 Yn y blynydd i'r rhwng o'r awrgol, yw'r newid o'r 17 yma yw yw 2014 yw'r Ffostructuren i'r Cwmifrif Llywodraeth Cymru? Yn y fawr yw'n rhaid hynny'n ymddiw'r ffaith bod ydych chi'n hynny'n rhaid o'r cyfnodd y dyfodol sy'n edrych. Y genddau ffadol 1 yn ddiweddolu sefodol wedi'i ddweud o'r ffodol. Yn gyflym maen nhw, yn y Cymnol Cymru, yw'r Ymddiannau M9A9 Fion Gwlllwyr Cymru, 2014, gyda Keith Brown, Minister for Transport and Veterans, Scott Lee's Head of Network Operations and Stuart Wilson, Development Management and Strategic Road Safety Manager for the Scottish Government. The instrument is laid under affirmative procedure, which means the Parliament must approve it before the provisions may come into force. Following this evidence session, the committee will be invited to consider a motion to approve the instrument under agenda item 2. Can I welcome the witnesses? Minister, can I invite you to make any opening remarks? Thank you very much, convener, and I'm delighted to speak to the proposal to promote an HDV 50mh speed limit in the regulations, which have been mentioned. We're doing this for a number of reasons. The expected benefits of the proposed HDV pilot are spread across four key areas, all of which are considered to be significant to road safety, but also for business in the highlands and connectivity to and from the central belt. The main areas are, first of all, improved journey time reliability, a positive economic impact across a range of indicators and wider road safety improvements, as well as environmental benefits. The A9, as everyone will know, is one of Scotland's most important links. The pilot really is just one of the many engineering enforcement and education measures that are being introduced to improve the safety and operation of the routes ahead of dualling. An extensive view of the available evidence has been undertaken in considering the pilot, and we've also taken the views of A9 users, the business community, and hauliers into account. The raising of the speed limit for HDVs is an integral part of the wider A9 safety initiative, and it's linked directly to the introduction of the average speed camera system. The strategy for the deployment of the average speed camera system is that it will provide 100% cover of all single carriageway sections of the A9 impacted by raising the speed limit. It's also clear that the speed camera systems will bring safety improvements to the route and the pilots will bring operational benefits. It may also further improve driver behaviour by reducing driver frustration. The Road Hologis Association has assured me that they will also work with their drivers to make sure they adhere to the most professional standards for the duration of the trial, hopefully in perpetuity. They will be customising their training with regards to the A9 as well as implementing an education campaign themselves. The pilots for the raising of the speed limit is dependent upon the introduction of the average speed camera system, and we will be using several measures to judge its success, including before and after surveys, as well as monitoring changes in overtaking behaviour. The speed limit, just to be clear, has not been changed for vehicles other than HDVs above 7.5 tonnes, so there will be no confusion to other motorists or tourists, and the revised speed limit will be signed and used as part of the wider interim safety plan proposals to improve safety for all users of the A9. Thank you. Thanks. Adam, would you like to start off the questioning, please? Thanks, convener. Good morning, Minister. Everything else has been equal. It's a wee bit counterintuitive to suggest that road safety would be improved by increasing a speed limit on HDV vehicles on the A9. Could you perhaps develop your thoughts on why this would actually be of significant benefit? Because according to the Transport Research Laboratory, who did a report for Transport Scotland back in 2009, they concluded by saying reduction in the number of accidents is likely to be greater if the speed limit is retained at 40mph for HDVs rather than increased to 50mph. Yes, I've seen that study, and I think our point is that the way in order to improve accident statistics and the safety of the road is, first of all, by reducing the levels of queuing, which you currently see, and overtaking associated with slow-moving HDVs. We appreciate just now that you have quite a substantial differential between the 60mph limit for other vehicles and the 40mph limit for HDVs, and that differential, we believe, causes frustration, and also we can reduce frustration by taking this measure. Also, it's true to say that this measure has been introduced, as I've said, along with the average speed camo system, which I think is very important. One of the main representations that I had received was from hauliers who regularly obeyed the speed limits, even had limiters in their vehicles to make sure they couldn't exceed the 40mph limit, and they felt, given the fact that the average speed for HDVs coming down that road before this introduction was 56mph, and that it wasn't a level playing field. Obviously, it's a competitive environment for hauliers, and they want to see it leveled, so if you could increase the speed limits, reduce the frustration, reduce some of the overtaking manoeuvres which are undertaken, but also make it a level playing field and one which is enforced, then it means it's better for the industry generally. As I say, the current average speed limit on the single carriage with parts of the road is 50mph on that for HD vehicles, and we also believe there can be substantial savings in terms of 150,000 vehicle hours per year of journey time. Going back to the point about TRL, it's also worth saying that they highlighted the use, highlighted the A9 as a suitable location for an HDV speed limit pilot, given the levels of monitoring which will be put in place and the presence of the average speed camo system. I'm familiar with the average speed camo system given that it's a feature of the A77 south of Comarnac down on the bypass through air. Is what you're suggesting predicated on the camo system in up and running before you actually introduce the pilot? It's predicated on happening simultaneously, and you've mentioned the A77, which I think is an important point. The studies which have been done on the effect of the average speed camo system, they are recording two less fatal accidents per year. Apart from the personal tragedy involved in any fatal accident, there's also a cost of around £2m to the public key agencies each time that happens. But in terms of reducing accidents and especially fatal accidents, it's proven to be extremely effective, and that's why we believe the two things should happen at the same time. We shouldn't really have one without the other. I think there's a point made by Alex Johnson publicly as well that you should consider these two things together, which is what we've done. Along with another number of other measures, for example, you may have heard the campaign about overtaking, quite a graphic campaign on radio, the tick tick tick of the indicator, and people saying this could be the last sound that you hear, because we know that is a cause of accidents on that road. That's why we think the two things should go together that we properly enforce the speed limits which were there, but we try to reduce frustration and the platooning and the queuing which goes on. Thank you. Minister, you mentioned the potential economic increase or impact of the increasing the speed limit. Could you maybe expand on that a bit? What were you thinking of in terms of economic impact? I suppose two main aspects. One, in terms of journey time, which can be reduced for HDVs previously travelling at 40, they've been able to travel at 50. I think I mentioned 150,000 hours has been a reduction now. That obviously factors through to time spent for drivers, fuel, but having that journey time reliability as well as the reduction is very important, so people can make an estimate of what it will take to go the length of what's one of the most important economic routes in the country. It's both in terms of journey time savings and the savings that can produce for companies and ultimately customers by bearing down on costs of transportation, but also in planning being able to have more certainty as to how long it will take you to use that road. Mark? It's part of that economic model and has there been any assessment of what the impact will be on rail freight by increasing the speed limit for HDVs? We have in the STPR in 2008 undertaken work since then to highlight the commitment to both road and rail freight, and the STPR highlighted the due dualling of the A9 and improvement to the Highland mainline, both of which are being progressed. We're working closely with Network Rail and developing phase two of the Highland mainline improvements project, and rail enhancements include provision of biodirectional sign that signalling to reduce the impact of engineering works on the route, increasing the length of freight loops, and also removing speed limits below 70 to 85 miles per hour for freight trains, so it's not the case that we're just looking at the road option here, but we're also improving the rail option, and I think those improvements which we've talked about should help to increase the attractiveness of rail, and we've also seen, I think, one or two pilots, particularly the whisky trains that you may have heard about, especially coming from Murray, but using the A9, where the whisky industry has got together with the support of the Scottish Government to take freight from road and put it onto rail, and we're hopeful that these kind of pilots and the increasing awareness of the benefits of using rail will factor through, so we're not just taking one side of this, we're trying to improve both routes, including the attractiveness for rail. Can I ask if a climate change impact assessment has been done on changing the speed limit? Well, it's certainly true to say that we expect it to be environmental benefits from this, so I wouldn't be a scott to come back on the assessments, the detailed assessments which have been done, and the reason for that is just as you've seen when you come across the new, when you come across the fourth road bridge just now, the alleviation of the queuing, and I just used that route myself this morning, so it's not completely alleviated, it does mean that the traffic passes more freely and you don't have the same stop and start, which is extremely damaging to the environment in our cars having to accelerate and stop and start and so on, so we know that that will reduce all the beneficial impact on the environment, I don't know if Scotland should want to come in on the others. I'll take that for me, Minister, morning everybody. There hasn't been a specific assessment of how much CO2 might be saved, for instance, by the journey to saving minister spoken about. We have done a lot of environmental damage to speed cameras and the 50-metallire monitoring. One thing to say, from experience of other average speed camera systems, which the 50-metallire pilot sits in the context of, the smoother traffic flows and more organised speed for want of a better description means typically that engines are running more efficiently. Also, when we're speaking to the Rhotology Association and Freight Transport Association, one thing they've made quite clear is that an HDV running at 40 and modern HDV isn't running its engine efficiently, they're much more comfortable running at 50, 55 miles an hour because that's what they're designed for. There will be savings, but I can't quantify precisely what it would be in that sense. Again, the dynamics of the United Traffic Floor are quite unique in many respects, so on an annual basis it's not really possible to say that. Okay, thank you. Jim? Just on that last point, Mr Wilson, you said that no specific assessment on the CO2 emissions have been undertaken. Can you ask why and if that is something that will be done in the future? We won't be doing it specifically, but the A9 dualling team are doing a much wider assessment of how the A9 will perform into the future with differing speed limits. Given the relatively small numbers of HDVs, if you imagine right now 95% of the HDVs on the A9 are speeding, as the minister said, the average speed is already approximately 50 miles an hour. The number of HDVs whose speed characteristics will change is relatively low, so 150,000 vehicle hours is what we'd expect in journey time savings, but in terms of carbon savings, it's too small a number to be accurate on. Is it not possible to undertake the assessment then, is that what you're saying? You could do number crunching, but the validity of the number would be questionable. I think what we can do... We're going to have quarterly assessments on this, and what we can do is, for the benefit of the committee, at least do the calculation on the 150,000 hours which we expect to save. I mean, that will be a judgement on what the average cost in terms of the environment is of that 150,000 extra hours being used by HDVs, but I think it's probably harder to quantify exactly what we save, not just in terms of the hours, but in terms of the profile of the traffic. If you think back, for example, to the M74 extension, before that came in, I think we'd all experienced the pretty horrendous conditions on the Kingston bridge with traffic back for many miles, and what you had was traffic moving forward, stopping and starting, and that's extremely damaging. Probably harder to quantify that, but I think we can, for the benefit of the committee, look at extrapolating the 150,000 hours for a figure in terms of what we expect to save in terms of environmental emissions. Thank you for that. That's very helpful. You've already said, you've talked about the importance of introducing the increase in the HDV speed limit at the same time as the use of average speed cameras, and you've said that it's necessary to do those two things in parallel in order to derive the benefits that you've outlined principally around safety, but the Transport Research Laboratory report that Mr Ingram referred to, which was commissioned by Transport Scotland states, and I quote, it appears that there would be a safety benefit associated with the installation of average speed cameras whether or not the speed limit applicable to heavy goods vehicles were increased. So I'm just keen to understand better, given that you could have the benefit without the installation of the average speed cameras why you are convinced that that's something that has to happen together, rather than waiting for an assessment of the impact of that before increasing the speed limit. I know what we're going to do both simultaneously, so both things will happen at the same time, and the reason why we link those two things together, there is a benefit, we believe, economically and in terms, to some extent, in terms of safety by introducing the speed limit, because they're both sides to it, the TRL report, which you mentioned, will also say an increase in speed limit can cause an increase in accidents, it's possible that can happen, but if that's mitigated by the fact that you have proper enforcement bearing in mind what's been said already about the actual average speed of HDVs on that route at the present time, if you have that enforcement and if you can take away some of the things which are causation factors for accidents, I've mentioned frustration, but some overtaking moves when people become exasperated and they undertake an overtaking manoeuvre which you wouldn't otherwise do, but the frustration drives to that. We believe there's savings in terms of accidents that can arise from that, but we do also believe that it should be properly enforced, and the enforcement of the average speed cameras I think sits with the increase in speed limit, but that's not the only reason for the introduction of the average speed cameras, and it's worth bearing in mind that our intention to, and all the work that's currently being done to dual the A9, that will in itself, because of the 12 different phases of that, would have required average speed cameras in any event. When you're undertaking that kind of online work, you have to have that if you think back to the M80 work, so there's an average speed camera system on there for the duration of the work that we're undertaking, so we would have to have had average speed cameras on different sections of the A9 in any event. We just believe it's sensible for us, given what's been said, I think Mr Ingram mentioned the benefits in the M77 to do both things, and that's got a wider application, the application of the average speed cameras than just relating to the increase in the speed limit for HDVs, it's got other benefits as well, so that's why we think both things are best done together. And just finally, what is the evidence base for the conclusions that you've reached on what work has been undertaken to arrive at these conclusions? The financial work undertaken by the A9 safety group, which includes, for example, the safety camera partnerships, Police Scotland crucially who've got the expertise in this area, and also taken into account the statements made and views of road users, so the RHA are involved in this as well, and the rail freight group, sorry, the transport freight group are also involved in this. So we've taken the most experts, people we can talk to in relation to this, but we've also paid heed to the views expressed by users. I think it was a petition in relation to this before. Certainly there have been representations for a number of years in the road haulage industry making these points that they believe this would actually improve safety. I mean the other thing can start to tackle this, things like elephant racing whereby when you suddenly come across a dual carriageway section an HDV pulls out to overtake another HDV travelling slower, and the traffic which is looking for that relief from the dual carriageway to get past is unable to do that, and this if you increase the average speed of these vehicles being able to do 50mph an hour before that it reached that point, it reduces the elements of that. And I should also just say that I've mentioned Police Scotland. There's been quite a change in how the A9 is policed with the advent of Police Scotland. You've now got a dedicated trunk load police monitoring unit. There's a greater presence now. In the past there had to be coordinates between different police forces, and now you've got one unified police force there. So we've taken the advice of these people in relation to that, and also looked at that as you've mentioned already in the TRL study, and such evidence is out there already. So HDVs will now be allowed to do 50mph along the route. What is the average speed, but the average speed cameras are going to apply to all vehicles. So what is the average speed that you expect people to do on that road? The legal speed limit or less I think is the short answer, but of course there's still that differential between all other traffic which can travel at 60mph, and you've got the HDVs which are currently restricted to 40mph on the single dual carriageway, it's 50mph on the dual carriageway. So we expect with the application of the speed cameras to have people obeying the speed limits so we're looking for average speeds. Just now you've got an average speed in excess, 10mph in excess of the legal limit, that's the average speed for HDVs, so we're looking to try and reconcile those two figures. On the schedule it's the A9 from Lunkarty to Moe is divided into about eight parts. Does that mean that there will be average speed over each of these eight parts? The average speed cameras that allow us to get some information as to the average speeds, and the survey work that we're undertaking will allow us to get average speed right across the length of the A9 from Perth Timberness, that's the intention behind it. That's coming to Stirling because average speed cameras will cover Stirling to Perth as well. So that's information, and I should just point out that the cameras are the latest digital cameras so they're able to differentiate between types of vehicles to make sure they're travelling at the correct speed. But that will give us much more information about what the average speed is along the length of the A9. Before you bring in Mr Wilson, so I'm just trying to get how do you police it and you find people for going above the average speed over a stretch? Is what I'm trying to get at, could you get three or four different fines or tickets because you're travelling over the limit, if you like, on different stretches? Obviously it's possible for somebody to use part of the A9 so the average speed that they've used on the A9 will be taken into account so you could be fined for one part, you could go along the A9, come off, done care, come back on, go back. So yes, you could be fined more than once for that. I don't know if you want to say any more mechanics about those two. Yes, thanks minister. The eight sections which are set out in the schedule are the single carriageway sections between Perth and Inverness. Between Perth and Inverness, the average speed cameras only apply to the single carriageway sections. Now the operating strategy in terms of what sections are live and what sections are will fall to the safety camera partnerships. Transport Scotland won't know what sections are or are not under enforcement. The point for drivers is you shouldn't know you should drive at the speed limit. Not all of the sections will be alive and the home office type approval for the system requires that you have to enforce within a single geometry in the sense you can do single or dual carriageway but you couldn't enforce over a combination of the two. The strategy for Perth and Inverness is very much based around the accidents currently on the single carriageway sections therefore the average speed cameras are devoted to enforcing on the single carriageway sections. They won't enforce on the dual carriageways, and the safety camera partnership can deal with that as part of a separate strategy. In terms of could you pick up more than one penalty if you like for driving at excess speed? Yes, you could. If you passed through two live sections and you were recorded twice as having driven at excess speed, average speed cameras are fairer than the fixed-gatsel cameras. You can adjust your speed over a long distance simply to maintain an average. Quite often you can make a mistake over a relatively short distance past a fixed camera site and you have points. It allows the driver to be more disciplined in terms of how they use the route. Drive at a fixed speed, which is 60mph up to 70mph for cars on the dual carriageways, you can do Perth and Inverness comfortably in two hours or less. There's a lot of evidence from what we've collected of what the A&E team have collected. Some folk are achieving that trip in 90 minutes. We've seen average speeds of 80mph, 90mph, point speeds of 125mph. We've just recently completed some driver surveys where three quarters the people we interviewed admitted having sped at least once on their most recent trip on A9. Most of that was a relatively low three or four miles an hour above the speed limit. A third admitted 10 miles an hour above the speed limit. A fifth admitted 15 miles an hour above the speed limit. That was car drivers, that was an HDV drivers. That was just folk that we spoke to and credit their candor. That's what a lot of people do in the A9. Not the majority, only a third of cars are speeding. Two thirds are driving on around the speed limit. Reinforcing the point that the minister has made. By raising the HDV speed limit on the one hand and introducing an average speed candor system on the other, the current legal speeds range, if you like, is 40mph for HDVs, most of them don't do it, to 60mph for cars. A third of them are travelling faster than that. The desired speeds closer to 70mph to 50mph to 60mph can travel within relatively small speed range. Anyone who does that, the average speed cameras are irrelevant. If you're obeying the law, they don't exist. It simply requires you to obey the law and think about what you're doing. If you don't do that, you've got every possibility of picking up penalties for driving at excess speed. You'd have to be doing that over a long distance and consistently. Those are exactly the people we want to moderate the behaviour of. In our local paper in the north-east nest camp published where the speed cameras are going to be operating in the following week, will that happen on the A9? It could be substantial signage in a public education campaign to let people to the existence of the average speed cameras, but the ones you're talking about are the ones on mobile which the police can move around so they'll let people know that they're trying to prevent speeding rather than collect fines. Just to kill off one myth, we don't get the cash from the fines. The Government doesn't get that. The camera safety partnerships don't get that directly as well. It goes back to the Treasury. No, because these cameras will be at fixed points and they'll be well advertised before that, so it won't be the same situation as you mentioned in the north-east. Okay, thanks. Alex. I was allocated the issues enforcement and a couple of points I'd like to clarify. First of all, are you confident that the electronic measures, the average speed cameras, will in themselves be the main enforcement measure for this change in the rules? No, we've not said that that should be the main enforcement measure. It is genuinely a suite of different measures and it started already. We've talked about the education campaign for overtaking for all drivers. We've also mentioned the education campaign and training that will be undertaken by the RHA of their members as well. These are really important, plus the additional policing that I've mentioned, a much more coordinated way of policing the A9 in particular. They'll still be police on the road, they won't be left just to the speed cameras. So the speed cameras are an integral and very important part of it, but they're not the only part of it. I was going to go on to the issue of policing and the numbers of police officers that are likely to be involved. Do you envisage the introduction of this measure requiring additional police presence on the road, or will the police presence on the road remain as it has been since the last reorganisation? You know that the levels of policing and the deployment of police forces is not a matter that we have any control over. It will be for the police to decide upon that and they will take that decision based on what they perceive the problem to be. What we've been told by the police is that the change to Police Scotland has got ahead of road safety for the whole of Scotland now, Chief Superintendent Ian Murray. So he has control over this and he thinks it's a much more effective way of dealing with this. I mean in the past we've had Tayside, Highland and even Central Scotland police involved in this. So whether it was a case that they always allocated the resources to their part of it I think is open to question, but what they can do much more effectively now is police the entire route in that sense. Of course they'll have an idea of which are the points that they want to put particular police presence on. I mean it's also not just in relation to safety in terms of speed and so on it's when there's bad weather and so on the police will up their presence here, but that will remain a matter for the police. But they think it will have a more intensive policing now than it has had in the past because of the structural changes that they've had. We've all very carefully alluded to the fact that prior to this measure it was possible that some HGVs have been exceeding the speed limit and we've suggested that what we envisage is perhaps not much change in the speed that vehicles are actually travelling at, but that it will be required to regulate that new speed. Do you envisage at the outset a requirement to intensify policing activity to ensure that we don't see drivers simply exceeding the new limit by the same margin they exceeded the old limit? Of course that I think would be the danger if you didn't have the average speed cameras, because if you suddenly increase the speed limit if people have become used to the idea they can exceed the existing speed limit by 10mph an hour then intuitively you might think well the same drivers might make the same calculation they can go 10mph above that speed limit. I'm not saying they would, and also it's not just an intuition that they're currently exceeding the limit I think they're pretty established there that the severity of HDVs do exceed the current speed limit. And also for the reasons which I think Stuart mentioned where it is quite frustrating on two levels, first of all that you can see your competitor whizzing by you if they're breaking the speed limit and you're obeying the speed limit so that frustration is less but also if the vehicle you're driving is designed to go at a higher speed more comfortably at a higher speed in the 40mph an hour that you're limited to that will help reduce frustration as well and the operation will depend obviously the introduction when it happens will be a high point I would imagine for a greater police presence when people are becoming used to the system as I said bad weather will mean I think in more intensive policing but I think in general terms they've made a commitment and to be honest I travel at A9 pretty regularly myself and I've seen that to increase presence since the advent of Police Scotland and I've travelled the road in a police car as well and they will tell you that they've made a place now to have a coordinated policing of that road but also to make sure they can allocate additional resources when there's particular issues caused by bad weather or even an accident as well I mean in the past you had a think I'm writing saying one police force may have had laser equipment to deal with an accident afterwards by taking the measurements so they could deal with it more quickly it will have helped to fund the police to get more laser equipment for Police Scotland generally so they'll have that availability across the A9 so I think you'll see real improvements to the policing I think we're seeing them already and I think you'll see that through this pilot and also the average speed cameras something you could perhaps clarify for me that maybe I should know but I'll ask the question now so that I'm better informed the resource requirement for running and monitoring the average speed camera system does that come through the Police Scotland budget or on terms of the budget stream to cover that? Well it's partially funded by obviously the fines I mean I mentioned the fines go to the Treasury but the Treasury give back money for the running of these systems as well so that's partially how it's funded what we will fund is the I've mentioned the laser equipment already but also I think £245,000 for the increased signage and so on that's associated with this I don't know if you would say any more about that in Scotland Yes the safety camera partnerships are funded through Transport Scotland we currently cover the eight partnerships around Scotland any changes in resource because of this scheme will be covered by Transport Scotland They are currently being reviewed obviously with the eight that are there currently they have to reflect the changes which have happened in terms of policing so I think I've been seeing the camera safety partnerships just now are being reviewed the structures of them Mary, have you got anything to... Thank you convener and good morning Minister I wonder if you could give me some detail around the procedures that will be put in place for reviewing the increased speed limit you mentioned in your opening remarks before and after surveys I wonder if you could give me a bit more detail around them but also what other procedures will be put in place to review it Well that's right first of all the before and after surveys if you take a judgement on the effect of a particular measure you really have to have that data to make an assessment but over and above that I've mentioned the fact that we'll do three monthly surveys and evaluation of how this is progressing but as to more detail I don't know if it's true or not I'll take the minister A Llyri Deller to the driver interviews we've just completed those were part of the before survey we're doing a lot of operational work as well given there's quite an extensive available data set both from what we had previously and for the due line works we've felt it was appropriate particularly given the structure of the average speed camera system to get a bit more detail on that so we're looking at the speed along sections of the A9 and overtaking and accidents and other figures which we'll be able to monitor and report quarterly we'll repeat the before survey six months after the average speed cameras on the place so that'll be in April or May of next year and again that's very much based around people's experience of using the route themselves and how they feel other people use it and there is a section in there on how they feel that various enforcement measures would contribute to the safety of the route and some of the initial feedback we've had people wanted more enforcement, they wanted more place they wanted more cameras that's what they said in the context of the feedback we've had but still we'll be one of the most intensively monitored routes both in terms of what we're doing for the interim safety plan and to support the due line as the A9 evolves into the future it will change, the dynamics of the route will evolve and we're very conscious that the baseline strategy and the future strategy have to reflect that so we can take individual sections that haven't been drilled and still make a definitive comment on the speeds, the overtaking, the accidents in this section have changed or not changed and we can relate it back to other things be it the fact that the section south is now drilled where five years previously it was not perhaps so there's an awful lot of work going on just in terms of getting the baseline right asking the right questions now asking it how we go three, five, ten years on in the future with it so will the service be done on the different sections on the route or across the whole route the driver interviews were done at various points on the route where the Perth Binvernes pitlockery done killed the main places where the users of the A9 can actually be interviewed in context it was very important to get the right number of people we also sought to get leisure users business users, commuters and we're setting quota set up by the people who did the surveys just to ensure a degree of robustness and again when we do that next year we'll repeat that same place we won't get the same people obviously but it's very much round trying to get the same spectrum of people asking the same questions and doing analysis of the answers and in terms of the operational service yes they can be done on a section by section basically effectively they have to be as the A9 gets drilled some sections effectively will be lost so you need to be able to distill down what happened in the other sections and make an informed judgement on those and will you be monitoring accident levels in the different sections of the route and how the speed cameras or the average speed cameras actually operate in the different sections and doing comparisons between them yes it will be monitored extensively it's one of the most extensively monitored routes we will have both in terms of our ability to get information on it and the need to answer questions on it okay thank you thank you convener thank you very much convener when you're opening remarks you referred to the introduction of the 50ml an hour as being a pilot scheme I'm just wondering if you are if this proves to be successful in the number of accidents and injuries and fatalities they've reduced if you're intending to roll it out to other trunk roads like the A70 or A71 that runs through my constituency no I have no intentions and no plans through that and the reason for that is I think the A9 is a bit unique in respect of that and actually we've had a substantial number of representations from people on other routes that felt this may happen there that we're very concerned about that they don't have the same characteristics as the A9 so no this pilot is for the A9 specifically and not for wider use how do you measure that it's unique given that you know drivers frustration is common in all single carriageway trunk roads like the A70 or the A71 and if you look at the injury stats for roads in Scotland you find that the A70 and A71 are both consistently higher than the A9 in terms of injuries per kilometre and you know surely if we want to address the idea of driver frustration trying to overtake at dangerous bends dangerous junctions like the Dalmauhoi junction etc then it would be sensible to roll it out if it proves successful in the A9 well I don't think that that roads which I don't use as much as the A9 has the same characteristics as the A9 you may mention the Dalmauhoi junction that's a comparable junction on the A9 in that respect it's also worth looking at the UK government had looked at this issue of a general 50 increased to 50mph for these vehicles across the rest of the UK at least in England and they've now come back from that position and said they don't intend to do that I think that's their decision but I think our decision is very much based on the fact that the A9 is unique I think you make a very good point though about the accident stats because the perception has grown that the A9 is worse than any other road and that's simply not borne out by the statistics but it is simply the fact that people do feel worried on that route just to go back to another point if I could that it's not just for those that would not want to have a speedcam was having the ability to do the overtaking manoeuvres that they do or to drive in the way that they do you can say well that's their decision and they're putting their lives at risk there's many people and I think the majority of people want to travel that road safely and feel sometimes worried by some of the behaviour that they see on that road so it's trying to address those concerns those safety concerns so I think the A9 is unique in that respect and it's also a hugely important arterial route for the north of Scotland coming to the south and vice versa including the one that you mentioned which have the same characteristics but I don't know if there's more technical explanation that the guys would want to give on that Adam Ebert for me minister part of the consideration for the A9 in terms of the single carriageway is it's a much better engineered single carriageway than you would typically encounter elsewhere in the trunk road network as a single carriageway it's relatively wide and yes it does weave about but it's relatively straight those aren't the circumstances you typically encounter in many other parts of the trunk road network such as the Highlands 828385 by the base 70871 even the A75 down south they don't have the same wide expans if you like also as a pilot we're comforted by the fact that we are dualling the A9 so if we're not setting a precedent that perhaps isn't defensible and with the average speed cameras in place we can vote in force speed limits generally and target any unacceptable behaviours when they do arise there are many things which have come together to make an appropriate place for a pilot but perhaps don't apply in other routes so are there any other steps that you'd be taking or considering to take in order to address the fact that there are other roads that are higher up in terms of stats, in terms of injuries per kilometre or fatalities per kilometre you know to address it if we're not going to address it through increasing HDV speeds on the road and to make these things under review the criteria that is normally used and again the guys can keep me right is I'll look back over the past three years in terms of the accident rate reported accident rate that we have for those roads and also another roads, non trunk roads we just had a major review of all the roads in Scotland where we look at the speed limits in relation to that but yes there are reviews so there's constantly been improvements done around the trunk road network because we believe that's a particular issue right the way across the trunk road network it changes over time and then there's another road that comes up in terms of priority so it's not the case that we're forgetting about these other roads they are constantly monitored worth bearing in mind that the trunk roads comprise is it 6% or even less than that of all the roads in Scotland and those are the ones that we're responsible for primarily so yes the entire trunk road network is kept in the constant review I'm just going to say briefly convener that of all the roads in Scotland the one that perhaps shares characteristics with the E9 is actually the E1 south of Edinburgh towards the border might that be a possibility for consideration in future? Well again, I think as I've said what you have to do when you consider investment decisions is look at the evidence and the evidence is that the E1 is fit for its purpose and it's safe route I'm not saying it's accident free there are no roads which are accident free but the E1 is fit for its purpose there have been improvements there and part of it is duelled as you know but we believe given the evidence that we have that it is fit for its purpose just now and finally just for the record when you do a pilot you normally have an end date but can I confirm that what you're saying is the end date will be when the E9 is duelled completely no obviously the two things will start to come together as a duelling gets underway we've said this will be a three year pilot that's what we've started off by saying but in any case it will certainly decide at the end of it based on the evidence what should happen it will be doing this right the way through that three year period but in any event as I've said this had we not done this in terms of the average speed cameras we'd have ended up doing this so much of the route as we duelled those parts of it which are single-clinus routes but it's a three year pilot and it's been proposed so you will have some reporting back that have been made by some of the members about the evaluations and the surveys that we do happy to come back at any time to say as we go through the process where we're at with that okay that's fine thank you does anyone else have any questions okay so we move to agenda item two the second item is the formal consideration of motion S4M10171 calling for the committee to recommend approval of the HGV speed limit M9 A9 trunk road regulations 2014 draft invite the minister to speak to and move motion S4M10171 happy just to be with the motion community okay thank you anyone else want to make any further comment very briefly I think this is an excellent decision to go ahead with this pilot I think it has been fully justified by the Government and has been handled in an excellent way and I hope this committee will give it unanimous approval to the measure okay so I now put the question on the motion the question is that motion S4M10171 in the name of Keith Brown be approved are we all agreed we are all agreed that concludes the consideration of this affirmative instrument and we will report the outcome of our consideration to the Parliament and that concludes the committee's meeting today next week the committee will hear evidence from the Scottish housing regulator on homelessness as part of the committee's follow up to its inquiry on the Scottish Government's 2012 homelessness commitment and we will also consider our work programme and I close the meeting thank you