 The next item of business is a statement by Mary McCallan on A9 dueling programme. The cabinet secretary will take questions at the end of her statement and hence there should be no interventions or interruptions. I call on Mary McCallan, cabinet secretary, up to 10 minutes please. Thank you very much. Following the Deputy First Minister's budget statement yesterday, I'm very pleased to have the chance to provide more detail on completing the dueling of the A9 between Perth and Inverness. I know that this statement is keenly anticipated, especially by those who are concerned to see safety improvements that have been developed on the A9 and for the many Scottish communities and businesses for whom the A9 is essential. I am acutely aware of the strength of feeling on this issue. The programme has faced challenges and I acknowledge that it has not progressed at the pace that we would have liked. There have of course been particular challenges with sky-high inflation, causing slippage in major capital projects. However, the A9 is the backbone of Scotland. It must be safe, reliable and resilient, and that is what this Government will deliver. When I assumed responsibility for transporting Cabinet in June, my primary objectives for the A9 project were threefold. First, to oversee amendments to transport Scotland's approach to procurement of its design and build contracts, to improve prospects and to avoid a repeat of last year's experiences with the section between Tumatyn and Moy. Secondly, to finalise a delivery plan for dualling the remaining sections of the programme, which foregrounded certainty of delivery but also carefully balanced it against considerations of market capacity, affordability and the need to minimise disruption on the network. Finally, in the meantime, to progress interim safety interventions short of and in anticipation of dualling. I will address each of those issues today. While focusing my remarks principally on the remainder of the programme, a word first on Tumatyn to Moy. Following the outcome of the first procurement for the section, Transport Scotland undertook extensive market consultation with the construction industry in order to gather views on how its major roads project could generate improved tender competition. As a result of this engagement, the new engineering contract with amendments was adopted for use on a new procurement for Tumatyn to Moy. This change in contracting approach was welcomed by the Civil Engineering Contractors Association. The new engineering contract is preferred by the industry and is widely used across the UK, with the terms and conditions adopted by Transport Scotland now offering a more balanced approach to the sharing of risk between Scottish ministers and those with whom we contract. I can confirm that on 11 December this year, invitations to participate in dialogue were issued to three shortlisted contractors and it is expected that award of this contract will take place in early summer 24, with the completed dualling expected to be operational by the end of 2027. Meanwhile, the Scottish Government has been determinedly considering procurement options for dualling the remaining eight sections. Options considered include procuring all projects using either a design and build contract or a mutual investment model known as MIM, which is used by the Welsh Government and a public-private partnership contract, or indeed we considered a hybrid of both approaches. We have also considered carefully how works are sequenced to provide an efficient overall programme that is aligned with the market's capacity to deliver, which minimises disruption to road users and which is achievable within the wider financial constraints. Of course, as the Deputy First Minister outlined yesterday, the UK, having not inflation-proofed its capital budget, has left us with a nearly 10 per cent real terms cut in our capital funding between 2324 and 2728. That has been a complex exercise, but the Government has concluded that the hybrid approach is the best way to complete the A9 dualling programme. I can therefore confirm that the Government will progress the three remaining A9 dualling projects at the southern end of the route via three capital-funded design and build contracts. We then anticipate progressing the five remaining projects in the north and central stretches via two resource-funded MIM contracts. That is subject to on-going due diligence and further decision-making in late 2025 and will be based on an updated assessment of expected market conditions. I can confirm today that, in progression of this delivery plan, work will begin immediately on preparations for the procurement for the next design and build contract, which will be for the Tay crossing to Ballan Lug project, with the contract notice planned for publication in spring 2024 and award anticipated in summer 2025. In addition, procurement of the Pitlockery to Kelly Cranky project and subject to completion of statutory processes, the passive Burnham to Tay crossing, will commence in summer 2025 and summer 2027, respectively. Subject to decision-making in late 2025, procurement for the two remaining northern projects under a single MIM contract could then commence in winter 2027, with the second MIM contract comprising the remaining three central projects commencing procurement in 2829. That hybrid approach will create a rolling programme of construction, which will lead to the progressive opening of the jewelled sections. Under the new plan, by the end of 2030, we anticipate that nearly 50 per cent of the A9 will be open as jewelled carriageway, rising to 85 per cent by the end of 2033 and eventually 100 per cent by the end of 2035. That means that we will see significant benefits from the jewelling programme years ahead of that backstop in 2035. I should say that we have published all the details of the programme on our Transport Scotland website today. As part of our work, we have also prepared updated scheme cost estimates for each project. The total cost of the programme is now estimated at £3.7 billion at April 23 prices. When adjusted for inflation, that is equivalent to £2.45 billion at April 2008 prices, which the chamber will note, is well within the original cost estimate of £3 billion at 2008 prices. That is cost. I want to talk about safety. The improved safety that is expected from jewelling is absolutely crucial. I wish to take this opportunity to offer my heartfelt sympathies and my condolences to anyone who has lost a loved one or indeed who has been injured in collisions on the A9. Dwyling will see driver stress and accidents reduced. Likewise, the severity and journey times for emergency vehicles will also be reduced. Dwyling offers resilience, limiting the need for lengthy diversions. At the same time, the A9 is critical to the movements of freight, business and leisure travellers. Dwyling improves reliability and the average times of journeys by 20 per cent. That is transformative for a route that serves 35 per cent of our land mass and carries around 10 per cent of Scotland's GDP in terms of cargo. Investment in the route will help to grow the economy, but the impact is wider than economic. The A9 is the backbone that connects Central and Highland Scotland, and for the 10,000 people living along it, it is often the only connection to vital services. It will also maximise the range of opportunities for contractors and their long supply chains. The programme will ensure that the link between two of Scotland's great cities is safe and fit for purpose for everyone who needs to use it both now and in the future. Comprehensive stakeholder engagement on this plan will begin early in the new year, building on extensive engagement to date. I will today write to interested MSPs inviting them to a briefing in Parliament as a first step. Regular engagement will continue as the programme progresses, including, of course, with local communities and on their individual projects. In the meantime, anyone with an interest in the A9 can sign up for updates at www.89juling.scot prior to the full launch of a new A9 juling website early in the new year. We will also advertise engagement opportunities here and through traditional and social media. Decisions to complete the statutory processes are now complete for over 92 per cent of the programme. We will complete the statutory processes for the three outstanding schemes with ministerial consent next year and will acquire the necessary land to support the procurement timetable. The only project not to have yet started that process is the Passive Burnham to Tay Crossing. I would like to take the chance to thank the local community for their valuable input through the co-creative process. Today, I can announce that the preferred route for this section is confirmed and that it includes a number of the elements of the community's preferred options, including around about it and held, and the junction layouts at the Hermitage and Dalguese. Further details of the preferred route, like the programme itself, are available on Transport Scotland's website, and local communities and rose users will have the opportunity to comment on the plans at public exhibitions in January. In the time that I have left, I would like to say a word on safety before concluding. Having updated on Tumat and Tumoi and the remainder of the programme, I just want to close with safety, because since 2007, this Government has invested £300 million in the maintenance and safety of the A9 and a further £3.6 million on average speed cameras. Following the tragic loss of life that occurred on the route in particular in 2022, we have been investing an additional approximate £5 million, and I am pleased to confirm that those safety measures are progressing at pace with a number of elements completed. Of course, those include enhancements to signing and road markings, emphasis junctions and those vital transitions between dual and single carriageways. As with the rest of the trunk road network, the safety performance of the A9 will continue to be regularly reviewed. Time is against me, but to conclude, this Government is restating its commitment today to dualling the A9 between Perth and Inverness, and we are doing that with a concrete plan. The approach that I have set out means that the Highlands can have confidence, that the considerable benefits of the A9 dualling programme will be delivered and in full. Now that we have reached this point, there will be no let-up when construction starts on Tamatyn Timoe next year under this delivery programme. It will roll continually until the route between Perth and Inverness is fully dualled. The cabinet secretary will now take questions on the issues raised in her statement. I intend to allow around 20 minutes after which time we will move on to the next item of business, and it would be helpful if those members who would wish to ask a question were to press the request-to-speak buttons. I call Murdo Fraser. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I thank the cabinet secretary for advance sight of her statement, although we have been waiting for this update since February, and here we are on the second-last sitting day of the year. Our wait here is as nothing compared to the wait of the people of Perth and Inverness and the Highlands and Islands who have been waiting for years to see this vital project completed with an SNP Government in Perth who have delivered a mere 11 miles of dual carriageway in 16 years. Throughout that period, too many lives have needlessly been lost and more will die as a result of the delays that we have heard about today. At best, we will be waiting another 12 years for this project to be completed and that is the most optimistic outcome that we can hope for. The cabinet secretary did her best to deflect criticism on to the UK Government, but I would generally remind her that the SNP had kept their promise to complete the dualling by 2025, and the challenges that she identifies with inflation and her Government's capital budget would not have been an issue. Today, Presiding Officer, we were expecting to hear that a contract had been placed for the Tamaten-Tamoi section. Even that has not been delivered. Instead, the best that we have is an expectation that there will be a contract award in summer next year. One year on, from where we were at the start of this year, we are precisely no further forward. Can I ask the cabinet secretary three things? Firstly, what guarantees can she give us that that contract award for Tamaten-Tamoi will now actually be done and on the timescale that she has outlined, given all the slippage and timescales that we have seen in the past? Secondly, in relation to the remaining sections, what confidence can we have that the timescales set out today are actually deliverable, even supposing that the funding can be found? Thirdly, how confident is the minister that there is appropriate civil engineering contracting capacity to carry out those works? What discussions has she held with industry to determine their willingness to tender for the contracts that are being proposed? I thank Murdo Fraser for his question, and I should like to begin by acknowledging his point about a delay in my update. I had hoped to give this update some weeks ago, and I am always seeking to expedite progress in that regard. Unfortunately, the A9 dualling project is a complex project. Indeed, it is actually a living complex project, but as of today, it is a complex project with a comprehensive delivery plan. I hope that even Murdo Fraser can welcome that. I think that the critical theme in all of the points that he raises is about certainty. The plan that we have set out today has sought to foreground certainty of delivery, but, as I said in my statement, we have carefully balanced that with the other factors that we must consider, namely the need to minimise disruption, market capacity and affordability. With all of that taken into account, what we are publishing today provides the greatest certainty that I am able to provide, bearing in mind that this is a large project with significant complexities, significant interdependencies, all of which are susceptible to a variety of external factors, not least the financial volatility that we have become accustomed to under Murdo Fraser's Government. The SNP first committed to dual A9 back in 2007. Today, 16 years on, and excuse after excuse after excuse later, the Cabinet Secretary expects us to be happy that, by 2030, 23 years after the 2007 commitment, it will have completed less than 50 per cent of the project. With a new day of 2035, for completion between Perth and Inverness, some 28 years after the initial promise, one has to wonder how on earth can the Cabinet Secretary say, with a straight face, that the Highlands can have confidence that the A9 dualing programme will be delivered and in full? So can I ask the Cabinet Secretary, does she have the confidence that this Government is even capable of delivering infrastructure projects off the scale? This Government has got a proud history of delivering major projects. Absolutely, there are a plethora of major projects, and I have absolute confidence, but I am not complacent at the same time, and that is why we have spent time. As I set out since I had responsibility for this, I have been determined to spend time finding all the ways possible to increase certainty in this project. That has involved updating our business case, it has involved spending considerable time and Transport Scotland spending considerable time engaging with the industry to update our approach to contracting under design and build contracts, and it has all brought together this new plan, which, for the first time, anticipates using a hybrid model of funding options that are available. That is an example of the Government using every tool that it is disposable and working exceptionally hard to give the confidence to the Highlands and to everyone who I accept has been waiting too long that this will be completed on a rolling basis of construction, with 50 per cent completed by 2030, 85 by 2033 and 100 per cent dualling by the end of 2035. In welcoming the reaffirmation of the Government's commitment to dualling the A9, which builds on the successful completion of a range of capital projects, including the Queensferry crossing, the M74 completion, the M8 completion, the Aberdeen Western peripheral route completion, the Airdrie to Bathgate railway and the Borders railway, and the acceptance by the cabinet secretary of a number of the proposals made by my constituents in the Dynkeld and Burnham area regarding the design of the route at that particularly challenging site. Would the cabinet secretary agree to further engage it from herself, the transport minister and their officials with community groups in Dynkeld and Burnham about the design issues and also crucially on short-term improvements that could be made to road safety in advance of the dualling works being undertaken? I thank Mr Swinney for so eloquently reeling off the plethora of major projects that this Government can be very proud for having delivered. On the point about his locality, I would like to thank the Burnham to Ballan U again A9 community group for its work in working with us in a co-creative process that has helped to broaden our vision for the A9 dualling project through this really important route. The transport minister and I truly value the input that they have made to the process and building on the positive relationship that's been established, I should like to reassure Mr Swinney that we will continue to engage with him, with his local community and all of that as we continue to develop this section of the A9 which of course has taken a big step forward today. Indeed, I can advise that Transport Scotland officials are meeting the Burnham to Ballan Lug A9 community group later this afternoon to discuss that preferred route option and of course, as I mentioned in my statement, we will be holding those public exhibitions locally in January for the community. Time and time again SNP ministers have come to this chamber, appeared in front of committees or pledged in public that the A9 will be dualled in full between Inverness and Perth and by the promised 2025 date. That was despite all evidence being to the contrary. We now know that since 2018 they were not being honest. The Scottish Government knew because officials told them that the 2025 date was unachievable but it wasn't until last year nearly five years later that SNP ministers finally came clean. So can I ask the cabinet secretary how can local businesses, those who live along the route of the A9 and those who have lost loved ones on the road, trust this Government to finely deliver on these new, even more vague promises when they have been lied to so many times before? I am not sure that that was parliamentary language but that is entirely your decision to adjudicate on. Cabinet Secretary, please assume your seat. I heard what the member said and I noted carefully in the way in which she phrased it. It is of course absolutely unacceptable to refer to another member as having lied or being untruthful. I felt that the way in which it was phrased did not quite fall within that bracket and indeed it would be for me in the chair. Thank you. The member's question centred on the inquiry that the Public Petitions Committee is currently undertaking, which is a retrospective look on the progress of the programme to date. I am concerned that my statement to date is about looking forward but I have agreed to appear in front of the Public Petitions Committee to assist them in their important inquiry. Indeed, some of the documents that Mr Halcro Johnston referred to are part of the very many that the Scottish Government has handed over to the inquiry. I think that Mr Halcro Johnston will find that he will have to correct the record at some point in the future. It was not and the papers make this entirely clear and I will certainly reiterate at committee, it was not until late 2022 that Transport Scotland knew for certain that the 2025 date was not deliverable. A number of the papers that Mr Halcro Johnston is speaking to talk, for example, about moving only to a MIM model and the deliverability of that by 2025, they did not mention capital design and build. As I say, I am happy to appear in front of the committee and discuss those matters on the retrospective account. I am looking forward today with this optimum delivery plan. Can the cabinet secretary say a bit more about the mutual investment model that she referenced in her statement? What it entails and what the advantages of it are? Yes, absolutely. I am happy to. The mutual investment model, as I said in my statement, is one that has been developed and used by the Welsh Government. It is a form of public-private partnership that is similar, in many respects, to a non-profit distribution contract that was previously used in a number of major road projects, including some of those that Mr Swinney narrated. The principal advantage that such a contract offers is that it provides additional investment through the use of private finance to deliver infrastructure projects and reduces the level of annual expenditure by spreading payments over a longer period of time. However, it represents a significant long-term financial commitment and requires a detailed consideration of market conditions, especially inflation and the cost of borrowing. That is why we, in a prudent manner, have built-in decision-making points within the programme. We will consider how appropriate it is to move to a MIM, given prevailing market conditions at the time. I call Rhoda Grant to be followed by Fergus Ewing. Presiding Officer, the announcement that one section will be dualled in the next four years is not going to pacify the anger of my constituents due to the lack of progress. The Government knew that it was not going to meet its 2025 promise yet tried to hide that. Can I ask if she will give detail to the key differences between design and build and mutual investment models and where the risk for each lies? Will she tell my constituents how they can realistically gauge progress towards completion for themselves given the Government's deception in the past? I hope that the member was listening to my response to Jamie Halcro Johnston when I made absolutely clear that it was not until 2022 that Transport Scotland knew for sure that 2025 was not achievable. Scottish ministers updated the Parliament shortly thereafter. Rhoda Grant, in referring to one section being completed in the coming years, is missing the point that I have been trying to stress, which is that this is a 12-year programme, but one of rolling construction. When spades are in the ground for tomato and tamoy section next summer, we will see rolling construction right through to 2035. As I say with that progressive opening, 50 per cent by the end of 2030, 85 per cent by 2033 and 100 per cent by the end of 2035, so that people who I accept rely on this route so fundamentally can enjoy the safety and economic and other benefits that come from dualling in advance of the completion of the entire programme. On the way to the chamber this afternoon, and quite by chance, I bumped into an Invernesian who reminded me that he had lost friends on the A9. That was a salutary reminder of the force behind this campaign. In any campaign, it is wise to accept victory where it occurs and to be magnanimous. It is said that to be prepared is half the victory, and I think that she will agree that we are not as yet fully prepared. Will she acknowledge that many, including myself, will continue to remain sceptical until they see even the diggers on the road and that the statement today, whilst on the face of it encouraging, involves a huge amount of work ahead? In conclusion, there must be no more slippage, no more delays and no more broken promises. I want to thank Fergus Ewing for his contribution today, but equally for his determined campaigning on this matter. Of course, since I have been in post but long before that as well, he mentioned in his opening remarks about the loss of life. Of course, that is the principal issue at the forefront of this. I attended an event with Fergus Ewing over the summer, organised by the P&J and the Inverness Courier, where we were joined by family members of the bereaved. I can assure Fergus Ewing and the chamber that that experience will never leave me and has been with me in all the work that we have been seeking to do as a team ever since. I would not expect Fergus Ewing to be anything other than sceptical—helpfully sceptical, I hope—moving forward, but I can assure him, as I have to other members, that what we have tried to produce today is the greatest possible certainty in a fairly uncertain world. I can assure him that, although I cannot prevent issues from arising where they arise, the Government will seek to overcome them as quickly as possible. Yesterday, we heard of another serious crash on the A9 near Invergordon, and my thoughts are with those taken to Aberdeen royal infirmary after the collision. That highlights the known dangers of the A9 in its current state. There was news last week that, in 2018, it was thought that the target to dual the A9 between Inverness and Perth by 2025 was unachievable, yet ministers didn't change course to address this, and 77 miles of the A9 are still not dualed. The new timeline will mean years of delay from the original commitment, and I must say that I'm surprised that there was no apology anywhere in the Cabinet Secretary's statement about this. So can I ask the Cabinet Secretary what guarantees can the Scottish Government provide this time that the new dates are realistic, and we will see completion by the new date? Beatrice Wishart, and I echo to her what I have to Fergus Ewing and a number of others, which is to I suppose reassure her in the first instance that that certainty of delivery that she and others is seeking is what has driven the development of this plan. Whilst it would be a little foolish to suggest that in a project of this scale and this complexity that issues won't arise, of course they will, I give her the same commitment that I have given to Fergus Ewing and others, which is that when they arise, where they arise, the Government will seek to address them as quickly as possible. She's absolutely right to acknowledge the accident that occurred near Tomach this week. My sympathies and that of all my colleagues are with those who have been involved. We are awaiting further details, but I also want to thank the emergency services who were so promptly on the scene. That relates to another part of Beatrice Wishart's question, which is about how the dueling is principally a safety issue. I have very much at the forefront of my mind how driver stress, how driver frustration will be reduced by dueling, how the severity of accidents will be reduced by dueling, because we know it's head-on collisions, which are the most difficult and fatal. Of course, emergency vehicles access will be quicker not just where there's accidents on the road, but for the 10,000 people who live along the route. I call Kate Forbes to be followed by Edward Benton. Thank you, Presiding Officer. My declaration of interest that I probably spend about 10 hours every week on the A9. The Cabinet Secretary may recall just a matter of weeks ago that the Tory said that dueling the A9 would take a century, so I've never been more thankful that she's in charge with an updated deadline of 2035 and not them. But can I also pay tribute to the Highlanders who have waited patiently for the A9 to be dualled? There are spokespeople, not least the Inverness Courier, who are here today. Certainty really matters. In order to restore trust, we have to keep communities regularly informed so that there are no surprises. How do we do that so that they can trust the pronouncements made by the Government and that progress is genuinely being made? I understand entirely the sentiments that Kate Forbes has expressed. My clear objective today is to set out that this is a new, optimal delivery plan and it is a concrete one that the approach that we have set out means that people in the Highlands and those who travel there can have confidence that all of those considerable benefits of A9 dueling that we know exist will be realised as efficiently as we can. As I said, I will repeat now that we have reached that point and there will be no let-up. Under that plan, under that rolling delivery programme, we will see continual work and continual construction until the route is finished. She is quite right to point out that research by the Conservative Party pointed recently to this potentially taking 111 years. I hope that even they will welcome the fact that it is going to take about a tenth of that time. Thank you very much, Presiding Officer. In the last, in the dark days of winter, we now get the promised autumn statement on the A9. I suppose better late than never considering the time we've been waiting for this project. Considering the Government's record, how can Scots believe that it can only deliver a miserable seven miles a year of dueling to complete this project by 2035? Surely we should expect more in the fact that you've failed to deliver a long-standing promise. Presiding Officer, again I would just point out to Edward Mountain at the irony, I suppose, that his party were compiling what they call research, what I would call a little ridiculous, whereas they were compiling those press releases. Thankfully, the Government, taking this serious issue very seriously, were working hard to overcome the barriers that we need to in order to present this comprehensive plan today. That includes, as I have said, looking closely at our business case, updating that, working with industry to improve the manner in which we procure, design and build contracts and building this plan, which, as I have said, foregrounds certainty of delivery, but considers market capacity, considers affordability and ensures that there will not be unmanagible disruption on the route. The cabinet secretary has rightly highlighted safety on the A9 as being the overriding priority. The green group is behind appropriate action needed to cut casualties and tragedies on the road, but given that the A9 programme will not be completed until the mid 2030s, can I ask what other options to improve safety on the A9 have been reviewed while, of course, staying on track to meet our legally binding climate targets? I am grateful to Mark Ruskell for highlighting what, as I have said, is the principal driver of this work, as far as the Government is concerned, and that is the improvement of safety. As I mentioned in my statement, since 2007, the Government has invested 300 million in the safety and maintenance of the A9 and a further 3.6 million on average speed cameras, which I think that everybody would accept and made a difference, but it does not go as far as Dooling itself will. In addition, following that quite marked increase in accidents that occurred during 2022, we responded with an additional £5 million in road safety measures. Those have included enhancements to signing and road markings, with a particular emphasis on junctions and the transition between Dooling's single carriageway, which we know can be difficult. The introduction of average speed cameras, the work of Police Scotland, targeted education campaigns and the on-going management and maintenance of the route have helped to reduce accidents and casualties from that long-term trend that we were seeing, with the exception of 2022. That remains at the foreground of our thinking. The statement on the Scottish Government's response to the section 35 order judicial review was sent to me at 16 minutes past 3 this afternoon. Statements are usually sent within sufficient time that allows MSPs to read over and scrutinise the minister's statement prior to arriving in the chamber. Sending a statement through four minutes before business is scheduled is discourteous to elected members in this Parliament. Can the Presiding Officer assist me in understanding why the Government is withholding statements from MSPs until the last minute? Does she believe that this is good practice as MSPs are restricted from being able to do their job for holding this Government to account? I thank Ms Gallacher for her point of order. I would say that, in terms of the guidance from the Presiding Officer, provision of statement in due time is very important and is a mark of the Government showing courtesy and respect to individual members. Vis-à-vis the specifics of the case, I would advise Ms Gallacher that the Presiding Officer herself, who will be taking the chair for the next item of business, will address that issue further.