 I will not criticise it, but they are putting in place the test as it exists. That ends question time. Next slide to business is a statement by Keith Brown in the future of Scotland's railways. The ministers will take questions at the end of his statement, and there should be therefore no interventions or interruptions. I will give a few seconds for people to get themselves settled. Minister, you have got 10 minutes. I am grateful to the Parliament for the opportunity to make a statement on the future of the ScotRail franchise. This morning, I advised Parliament that the procurement process for the ScotRail franchise had been completed on time and to plan. The Scottish Government believes that good public transport improves the lives of the people and the economy of Scotland. Following extensive consultation, Scotland's railway has attracted a world-leading contract to deliver for rail staff and passengers. The competition has been evaluated rigorously on the basis of the most advantageous balance of quality and price for passengers, staff and taxpayers, and the Scottish Government intends to award the contract to Abilio ScotRail Ltd. The new franchise contract confirms the Scottish Government's commitment to transform Scotland's rail service. The new Abilio Group UK headquarters will add 50 new jobs to the 150 Abilio ScotRail HQ jobs secured in Glasgow. The franchise will commence on 1 April 2015 and will deliver investment in the service for the next 10 years, investment for the benefit of passengers, staff and taxpayers. The improvements that the contract secures will be felt right across the network for the benefit of all of Scotland. Before I go into detail, I wish to remind members of the context of railway franchising. As members will recall from my statements earlier this year on the award of the Caledonian Sleeper franchise, franchising is a requirement under the Railways Act 1993 and precludes any UK public sector organisation from bidding to operate a railway service. As I have stated publicly on many occasions, it is an unfair restriction that ought to be changed so that private and public bidders can compete equally. I have written to three secretaries of state for transport requesting a change in law and each request was refused. The Labour Administration, over 13 years, despite ample opportunity, chose not to widen access to rail franchising to UK public sector organisations. The Transport Act 2000 and the Railways Act 2005 are silent on this issue. In fact, the Labour Administration supported franchising and its restrictions. In 2009, the then Secretary of State for Transport, Lord Adonis, reassured the Transport Committee that, the evidence so far is that the franchising system has continued to prove its worth. I am left to reduce both through its legislative silence and its vocal support for franchising that the Labour Administration was clearly happy to leave us operating these patently unfair procedures. This week we have started laying the tracks of the border railway, but the tracks of the franchising process was laid by the Tory and Labour Governments at Westminster. Earlier this week, I was asked to cancel the franchising process. Doing so may have left us liable for bid costs in excess of £30 million from our five bidders. Remember that it cost the DFT over £50 million for the west coast franchise failure. It was in fact Ed Miliband who said that it is a disgrace that it is going to cost £40 million plus and perhaps more for the taxpayer's money because they have bungled this franchise. Nobody in this chamber can guarantee what new powers we will get and on what date, but we do know that a delay in this process would be for a number of years. It would be costly and a bad deal for the travelling public. I am not willing to put at risk the expectations of our passengers or the interests of the taxpayer by playing fast and loose with rail franchising. Despite having to adhere to unfair franchising rules, we have always stated that we would do so competently. Accordingly, we have set out a prudent programme for our franchise procurements, with a process managed by an expert team in Transport Scotland. We delivered the Caledonian sleeper franchise on schedule, and today, applying the same competent prudent approach that has become the hallmark of this Government, we have delivered yet another successful outcome. Following a pre-qualification process, we have attracted five high-quality bids. Those bidders, each with international interests, demonstrate the global appeal of Scotland. Their participation demonstrates the confidence that they have in Scotland as a place to conduct business. As members will know, ministers play no part in the evaluation of bids or in the selection of the winning bidder. Those matters are governed by the process administered by Transport Scotland officials. However, I am advised that each of the bids was of high quality, and after a rigorous evaluation exercise, a bailiol came out on top. At this point, I thank Ariva, First Group, MTR and National Express for their participation and their confidence in the Scottish Government's vision for ScotRail. I also thank those many stakeholders that informed each of those bids. In particular, I go to First Group and its hard-working staff for their management of the service since 2004. Since that time, patternage has grown by a third. We have seen more than 200 additional daily train services. Performance has improved from 87 per cent to 92 per cent, and passenger satisfaction has risen to 90 per cent. Those taken together are commendable achievements. Our franchise specification puts passengers' interests at the heart of the ScotRail service. It has ambitious service standards and an emphasis on quality and effective operation. The new franchise will transform the passenger experience with improved provision of information, enhanced websites, a price promise to provide the best value ticket, as well as a Scotland-wide extension of smart and integrated ticketing, making travel simpler and smarter. In addition to its price promise, the new franchise will implement our commitment to bear down on fares to make rail a much more attractive travel choice. As of January next year, peak fares will be capped at RPI and off-peak fares cannot increase at a rate greater than RPI minus 1 per cent. Jobseekers and the newly employed will also benefit from reduced fare schemes. In short, fare are affordable fares for all. A mobile ticketing application will enable passengers to buy tickets to search for travel information, to book cycle hire and taxis from selected stations and to obtain details on less busy services. Enabling choice and making journeys easy is a key to getting our country on the move. Across the network, there will be more car parking spaces, more electric car charging bays and more cycle spaces. Even at selected stations, a bike and go cycle hire scheme will enable end-to-end journeys. Our station environments will be updated with more platform shelters, more refreshment kiosks and major enhancements at Aberdeen Perth, Stirling, Motherwell and Inverness. All that builds on the substantial investment already seen at Waverley and Haymarket and the improvements planned for Glasgow Queen Street and Dundee. We all recognise the need for greater transport integration to join up journeys. At selected stations, cross-modal information screens will display arrivals and departures of other modes such as bus, ferry or air. A key aspect will be forging links with other providers to unlock journey opportunities across Scotland. The franchise will also deliver improvements on our trains, increasing the attraction of rail travel. With high-speed trains, better journey times and more comfort, our seven cities will be linked by proper intercity rolling stock, more in keeping with the intercity experience, which we no passengers prefer. New electric trains will be delivered for Edinburgh to Glasgow and Stirling, Alloa and Dumblane services. Overall, there will be a 23 per cent increase in carriages across the network and that will ensure the full advantages taken of the Government's substantial investment in infrastructure. We also ask for proposals to capitalise on the tourism potential of our railways. The new franchise came forward with the Great Scenic Railway of Scotland, a proposition that covers the West Highland and Kylines, the Far North Line, those serving Stranraer and Dumfries and from September 2015 the Borders. This proposition enables our railway to market Scotland's scenery, its heritage and its tourist attractions to a wider audience. Trains on those routes will be refurbished and there will be dedicated tourism ambassadors trained to visit Scotland's standards to provide information on attractions, history and journey connections. I hope that community rail groups and local businesses engage with the franchise to grasp the very real opportunities arising from this marvellous, expansive initiative. I have also been very careful to ensure that the interests of ScotRail staff are addressed in the new franchise contract. Accordingly, we work with the rail unions to ensure that staffing issues are appropriately covered and I am grateful for the unions assistance in that respect. The transfer of undertakings protection of employment regulations 2006, of course, will apply and pensions will also be protected. We might be obliged by Westminster to franchise, but that does not mean that we should not get the best deal for staff anywhere, as I believe we have. The contract contains commitments on apprenticeships, 100 of those, training in staff development and, for the first time, trade union representation on the board of the company. It also sets out the franchise's extensive corporate social obligations to the community that it serves. The latter is important because a railway does more than just provide a journey opportunity. It also spreads and generates economic vitality and prosperity across communities. That is why, Presiding Officer, that contract is a good contract. It does more than simply provide rail services. It seeks to help to get Scotland on the move economically and on the move socially. We also have struck a deal with the franchise to ensure that no compulsory redundancies during the entire life of the contract. Over and above that, we have also struck a deal to make sure that every single person, whether directly employed or through subcontractors, will have at least the living wage as a salary. Presiding Officer, we are committed to delivering a safe, well-founded, properly resourced and an audit process that makes sure that the franchise process that we have gone through stands up to scrutiny. It has also been our intention to make sure that it is the best possible deal for fair payers and passengers. I believe that we have achieved that, even though we are obliged to go down through the franchise route. It does offer a better Scotland offering improved services to rail passengers, whether residents or visitors, security for our railway staff and enabling economic opportunities for all in our cities, towns and rural communities. Members who wish to ask a question off the minister should press request peak button now. I thank the minister for notice of his statement but regret that announcements continue to be made outside of this Parliament in advance. I also like to put on record our appreciation of the work done by staff in the past 10 years on the franchise. In awarding the ScotRail franchise to Abelio, the minister has decided that profits from Scotland's rail services should be used to invest in lower fares and better services in the Netherlands rather than here in Scotland. We now have a minister who claims to support a Scottish public sector railway continuing with a franchise tender process that excluded that very option. Why do you say one thing in your deputy leadership bid but do something else in your position as minister? Keith Brown should have welcomed calls by transport unions and Scottish Labour to suspend the franchise process so further devolution could allow public bids to operate Scotland's railways instead that he carried on regardless. The Deputy First Minister recently wrote to the UK Government to ask that the roll-out of universal credit be postponed to allow the talks and additional powers to be carried out in good faith. Why does the Government say one thing when they are making demands but the opposite when they are in a position to act? The minister shows that the Scottish Government's record is one of hollow words and broken promises. In public the Government talks about more powers but when they have the opportunity to act they abdicate responsibility. Why did the minister not show the leadership that people of Scotland expect and allow the possibility for a Scottish public sector rail operator to bid for the franchise? I believe that the statement that we have just heard shows why the Labour Party far from being taken as a serious potential government is not even taken as a serious potential opposition. First of all I struggle to understand exactly what the Labour Party's position is because we have George Fuchs saying that explicitly the situation is that we have the powers to nationalise the railways in Scotland which is patently false. We also have the situation where the Labour Party for 13 years had the ability to change us and refused to do so. We have also got the endorsement of the franchising process from prominent Labour politicians as well. Interestingly, maybe the ideas at something's changed. Well, as recently as a few months ago the Labour Party's own publication, Powers for a Purpose, says that the co-op party report that they referred to argues for a new approach which Labour supports which would in the longer term, i.e. after the end of the new franchise starting in 2015. The Labour Party is all over the place in terms of franchising and the reason why we are hearing such thunderous accusations is because they are embarrassed about the fact that we have ended up here. You ask why there is a Dutch railway company, a publicly owned Dutch railway company. That is a natural consequence. If you set out legislation that allows public bids from other countries but refused to allow it from Scotland or the UK, this is the Labour Party's legislation. The Labour Party has laid the tracks for how we have to do the franchising. I very much hope that that changes. We will continue to argue for the change. Mark Griffin says that I have said one thing and done another. I have three things written to Secretary of State for Scotland arguing for that change. I would like to have had Labour's support in doing that. We have not had that support. If you want to change it, you have the chance. I don't dispute where the trade unions come from in relation to this because they have always held that position. They have never had the potential to change it. The Labour Party has, and they refuse to change it. You should take responsibility for the outcome of these consequences, but we have run a proper process in this regard and we have a good deal for the people of Scotland. I thank the minister for his statement and for advance sight of it. As a north-east MSP, I am naturally sad to hear that the Aberdeen-based first group have lost out in their bid to retain the ScotRail franchise. It is no coincidence that their tenure has seen a dramatic reversal in the decline of rail passenger numbers in Scotland. Their investment and sound management has delivered significant improvements in comfort, punctuality and substantial increase in the number of routes and capacity across the Scottish rail network. The competitive nature of the franchising mechanism has played a key role in reviving rail transport in the United Kingdom. I believe that the announcement that was made by the minister today has further strengthened that recovery in Scotland. Nevertheless, the transport minister has done well to resist calls from the sirens of the extreme left who would see us return to the investment vacuum and the catastrophic management failures of state-owned monopolies in the 1970s. Keith Brown, however, must guarantee that he will play his part in making this franchise a success. I ask him if he will give a sound undertaking that he will stand by the contract that he has signed and will not exploit any five-year break-close in an inappropriate way to end this contract before it delivers everything that has the capacity to do. First of all, if I can agree with the comments of Alex Johnson on First Group, I think that they have done an excellent job and we have seen real growth in terms of patternage, so we certainly can deal with that. I can also say that I do not share his enthusiasm for franchising, as he well knows. I believe that it is an expensive process to go through. It is expensive for the companies involved and certainly just now it presents an unequal playing field and not allowing public sector bids to come forward. I have argued that for quite some time. Alex Johnson also asked about the situation with the five-year break-close, which is in the contract. That break-close can be activated by either side—either by the Government or by the company themselves—and it can do so for any reason. However, there is no way that I would intend, for inappropriate reasons, to exercise that break-close or to exploit the break-close, as he has mentioned. That break-close has been put in there because circumstances can change and we have to be aware of that fact. All the tenders for the contract knew that at the time, but he also asked, will I be supportive of and continue to support the progress and ambitions of the contract? Of course, there are huge benefits in the contract. It has been the result of very hard work done by Transport Scotland officials. By the Government laying out exactly what our expectations were, whether it was for cyclists, fair payers who say that they are suffering, especially throughout the rest of the UK, in terms of high fares. I am sure that Alex Johnson will be very interested, for example, in the £5 fare from Aberdeen to Inverness or Glasgow or Edinburgh or Dundee. Of course, it is a fare that you have to apply for in advance. There are restrictions to it, but that addresses the fact that some people want to have the cheapest possible fare. I would hope that, rather than some of the comments that were already made by Alex Johnson, he, like me, will be fully behind the success of the contract for the benefit of passengers and for the staff who will deliver those services. I have very many people who wish to ask a question of the minister. If we could have a short question and a fairly short response, that would help us to get through. Stuart Stevenson, followed by James Kelly. Presiding Officer, I welcome the substantial staff improvements in new jobs that come with the new franchise, the living wage, trade unions on the board, 100 new apprentices and the protection of pensions and travel rights. Is it not the case that we must move ahead urgently to deliver for staff? Rather than have them wait for years, perhaps forever, for new railway powers to come to this Parliament, it is simply not the time to put Scotland on hold, especially for an indeterminate period. Stuart Stevenson is exactly right, and it strikes me that people like Mark Griffin really have to try and get over the fact that they were on the winning side in the referendum. Power over these things rests at Westminster. There is no guarantee over powers. I do not know whether they have signed a petition to make sure that we get extra powers, but there is no guarantee for powers. The delays that could be incumbent if we were to delay or cancel the contract would have an impact on the new trains that we are ordering, on fares, the benefits of the new services and the reduced fares would not apply and, of course, the enhanced benefits that Stuart Stevenson rightly points out for staff. No compulsory redundancies during the whole term of the contract, the living wage for every single member of staff, whether it is subcontracted or a direct employee. Those are real advances for the people serving the customers and for the customers themselves. I think that people in Scotland will be interested in the opposition of the Labour Party to this material advance for fair-paying passengers and for the staff that provide those services. James Kelly, followed by Alice MacKinnon. In the light of the decision that takes the prospect of public running of the railways out of contention for 10 years, does the minister still support the pitch that he made in launching his deputy leadership and support of public railways? Will he then be included as part of the SNP's proposals to the Smith commission? I don't know whether— Will it be in the Labour Party's— I'm not sure how— Will it be in yours? Minister— I'm not sure whether James Kelly came into the chamber late. I don't know whether he actually heard my previous responses, but he may have missed out the fact that it was Labour's own position, Labour's position that we should look for a new approach after the end of the franchise that we're about to sign. That's the same as the position that he just outlined. It is the case that Labour Party are all over the place in relation to this. They're not being taken seriously because they've changed their position so often. They were the party that were happy to have franchising. We've heard franchising referred to in glowing terms by Lord Adonis. He never changed it when he had the chance. He never changed it in the Kalman commission. He never changed it in the Scotland Act. He didn't even argue for that change. So a few months ago, you were arguing for us to let this contract and suddenly it's changed, and it's because you're embarrassed by your failure to act in the past. We have acted to protect fair-paying passengers. Thank you, Presiding Officer. A bellio will say that there will be major investment in concourse and retail development to improve links between Aberdeen station and Union Street. I expect that this will be welcomed by people in Manawth East region. Cabinet Secretary, can you tell me the anticipated cost of the project and the timescale and some assurances that there will be thorough community consultation on the project? I'm more unhappy to give the assurance that there will be thorough community consultation. It does involve different parties because it involves infrastructure as well and local authority partners as well. I'm more than happy to provide in writing the details in terms of cost the different parties involved and to underline the reassurance that I've given in terms of community consultation. Morimawr, followed by Jameedy. Presiding Officer, can I welcome the commitment for staff set out in the new franchise contract, which will see all staff and subcontractors paid at least the living wage, 100 new apprenticeships and the guarantee of no compulsory redundancies throughout the lifetime of the contract, as well as staff pensions and travel rights protected, and the representation on the board? That's fantastic. Does the minister agree that it is essential that, rather than putting Scotland on pause, those key benefits for staff should be delivered at the earliest possible opportunity? Morimawr, what is quite right and they will be delivered at the earliest possible opportunity. I think that the one thing that surprises me is that I have not heard one word of welcome from the Labour Party for those key benefits for staff. Jameedy, followed by Neil Bibby. In keeping rail fares affordable in Scotland, can I ask the minister what difference the £5 intercity fare and reduced ticket prices for job seekers and those new lane work will make to the people and economy of Scotland? Can he set out a timescale for the delivery of more cycle spaces at stations and on trains and the introduction of a bike and go cycle hire scheme? The last point that Jameedy makes, he will be aware, of course, has started that process already. I am very pleased in my own area to have launched the bike hire scheme and bike shop at the Stirling station just outside my constituency. Further benefits in terms of the work of Recycle Bike, a tremendous local organisation that prepares and provides bikes at cheap costs to local families. That work has started already and is on-going. As the other part of Jameedy's question in relation to the new services, it will start when the new contractor takes over the franchise, which will be in 1 April next year. The point about cyclists, of course, is that we will get more information out in due course, but what they intend to do is to make sure that people are able to park their bikes more easily at stations and also where they can to take them on to trains in greater numbers, which we have had a real demand for. Those are real advantages, which will mean that we can have a much more integrated element towards transport. I mentioned also the fact that some of the concourse improvements in signage will also tell people about ferry arrivals and bus arrivals, trying to make sure that buses—we have obliged all the bidders to look at this when they made their bids—buses connect far better with rail services rather than leaving five minutes before a train arrives. All those things are benefits that we should start to see. We are seeing some of them already, and we will start to see them more in the months to come. Neil Bibby, followed by Aileen McLeod. Delivering the living wage for your procurement is a good thing. It is a shame that you did not think that a couple of months ago when you voted against it minister in the procurement bill. Since 2008, ScotRail has made £100 million of profits, 95 per cent of which have gone to shareholders. What are the projections for the profits to be made by the new franchise holder? How much money will be taken out of the Scottish rail network and not reinvested in the Scottish rail network? I do not know whether Neil Bibby is aware, but it was the Labour Government in 2004 that awarded the franchise in the first place to ScotRail. It was the franchise framework that the Labour Government had in the past. If he has a concern about the profits as he sees it, we have in place provision to make sure that there are excess profits that come back to the Government, so we have done that. We have done that in relation to the new contract as well. The second point is his late conversion to the idea of the living wage, which Labour did nothing about when they were in power. What we are seeing is that there was no living wage in 2004 when Labour Party had a chance to do it. This is a Government that has taken action on living wage, not just for directly employed people, but by people employed by subcontractors. We are taking action where Labour only talked about it. Aileen McLeod, followed by Alison Johnstone. I welcome the announcement of a great scenic railway of Scotland scheme bringing more tourists to the south-west, the borders and the north. Can the minister outline the benefits that will be delivered from my constituents in the south-west of Scotland? That is a very good point. I know that it has been already warmly welcomed by tourist organisations across Scotland. As Aileen McLeod knows, not least because in her area we have had the first community rail partnership established. There is real pride in sections of the railway that we want people to take ownership of. We will see, as I have already mentioned, the tourist ambassadors, which will help people to locate and get to the attractions that we have and the scenery that we have all around Scotland. That should benefit places across the whole of Scotland, including the area that Aileen McLeod represents. Alison Johnstone, followed by John Mason. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I would like to inform the chamber of hospitality provided to me by Abelio during the Commonwealth Games in my position as co-convener of the cross-party group on cycling. There is a huge public appetite for bringing rail back into public hands. Green colleagues in Westminster are leading a bill that would allow the re-nationalisation as franchises run out. Can the transport minister confirm that the optional five-year breakpoint in this franchise will allow a Scottish public sector operator to make a bid at that point, providing that power is devolved from Westminster to allow it? The key thing in the tale is the last part of Alison Johnstone's question, providing that Westminster allows the powers to do that. Of course, we are going to argue for the maximum possible powers over the rail network in Scotland. We have done that for many years. We have argued for the franchising process itself to be expanded to allow public sector bids. There is no guarantee that a public sector bid comes along, or that it is successful, but we have argued for that. In relation to the five-year break, I have mentioned that already. What we do is exercise that only in the responsible and appropriate way. Who can say in five years time what the situation is? I think that we have to go into these contracts with the intention of seeing through the contract. If circumstances change, either for the party providing the service or for the Government—and of course you have to look at that again—but you have to go into it with the intention to have the contract. That is what bidders who are bidding for this process, as we are obliged to do, expect. That is the way that we will follow proceedings in terms of the five-year break. John Mason will follow by Ken Macintosh. There seems to be quite a lot of good news linked to this contract from what I can see. Can the minister confirm that, as well as taking on the first ScotRail staff in Glasgow, they are actually going to bring new staff to Glasgow and have a new function there? John Mason has a very good point about what Abilio intends to do to bring their UK headquarters to Scotland in Glasgow. With that, there will also be a shared services centre. In total, we are talking about 200 jobs, so major benefits in terms of that. I think that that shows the level of commitment that Abilio has to this process, a real boost for people in terms of jobs. As I have mentioned, the point about jobseekers in the past is the idea of making it easier for jobseekers to get around the country and the newly employed, perhaps before they even start receiving a wage to be able to get around the country more cheaply. That shows and demonstrates the Government's commitment to driving up employment and to helping out some of the more disadvantaged people in society. Can the minister tell us, rather than his views on Labour's position, whether he considered using the powers that already exist within this Parliament to consider either a co-operative, a mutual or a not-for-profit franchise, as for example proposed by the real union Aslef or by the co-op? Further to Alison Johnstone's question, whether or not the five-year contract break would allow a future administration to go down that route, or are we committed to a 10 years of Scotland's privatised railways? I think that I have answered the question of the five-year break twice now, which is to say that, of course, the five-year break can be exercised by either party in relation to that. Ken Macintosh's other point about the not-for-profit bid. We have said from the very start of this process that we would be more than happy to see a not-for-profit bid come forward. Some of the organisations that he mentioned were very interested in that and were also asked if they wanted to come forward with a bid, and they said that they were unable to do so. It is also, if he checks into it, one of the provisions is that you have to have some background and experience in providing real services, which we have at least one organisation, public sector organisation in Scotland that is able to do that. We are not able to favour one bid over another. I think that Ken Macintosh knows that fact. Of course, we have always been ready to welcome any not-for-profit bid that did not come forward. That ends the statement from the minister. I apologise to the two members. I could not call, but the motions this afternoon are extremely tight. The next item of business is a debate on motion 11114, in the name of Graham Pierce.