary taking to ensure that Scottish tax payers' money is not used to exploit Scottish workers? Well, I had Jackie Baillie listen to all of my statement. I did mention, of course, the fact that many of the employees of Carillion had been taken on by the two other contractors, and the Scottish Government was very active in making sure that that was the case. So 90 per cent—in fact, more than that, I think—were taken on by the other contractors. There is not the situation in the other contracts that I could mention in the UK, where the collapse of Carillion has meant that the project itself has stopped. So I think that that does demonstrate, of course, the concern that we have for employees on this project. Also, over the years of this construction project, a number of issues have been raised with me, and every single one of those we have taken up many times. It has turned out not to be true, the allegations that are made, but, on those occasions where it has, we have both investigated and taken action in relation to that. Some of the issues that she raises, of course, relate to First Minister's questions. The First Minister made the point that those contractors, those employees who sought instead to work through an agency rather than be directly employed, that was their choice to make that decision. They had the choice to do one or the other, that is the point that she made. On abolishing things like zero hours contract or taking action on employment law, Jackie Baillie knows full well, even if Richard Leonard pretends not to, that the Labour Party is instrumental in making sure that employment law stayed with the Conservatives. In fact, she said during the Smith commission that it was crucial that it remained with the Conservatives. Had she wished us to have the means to deal with those issues rather than complain about them, in fact, she began to wonder whether that was not the whole intention behind Labour's position to keep it there so that she continued to have a go at the Scottish Government, even though it is the UK Government that has the powers for it. I do know that some members of the Labour Party who are not represented here today regret that decision. I certainly regret it. I would like to have the control of employment law to allow us to deal more robustly with some of those things. Perhaps in future, the Labour Party would do what Richard Leonard failed to do at First Minister's questions and say that he will support the devolution of employment law to Scotland. Julian Martens will be followed by Jamie Greene. I would like to ask the cabinet secretary what impact today's announcement will have on the Balmedy to Tiberty dueling project in my constituency. I note that, in the cabinet secretary's statement, he made references to certain sections of road to be opened as they are ready. Has he been given any indication by Aberdein Rhoads as the progress of stretches of the project? Have they given any indication of which stretches in particular they can anticipate opening ready earlier? How will they be communicating that to road users in the area and in MSPs? I know that she is following the project very closely. She will be aware that, for example, Crabeson and Dice junctions were open to traffic ahead of schedule in August 2016. I have also said to the rural economy committee that, as other roads may be opened, of course, we will advise members of that. We have tried to respond to every inquiry that is made. A number of members here—I see that Peter Chapman has made a number of inquiries about this—have tried to respond to those as quickly and as fully as possible. I understand the point that was made by Gillian Martin that, obviously, local members will want the latest possible information. I undertake to make sure that Transport Scotland officials are here to make sure that that happens. We have been working closely with the contractor to ensure that the impacts on this have been mitigated as best they can, but we are also establishing whether further mitigation measures can be put in place to ensure that the project is not only delivered as soon as possible but that we can open other sections of new road as soon as they are able to do that. Jamie Greene will be followed by Lewis MacDonald. We FOI'd email correspondence and minutes of meetings between the cabinet secretary and Scott Shaw, the AWPR project manager, over the past 12 months on this very specific issue of completion date. The response here from Transport Scotland states that information is not available because there were no meetings in which minutes were taken in the last 12 months and not a single email was exchanged on the matter. The cabinet secretary just said that he was surprised to learn about the delayed completion date from Balfour Beattie. I am surprised that he is surprised. Does the cabinet secretary not speak to Balfour Beattie on a regular basis? What are the communication lines like between himself, ARL, Balfour Beattie and the project manager? Are they positive, forthcoming and regular, and do they reflect a well-managed project? I do not think so. Perhaps the same questions could be asked of the two projects in England that have been completely stopped by, of course, the collapse of Krillin, but they were not asked that question. In relation to the discussions, of course those are led by Transport Scotland directly with the contractor for very good reason. I have had meetings with the contractor, I have had individual meetings with the different companies involved and discussion with them, and of course he mentioned the letter from Balfour Beattie. We have had meetings with Balfour Beattie recently. Perhaps the FOI, which he lodged, did not capture those, because the ones I am referring to happened more recently. In relation to the completion date, of course, the idea that this was something that caught people by surprise, if he looks at the House of Commons two committees that have been looking into this issue since the collapse of Krillin, he will have seen, just as recently, I think, three weeks ago, confirmation from ARL, the contractor, that they expected this project to complete on time. That is why I was surprised to see a public statement subsequently bringing that to question, not surprised, because we had had discussions with them about the nature of that challenge in terms of closing it. I was surprised to see that quickly followed by the statement that was made by ARL. We have had very good discussions with ARL, but it is carried out, as he would expect, in the main, between the Transport Scotland professionals and the companies involved. Lewis Macdonald, to be filled by Stuart Stevenson. Balfour Beattie told the cabinet secretary that the completion date of late spring would not work. He is now told to Balfour Beattie that the completion date of late summer is too aggressive and will not work. We should expect completion by late autumn of this year. Does Mr Brown recognise that the issue here is not just delay after delay from season to season? It is also the sense that nobody is in charge here, that there appears to be no communication between Government and contractor, except under the pressure of events. Why is it that Balfour Beattie and the Government are not having these conversations and comparing their notes on an on-going basis? Can Mr Brown commit today to coming once again to the north-east? He has been a number of times as this project has been delayed and delayed, but this time can he come and deliver some absolute certainty to people in the north-east as to when the road will be finished, because we have heard delay after delay up until now, and it is that absolute certainty that people most need. I do not think that I have ever mentioned a date of spring next year in any statement that I have made. He is right to say that, as I have said in my statement that the contractor believes that it may be summer this year. I think that they have mentioned August and September. I am trying to be as straightforward as I can by saying that we have had that independently analysed by Transport Scotland. They think that there are challenges. It is possible to do that, and we will do all that we can to try to make sure that that happens. However, there are challenges both in terms of how aggressive that programme is. We are also concerned to make sure that the safety of everyone involved is looked after as well, and there is no undue pressure on people working on the project. However, there is also not a great deal of contingency in that time. It is for that reason that we think that to get that contingency into the programme late autumn is a better time to put it out to the public. That allows them to realise that that is what the aim is here. If we can do it early, we will certainly do it earlier, and failing that, we expect it by late autumn. I say to Lewis MacDonald that, of course, as we get closer towards the end of the project, it is possible to be more certain. As soon as we can be as certain as we can by the completion date, I am happy to come to the north-east and to give that date to local stakeholders. We will also very shortly start to provide information on the preparations for the opening of the road as well, because people expect to be able to factor that in. Of course, as soon as we can make those two things happen, we know the date on which it is going to open, and we know the arrangements will make sure that all local stakeholders are aware of that fact. Stuart Stevenson is to be followed by John Finnie. In the nearly 60 years that elapsed between 1948 that the cabinet sentryd referred to, and the SNP coming into government in 2007, Labour and Tory governments for roughly half the time—indeed, the Liberals were party to government up to 2007—at any point in that nearly 60 years time, were any road orders brought forward by those parties, or other material preparations made to actually cause an Aberyne Western peripheral route to be delivered? I think that Stuart Stevenson is implied in his question and knows about the absolute lack of progress that was made by the other parties during all the decades when they had the opportunity to take this project forward. Of course, not a single inch of tarmac was laid during the time of any of those three parties, but he could have made the same point about the dualling of the A9, or about the fact that we did not even have a motorway between Edinburgh and Glasgow until very recently, so it is this Government that has taken on these big, complex projects and is delivering for the people of Scotland. John Finnie is to be followed by Mike Rumbles. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I would like to thank the cabinet secretary for early sight of his statement, which is called an update on major infrastructure projects, and I would like to thank him for his very brief update on travel between the central belt and the Highlands. I would also like to draw his attention to the Transport Scotland website, which tells us that, in a quote, detailed information on the necessary works are anticipated in 2017. Sitting the grammar aside, we had the same message saying that in 2016, but, of course, that was not about the A9, cabinet secretary. That was about what is missing from your update. That was about the Highland mainline upgrade, which has undoubtedly lost momentum. The Scottish Government is committed to low-carbon infrastructure, and I am not sure that it is fully appreciated how cowded the single-track line is and that knock-on delays seriously inconvenience many passengers and that that happens almost every day. We are going to move to a situation where four lanes of road and one lane of rail are considerably less than there were in Victorian times. We have wasted, cabinet secretary, almost five years of control period of five. There is only about 12 months left. When are we going to get an update on the Highland mainline, cabinet secretary? I do not agree that it has not been wasted at all. If you look at the investment that we have had in terms of the railways, some of the new stations that have opened, the longest piece of new railway track in the UK in 100 years has been opened during that period. I think that we have been investing at a huge level in terms of the rail infrastructure. The member quite rightly makes the point about not the Highlands, although there is work going on, of course, and the route between Aberdeen and Burness as well. It is important to say that we have tried to address quite a number of issues where there has been a lack of investment over the best part of a century in the rail network and we are doing as much as we can as quickly as you possibly can do it. Of course, the same is true in terms of our roads. I do not see one as being isolated from the other. We have to try to do both. In one previous answer, I remember saying that buses and bicycles also very often travel on roads as well. The roads network is very important, so the two should not be in isolation. Of course, the route that the member refers to is the responsibility of my colleague Humza Yousaf, and I am happy to get him to respond to the member with an update on progress and relation to that. I think that we have a very proud track record both in terms of road and rail in terms of investment in Scotland. Mike Rumbles is followed by Kate Forbes. Presiding Officer, isn't it strange that a statement designed to give clarity to the opening of the much repeatedly delayed AWPR? The cabinet secretary seems to have added much confusion in his statement today. Is it opening during August, as he said it was, according to the contractor in his statement? Is it opening at the end of summer according to Transport Scotland? Or is it opening in late autumn according to the cabinet secretary's own advisers? That is what he has just said. All I can do is repeat what I have said. We expect the road to be opened by late autumn, and I have explained the reasons why the contractor thinks that it can do it by this summer—it is possible that that could happen, of course—and also some of the reasons why that is the case, why it is not happening in spring this year for the reasons of the weather. Mike Rumbles will know better than me about the impact, for example, of Storm Frank. He will know better than me the impact of even recent weather and also about the impact in terms of carillion for the supply chain that is vital to this contract. For those reasons, it has moved out from spring. The contractor thinks that it is possible that it is summer. I think that it is prudent to talk about late autumn, and if he can do it before that, then we will certainly try to achieve that. I appreciate the cabinet secretary's update on the A9 dualling programme, which is good news for many Highland residents that have waited decades for a decent road. There are, of course, two arteries to the Highlands, including the A82. With Government commitment to invest in improving both roads, does that prove how important it is for the Government to continue investing in the A82 and the A9? I think that it not only proves that point but also proves the lack of investment that has been over far too long a period by previous Governments. The Government wants to see improvements to the roads infrastructure in the Highlands to help to support Scotland's economy and to better connect our cities and communities. That is why we are committed to pressing ahead with a major programme of works to dual the A9 between Perth and Inverness by 2025. The A96, as I mentioned, between Inverness and Aberdeen, and other roads that the member will be familiar with in terms of Tarbot Timber and Arnhem, are well on the A82, including some of the work that we have already done in terms of the Korean-Laric bypass. It is very important that, as with the Borders Railway, all parts of Scotland get the benefit of investment, investment in which they have been starved off for too long under previous Governments. This road has been a catalog of errors for a long time now. None more so than the most northern link of the road, the Balmidi Tipperty section. I can tell the cabinet secretary, unlike what he said in answer to my colleague Dean Lockhart, that northern section was absolutely promised to open in spring 2017. It is still not open, which means that it is now a whole year overdue. Is the cabinet secretary seriously saying that even this section will not be open until late summer or late autumn? Will he now apologise to the residents of the north-east who have had to put up with this severe disruption to their lives for much longer than expected? Of course, we have always said and readily acknowledged that any major infrastructure projects of this type cause disruption, and we have tried to minimise that whenever we can. The member is quite right. He may also, like Jackie Baillie, have not been around in 1948, but that is when his predecessors and the Conservative Party and Jackie Baillie's predecessors and the Labour Party started talking about this. I am sure that people can remember in 1983, when the Lib Dems talked about it as well. The member will also be aware, of course, of the legal history of this project and some of the delays caused by that. As soon as we are able to get through that legal process, we have moved forward with the project, starting in 2014. I know that it has taken longer than we expected and I readily concede that point. I also regret the fact that there has been disruption associated with it. That is true for most projects, but we will crack on and try to get this road done, certainly far faster than any previous party has committed to doing it. I am conscious that we are just out of time on that as well, but I will squeeze the last two questions in if they just ask a question, short answer. James Kelly Presiding Officer, can I ask the cabinet secretary if he is going to correct the cost estimate of £745 million? It is clearly incorrect, given the extended timescales and also the legal challenges that are involved with substantial costs. No, I do not. The £745 million expected budget for that is expected to be the cost. Of course, as the member points out, it can change, but I am happy to provide the member with any details. However, there is no change to that budget resulting from the changes that I have announced in terms of the time to complete the project. The contractors are the ones that are responsible. That is the way that the contract is written for taking on the costs of this delay. I apologise. I skipped past Gail Ross. Can the cabinet secretary outline what progress there is on the procurement of the contract to deliver the A9 trunk road improvements at Beridale-Braise and whether Transport Scotland will be reviewing availability of parking places on the A9 between Inverness and Caithness, which is used by both road freight and tourism traffic? I am happy to do that. I apologise for not having done so before to Gail Ross, although I did undertake to do so last week. The Beridale-Braise is another long-standing project that was not taken forward by previous Governments. Transport Scotland commenced dialogue on 26 February 2018 with four bidders, although one bidder has been thrown in the last week. The contract is expected to be awarded in late summer with work commencing soon after. Transport Scotland are members of the North Coast 500 working group, and that group identified a need to review, as Gail Ross asked, parking opportunities along the route. Transport Scotland has commissioned a review of the A9 between Inverness and Caithness to identify if there are opportunities for increased parking facilities for all road users, including tourists and commercial vehicles, which could also have the potential to provide locations for slower moving vehicles to pull in and to allow others to pass. I welcome the approachability of Transport Scotland in terms of the consultation process for the Hardmure to Fockers section of the A96. Will the cabinet secretary give some thought to how the co-creative process could be used to make sure that the community has an even bigger role in shaping the road? Of course, the co-creative process that the member refers to is being used for the first time in any major project in relation to the A9. It has been a great way to make sure that we have the maximum possible community engagement, especially on issues that can be quite difficult in terms of the options that the people developing the project have to take forward. We have made the offer, I think, previously in answer to Gillian Martin. We have made the offer that that process could be available to other groups as well. Of course, we are happy to follow that through in relation to the A96 project. Thank you very much to the cabinet secretary and members.