Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Meeting date: Thursday, September 10, 2015

Official Report 836KB pdf

---

Freight Transport

The next item of business is a debate on motion S4M-14193, in the name of Jim Eadie, on freight transport in Scotland. I invite him to speak to and move the motion on the Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee’s behalf.

15:54  

I am delighted to speak on the Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee’s inquiry into freight transport. I look forward to hearing the views of members from across the chamber and their perspectives on such an important issue.

The phrase “important issue” is often used in this place, and rightly so, but that regularity can lead to its meaning being diminished. I want therefore to give a flavour of why the freight transport sector in Scotland is an important issue.

Around 200 million tonnes of freight is moved in Scotland each year. To give that number some context, I note that the new Forth crossing will use 150,000 tonnes of concrete, or just 0.075 per cent—less than 1 per cent—of that figure.

Heavy goods vehicles and light goods vehicles make up one fifth of all road traffic in Scotland, and they cover a combined 5.5 million km per year. For the astronomers among us, or those who are interested in spacecraft—I see Chic Brodie in the chamber—that would get us to the moon and back 47 times.

Scottish ports handle around 68 million tonnes of freight each year. That is the equivalent of around 340 fully loaded visits by the world’s largest container ships, which can carry almost 20,000 containers.

Given the importance of freight transport to the Scottish economy, the committee launched its inquiry with the aim of identifying and understanding some of the challenges that the freight transport industry in Scotland faces. We wanted to examine domestic and international links, to find out how rail, road, air and sea freight services are connected and to identify key areas for development, improvement and change.

I mentioned the moon, so it is only right that I go on to refer to the sun and the stars. I record my thanks for the enthusiasm and dedication of my fellow committee members: Adam Ingram, David Stewart, James Dornan and Mary Fee—I think she knows that I was referring to her when I mentioned the sun—as well as Mike MacKenzie and, last but by no means least, Alex Johnstone. It was a real team effort. After reading a ream of written submissions, holding seven lengthy evidence sessions and conducting nine fascinating visits, we were in danger of becoming freight geeks.

We were ably assisted by the committee’s adviser, Dr Jason Monios from Edinburgh Napier University, whose expert knowledge of freight transport and logistics was invaluable. The committee is grateful for all the evidence that we heard and received during the inquiry. Our findings were very much based on what we learned over the course of our work.

I thank all the organisations that welcomed us on visits in England, Scotland, the Netherlands and Sweden. So that we could cover as much ground as possible, we ran some visits concurrently by splitting the committee into two groups.

I will move on to the report. I am sure that individual members will wish to cover specific parts of our work, but I will give a general flavour and summary of the committee’s findings.

I will start with roads. In many ways, a theme of the committee’s work was how to minimise freight on our roads, either by moving it to other modes of transport or by maximising the capacity of vehicles. However, it was clear that a good road network is still an essential part of freight movement.

I will use the A77 as an example. Many members, including our own Adam Ingram, know the route well. Whereas the Glasgow to Ayr section is primarily dual carriageway, the section south of Ayr to the port at Cairnryan—a distance of roughly 45 miles—is single carriageway. The scenery may be breathtaking, but the route goes through congested town centres such as that of Maybole, while twisting and turning on what are at times very narrow roads, yet the A77 is a designated trunk road, as well as being the primary freight route to Northern Ireland. The clear message that we received was that an upgrade to the route should be treated as a priority.

Improvements to the A77, as well as 28 other schemes, are contained in the Scottish Government’s strategic transport projects review. Although the route is designated for improvement, no timelines are associated with the necessary work as yet. The committee heard from businesses and groups from across the country, such as the Freight Transport Association and the Road Haulage Association, that some approximate timetabling of road projects would be helpful in planning investment. The committee has therefore recommended that indicative timelines for all 29 listed schemes in the strategic transport projects review should be published in due course.

The committee was encouraged by the enthusiasm of producers, retailers and hauliers for making more of a shift to rail freight. During our visits to the rail hubs at Grangemouth, Coatbridge and the Daventry international rail freight terminal—DIRFT—near Birmingham, which is the United Kingdom’s biggest rail hub, we saw at first hand encouraging signs of movement away from road to rail. That growth is fragile, however, and we heard of hub operators that struggle to get backing for investment in new or replacement rail infrastructure when their customers do not want to commit to long-term contracts. That is a difficulty that we need to address and make further progress on. However, it was encouraging to hear during the summer of the planning approval for the proposed investment in the Mossend rail hub.

The rail network has capacity issues that will have a bearing on increased use, such as variable loading gauges, a lack of sufficient passing loops and issues with access to the network at weekends and during busy periods for passenger trains. The committee therefore looks forward to scrutinising Network Rail’s forthcoming report on how it plans to upgrade the network over the coming years, including the main line that links Perth and Inverness.

On linking rail to water freight, the committee was disappointed to discover that, despite a rail line going into the port of Grangemouth, there is no regular service between the port and Grangemouth rail hub, which is barely a mile away. That situation has recently been brought into focus by the creation of a regular rail link between Grangemouth rail hub and Teesport in north-east England, which is almost 200 miles away.

To move on to water freight, it is fair to say that the committee was concerned by what it saw at the port of Grangemouth, which is Scotland’s largest port by far. Investment appeared to be limited, which a number of witnesses suggested was because of a lack of competition. The Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee shares that view and believes that the port has acted as a constraint on, rather than a facilitator to, Scottish trade. The report therefore called on the Scottish Government to explore ways of working with port operators to encourage appropriate private investment that ensures that those strategic international gateways meet the high standards of service that customers require.

The committee was disappointed to hear from the operator of the Rosyth to Zeebrugge ferry service, DFDS Seaways, that the service that is on offer at Rosyth is of poor quality in comparison with the service at Zeebrugge. Nevertheless, it was encouraging to learn in July that more than £4 million is being invested in the route by Forth Ports and DFDS Seaways.

I will mention air freight only briefly, as sadly—despite the committee’s requests to airports, freight carriers and industry groups—there was little input from those in the industry on that important sector. The committee regrets that and views it as a missed opportunity for those who are involved in air freight.

Our inquiry looked at other issues, on which I will not go into detail because of time constraints. They included the need to review the availability of freight grants; increasing the use of urban freight in town centres, including the use of cargo bikes in built-up areas; reducing carbon emissions through modal shift; and better use of policy and planning. I hope that colleagues will pick up those issues during the debate.

I will close by emphasising the committee’s primary recommendation that the Scottish Government must develop a new freight transport policy in order to meet future rail, road, sea and air freight transport needs. That would provide a strategic direction that would help to provide greater certainty to all in the industry and ensure that Scotland’s freight transport sector receives the investment that it needs.

The minister said in his response to the committee’s report that the Government is updating the national transport strategy, and the committee certainly welcomes that announcement. However, the committee was clear in its view that, for freight to be given the importance that it deserves, there must be a dedicated freight transport strategy. The committee’s report reflects the views of all stakeholders in the sector, and the committee speaks with one voice in calling on the Government to respond positively to its clear recommendations in due course.

I commend the Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee’s report to the Parliament.

I move,

That the Parliament notes the findings of the Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee’s 6th Report 2015 (Session 4), Inquiry into freight transport in Scotland (SP Paper 772).

We are extraordinarily tight for time now. I call the minister, Derek Mackay, who has up to seven minutes.

16:03  

In giving evidence to the Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee on 29 April, I welcomed its work in helping to identify and understand the challenges that are facing the freight transport industry in Scotland. The Scottish Government provided a formal response to the key issues and recommendations contained in the committee’s report on 17 August. I look forward to this afternoon’s debate as it provides an opportunity to examine the findings of the inquiry in more detail.

Since 2007, the Scottish Government has pursued policies that are focused on its purpose of creating a more successful country, with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish through increasing sustainable economic growth. That approach is supported by the four pillars of our economic strategy: investment in people and infrastructure, innovation, internationalisation and inclusive growth.

In the programme for government that we set out last week, we restated our ambition to make Scotland the best place in the United Kingdom in which to do business. As part of that, we recognise that transport infrastructure needs to provide for the efficient, effective and dynamic movement of goods and that in so doing it is a key enabler in helping the Scottish Government to achieve our purpose and our goals for economic growth.

To achieve that, we are investing in infrastructure that connects people to jobs and services, and businesses to customers and suppliers. We are supporting developments that are focused on improving journey times and connectivity; enhancing Scotland’s competitiveness; improving accessibility and integration; and minimising the impact of transport on the environment. I am reassured that the findings of the committee’s inquiry are supportive of that being the correct strategy, which puts us in a strong position to tackle many of the issues that the committee identified in its report.

It is beyond dispute that the Scottish economy needs efficient, sustainable and robust freight transport in order to meet growing customer demands and compete effectively in a global economy. Our vision is for Scotland to be a place where the movement of freight through the entire supply chain is efficient and sustainable and is on a transport infrastructure that is integrated and flexible, thus allowing Scotland’s businesses to compete and grow in a global economy. The investments that we are making in major transport infrastructure projects demonstrate our commitment to achieving that vision.

The strategic transport projects review—the evidence base for our investment—identified facilitating strategic freight routes as one of the primary functions of the national strategic transport network. I note that the committee’s report makes a number of recommendations that are aimed at bringing forward or accelerating projects already identified in the STPR. However, the timetable for delivering the projects is determined by the availability of resources in future spending reviews, which is a matter that we discussed as recently as last week. We can unlock extra resources only if we have access to greater spending capacity. Nevertheless, the Scottish Government has made, and continues to make, significant investment in projects that ensure that our national transport network fulfils its primary function. More than that, we are investing to ensure that we have a transport infrastructure that is fit for purpose and able to support future economic growth.

Since 2007, we have invested £6 billion in our trunk roads and we have a £3.5 billion capital investment programme in rail for the next five years. We also continue to provide grant funding for projects that are aimed at achieving modal shift. Projects such as the Queensferry crossing, the Aberdeen western peripheral route and the dualling of the A9 and A96 will serve to improve transport connections both within Scotland and to the markets that our businesses want to reach. We are working with industry partners to ensure that international transport links are able to support our ambitions for growth. That includes supporting the Rosyth to Zeebrugge ferry service, which was threatened at an earlier stage but which we are all delighted to know will continue. We are working together with the parties involved to look at new ways of increasing and improving services for Scotland in the long term.

We recognise that business operates in a dynamic environment. That is one of the reasons why I have instigated a refresh of the national transport strategy to reflect the current strategic context and, indeed, the committee’s recommendations. In addition, our refreshed rail freight strategy will consider the on-going role of the Scottish Government in support of rail freight, which includes future planning, and how it can best contribute to sustainable economic growth. Here, too, we are investing, with the £30 million Scottish strategic rail freight investment fund.

In all that we do to enhance freight transport, we must always bear in mind the commercial nature of the freight industry and the competition both within and across modes. Identifying solutions that achieve public policy aims is not enough, because they must also be sustainable from a business perspective. We know that that can be achieved only through close partnership working between the public and private sectors. We do that through our well-established freight stakeholder group, the Scottish freight and logistics advisory group—ScotFLAG.

The evidence that was given during the committee inquiry showed that we continue to enjoy the support of key stakeholders for that partnership approach. Indeed, ScotFLAG was specifically mentioned by stakeholders as providing good links between Transport Scotland and industry, and as being a useful forum for identifying and addressing freight transport challenges collaboratively. ScotFLAG will discuss the committee’s recommendations when it next meets on 14 September.

I consider that the Scottish Government’s purpose, economic strategy, infrastructure planning, investments in the network and partnership with the freight industry provide a strong structure and the best approach to tackle the freight challenges that the Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee has identified.

16:10  

I very much welcome the committee’s excellent report, which benefits from the consultation with and input of key stakeholders. As has been said, freight is hugely important to the Scottish economy. The report gives us an overview of the challenges and highlights the need for innovation and investment if we are going to expand our freight opportunities.

We particularly need an overarching vision and policy. It is nearly a decade since the freight action plan and now is the time for us to look at the issue and, as the previous report did, think about the future. The previous report looked 20 years ahead. Ten years on, we are in a good place to say what we need to do for the next 20 years. It is crucial that we mobilise the political support throughout the chamber for emphasising the role of freight. If that role is in exports, we need only look at the previous debate today to see the importance of facilitating exports.

Freight is also key to the transition to a low-carbon economy and enables us to tackle other Government challenges, for example on air quality, community safety and the quality of life along key routes. Now is a good time for us to have this debate.

It is particularly important that the committee highlighted the national planning framework. I hope that the minister draws on his previous portfolio in that regard, because that will provide certainty to businesses and partners in planning for the future. Crucially, it is also about the involvement of local authorities in that joined-up approach.

The committee made a crucial point about investing in routes and infrastructure upgrades. We need to focus on the integration between different modes, particularly in relation to ports and urban areas. We need to ensure that we are looking not just at roads and railways but at what happens to goods next. That is about transfer, particularly if we are looking at modal shift. Huge benefits for our environment will be delivered through vehicle technology and efficiencies that can be delivered through the packaging of goods.

I hope that we can take further the committee’s work in certain respects, particularly in relation to urban areas, where a different and potentially more radical approach will not just deliver better freight options but lead to lower emissions and help us to tackle our air-quality targets. Hopefully, that will involve more use of electric fleets. The technology is changing fast and we cannot afford to be behind in that.

It is important to look at different sectors and work across industry partnerships. Consider the circular economy debate and how the retail industry has changed over the past decade. We are beginning to see some win-wins coming through in the freight sector.

I want to focus my last couple of minutes on rail freight, because the environmental benefits are potentially massive. For example, the CO2 emissions from rail freight are 70 per cent lower than those from road freight. In addition, if we tackle congestion, it will lead to benefits for other road users. Network Rail has identified a 60 per cent growth if we can seize the opportunity, which is one that we should not miss.

The committee’s report identified routes and the freight facilities grant as crucial. On routes, it is fundamental to address pinchpoints and capacity work. Yesterday was the official opening of the Borders railway yet, within the first few days, rail experts are already talking about the fact that there are only 10 miles of double track. On a lot of our more established rail routes, particularly some of our key intercity routes, such as Perth to Inverness, Aberdeen to Inverness, and routes across the central belt and down south, we can see some serious pinchpoints and problems for the freight industry that impact on reliability. That is reflected very effectively in the committee’s report. We need to see more investment there and, as with roads, more freight investment. If we tackle pinchpoints, passenger services will benefit, too. It is a win-win.

A particular issue that we need to look at is longer passing loops, which enable us to have longer freight trains. The difference in capacity between 10 and 20 carriages is huge in terms of the efficiency and competitiveness of the industry. We also need to address loading gauge restrictions with particular regard to refrigeration for the food and retail industry. That is crucial.

We need targeted investment both within Scotland and in the cross-border routes. In addition, let us have another look at the freight facilities grant. It is clearly not working and we need to look at the rules. To make that money effective, let us get it out the door to improve our freight industry and ensure that rail freight can take off for the next 20 years.

16:15  

The committee’s inquiry was timely and this is a timely report. The issue of freight transport involves a lot of interests. The committee discussed looking specifically at freight transport for some time and getting to the point of having a report to debate is probably long overdue.

The message is positive in many ways. Most of those who are involved in freight transport in Scotland are doing a good job. They are getting on with their priorities and ensuring that they provide a service to those who need it. However, we got the message that they are failing to work together effectively.

We are not doing enough to support those people. Too often we find that the connections between transport methods are not as effective as they should be. Look at the connections of roads and railways to our ports, for example. It is interesting that rail access to our ports is limited in most cases and absent in many. Road access can be a problem on a large or small scale. The major port of Cairnryan now provides a lot of linkage to Northern Ireland, yet on this side of the route we find that roads such as the A75 and A77 are largely unfit for the purposes that we require of them. As the minister acknowledged, improvements can and will be made in that area.

Even ports that are much closer to main rail and road links find difficulties in getting goods on to the quayside. That remains a challenge in many areas, which must be dealt with locally.

There are a number of things that we must do to improve rail freight opportunities in Scotland. As we heard a moment ago, passing loops, particularly on routes north to Inverness, are a key issue. The loops are not long enough and so limit the length of the freight trains that can go to the Highlands. Of course, the congestion on our rail network is due to the number of train movements. There is a lot of free capacity to be had if we can run longer trains. Passing loops are vital.

Another rail freight problem is that many of our routes north from the central belt have height constraints. As a consequence, there is a need for low loaders and lower wagons to accommodate the existing containers that operate in Scotland. A number of rail freight operators brought the availability of lower wagons to our attention. A little effort and perhaps a little Government support to provide a larger pool of such wagons might successfully result in a lot more freight being put on to our railways, which is certainly worth consideration.

Connections between roads and railways are also constrained by the fact that many of our roads are not fit for the vehicles that carry the containers that we can put on to the railways.

My ability to participate in some of the committee’s visits was slightly curtailed during the inquiry by the intervention of a general election, to which I had to devote a little time, unsurprisingly. However, I did take the opportunity to visit the firm of Gray & Adams in Fraserburgh, which is one of the premier manufacturers of temperature-controlled trailers for the road haulage industry. There I saw some of the work that is being done to get more effective loads on our roads.

Only a few years ago, the main road transport issue was weight. Everybody wanted heavier weights on the roads for efficiency and people were concerned about heavier trucks on our roads. Suddenly the emphasis has changed. Many cargoes on our roads are much lighter than they were, and the issue has now become volume or bulk. What I saw at Gray & Adams were 40-foot trailers—and, in some cases and with special licences, 45-foot trailers—with facilities for double-deck loading. Given that the presence of such vehicles on our roads is vital in supplying areas where there is no rail connectivity, we need to consider the accessibility of these vehicles to some of the regions that we need to get to.

You should draw to a close, please.

There is a great deal still to be said on this matter, but I believe that our report highlights the current issues. Indeed, having heard the minister’s opening speech, I think that we might be pushing at an open door.

We move to the open debate. I must ask for four-minute speeches, please.

16:20  

First of all, I thank my fellow committee members, the clerks, the advisers and everyone who gave evidence in this fascinating inquiry. I gained an understanding of what is actually a far more complex freight system than I had previously realised it is. In fact, I had never really stopped to consider how our freight transport system works. How do products end up on supermarket shelves from dispatch points all around the globe? How are all the goods that keep the wheels of industry and commerce turning transported?

The inquiry benefited significantly from our external visits, and my own visits to Forth Ports at Grangemouth, to the rail freight terminal at Coatbridge and to Gothenburg in Sweden greatly assisted my understanding of the logistics of freight transport. I was particularly struck by the fact that the rail freight facility that we visited in Sweden had been initiated and funded by a local authority, with the justification that it would increase local economic growth, provide local jobs and boost the local population. I was forced to wonder why Scottish local authorities do not think about making such investments.

As the inquiry progressed, I began to view the system in terms of a plumbing and heating diagram for a large and very complex building. The building is constantly being extended and its uses changed, and the pipework is constantly being changed and upgraded to suit. The building is open all day every day and cannot wholly be shut down for upgrading or repairs. The pipes carry the lifeblood of business and industry, and changes in one part of the system affect all the other parts. The building also carries the historical legacy of having been designed largely for a different time and age, which means that it can be improved only incrementally. The consequence is that, at times, some of the pipes are too narrow in diameter to carry the required volume, blockages and disconnects can occur, frictional resistance can increase, and the effect can be an increase in the cost of doing business and getting goods to market.

In this age of diminishing public sector budgets—in particular, the Scottish Government’s capital budget—it is impossible to fund all the desirable improvements, all of which have their own merits. Many transport operators to whom we spoke realise that, although they all, understandably, made the case for improvements that they felt would improve their own sector’s efficiency and effectiveness. I am reassured by the transport minister’s comprehensive response to the committee’s report that the Scottish Government recognises the importance of maintaining a freight system that is as fit for purpose as it can be.

One issue that was raised in the inquiry and which struck me as being worthy of further exploration was the number of private sector freight operators who suggested that there is significant scope for greater efficiency and effectiveness if there is greater co-operation between operators. They see a crucial and perhaps catalytic role for the Scottish Government as honest brokers in facilitating such co-operation, and they pointed out the difficulties of operators doing that on their own in what is a very competitive market with tight margins, and in which rivals often find it difficult to trust each other.

I am optimistic that when we have the full borrowing powers that every other country enjoys, we will be able to improve our transport system comprehensively and significantly. In the meantime—

In the meantime, you must close. [Laughter.]

I am pleased that Government intends to refresh the national transport strategy, which will include freight transport. I must say before I close that I am, as a Highlands and Islands region representative, especially pleased that Transport Scotland—

I will cut you off.

—is conducting a review of freight fares across Scotland's ferry network.

16:25  

I start by associating myself with Mike MacKenzie’s words of thanks to the clerking team, the witnesses and, of course, the convener, who managed the inquiry exceptionally well.

My speech will have a more local emphasis than the convener’s. I will not be talking about the sun, moon and stars; I will be talking much more about urban freight and the issues around the last mile of the journey.

The committee heard from Dr Maja Piecyk about challenges to businesses—for example, failed deliveries that need to be repeated, which increases the number of trips. Furthermore, of course, we know that there are various problems in making inner-city deliveries, including the small window of delivery time, environmental zones and vehicle restrictions in respect of air quality. That was an issue that the committee was keen to investigate further, which is why, on our visit to Holland, Dave Stewart and I went to the Binnenstadservice. I thank Andrew Proudfoot who looked after both of us carefully on that visit—I am sure that he would not want to do that again. The Binnenstadservice is a consolidation centre that is based on the concept that, instead of trying to complete that last mile in a large lorry through busy and sometimes narrow streets, carriers deliver the goods to the Binnenstadservice, which then bundles the goods so that they can be delivered in a more appropriate vehicle and in a more efficient and environmentally friendly way.

It may well be that consolidation centres could be part of the solution to the problems that many of us from urban areas will recognise. I know that Tactran has been considering such an idea and I was encouraged to read in the Government’s response that it says that it recognises that consolidation centres could have a part to play, although it says that they work better where they have been developed at local level, in partnership with the private sector. Interestingly, Mike MacKenzie used the phrase “honest broker”; it might be that the Scottish Government could play that role in facilitation of consolidation centres.

The committee also heard of the success of the night-time deliveries that received special permission to operate during the Commonwealth games in Glasgow. Martin Reid from the Road Haulage Association said:

“The way in which everyone worked together and pulled together during the Commonwealth games meant that, during the entire period of the games, we did not take one negative phone call from a haulier saying that they could not get access, that they were stuck in traffic or that a road was closed. That was because of the joined-up nature of the organisation. Sadly, that was a one-off, rather than the norm.”—[Official Report, Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee, 4 February 2015; c 11.]

Perhaps we should be trying to ensure that that sort of joined-up behaviour becomes the norm.

Chris MacRae from the Freight Transport Association said that such a scheme warrants being looked at more across the other Scottish cities. As trucks are generally quieter now than they were in the past, some objections relating to noise could be overcome. However, he acknowledged that changing zoning regulations may prove to be difficult.

Trials of such work have taken place in other parts of the UK. Justin Kirkhope from the Co-operative Group spoke of its work with local authorities in London to expand the number of hours during which it can deliver to its stores. That followed the relative success of a trial during the London 2012 Olympics. The Co-operative Group believes that the change in timing, which now operates in 66 stores across the capital, has led to more reliable deliveries, reduced traffic congestion and has enabled it to re-use its vehicle fleet, which has led to improved efficiency.

Because Hampden Park played such a crucial role during the Commonwealth games, I can draw on my constituency's experience of night-time deliveries. Before the games, I was inundated with concerns and worries from local shopkeepers. One of their main concerns was the time restrictions on deliveries—in other words, night-time deliveries.

You need to draw to a close.

After the games, I arranged to have another meeting with the shopkeepers to discuss how they felt about things, and found that the overwhelming response to the night-time deliveries was extremely positive. I am delighted to see that there is a recognition that there might be a role for night-time deliveries, and I hope that the Government will, in its response, take on board the recommendations that the committee makes.

16:29  

I live within a few minutes’ driving distance of the port of Rosyth, so every day I am aware of the importance of connectivity and freight to that area and the whole of Scotland. The freight work that is done there supports hundreds of jobs in the area, and the recent concerns over DFDS Seaways’ Rosyth to Zeebrugge freight service has served to highlight the significance of Fife to the freight industry in Scotland. I hope that we will constantly work to ensure that those jobs are protected and that Scotland has a direct freight connection to mainland Europe.

The new Forth crossing was introduced not just to connect Fife with Edinburgh but to increase the capacity for freight transportation in the area and across Scotland. Road hauliers were pleased to support Fife’s campaign for a new bridge because of their increased time and fuel costs arising from being caught in tailbacks at peak times. As long as cars, buses and lorries share the same roads network, we will have to plan for their combined impact on road capacity.

More generally, 196.8 million tonnes of freight were lifted in Scotland in 2010. There is a continued reliance on roads for transporting freight, with just over 70 per cent of freight being transported on roads, compared to 5 to 10 per cent being transported on rail, and there was little improvement in getting freight on to rail between 2000 and 2010. The freight action plan that was published in 2006 by the then Scottish Executive was the last comprehensive freight-dedicated policy to be developed at Scottish Government level.

Does Jayne Baxter not accept that, even in the absence of a published policy paper, the Government makes the right interventions? The Rosyth to Zeebrugge ferry is an example of that, as we were opportunistically able to intervene to secure the service, which is good for the economy. That shows that, even in the absence of a published policy, we take action where it is required.

Yes, I agree with that. However, we must turn that willingness to intervene and invest into a strategy. Good things have been done, but we should formalise them in a strategy. Almost a decade on, in the aftermath of a global financial crash, it is vital that the Scottish Government takes a fresh look at creating a new plan for freight.

The report is a detailed one that outlines five core challenges for the future of freight transportation in Scotland. Those challenges consist in reducing the need for transport by restructuring the supply chain, making a modal shift to rail or water, using vehicle capacity more effectively, driving more fuel-efficiently, and switching to alternative fuels. The report correctly identifies several precise challenges for Scotland’s freight industry, including the need for wider road improvement schemes across the country, the need to improve the network to link ports to each other directly, the problem of the current overreliance on narrow local roads, concerns around the recruitment of new HGV drivers, and the question of speed limits on roads, with some people suggesting that speed limits be increased to 50mph.

Another method of transporting freight that the report outlines is rail, which is a method that is best suited to large and bulky freight, but is also more environmentally friendly than transporting freight by road. However, the report highlights that increased use of rail for freight transportation is sabotaged by Scotland’s ageing and inadequate rail network. Problems with our rail infrastructure—gaps in rail-termination provision, lack of capacity and lack of electrification—all conspire to limit the amount of freight that is transported by rail. Improving that situation would be of real benefit to Scotland’s freight sector and our overall economy. We can also move freight by air, although that is typically reserved for sensitive and expensive cargo. The final mechanism of transporting freight is by sea. As I mentioned, my region is a major contributor to that method of transporting freight in Scotland.

Throughout the report, there is a repeated focus on ensuring that planning is properly executed, and there is an obvious need to formulate a new plan for freight. Working from the remnants of a plan that is nearly a decade old is unsatisfactory. In addition, the problems around road and rail that are detailed in the report apply beyond the freight sector and need to be examined in the round.

16:33  

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in the debate. I start by reflecting on the contribution that the Scottish Government has made to the port of Montrose in my constituency. This is an opportunity also to thank the outgoing, recently retired chief executive of Montrose Port Authority, John Paterson, who did a huge amount of work to bring the port up to scratch and ensure that it has a future in servicing North Sea renewables operations.

The other major port in the north-east is Aberdeen harbour. Like Montrose, it is close to the railway but not directly linked over most of it. I wonder whether both those situations should be investigated. There are, of course, roads in the way, but double handling is clearly a bad idea.

Mr Don is correct in some regards, but there is a rail connection to Aberdeen harbour—the Cotton Street line. It is underused and is probably not the right line to deal with major freight, but there is a link.

I do not dispute the member’s local knowledge; he has made the case.

I enjoyed Mike MacKenzie’s vision of a plumbing and wiring diagram. That is a good way of looking at the connections across Scotland.

When we discuss access to Aberdeen and the north-east, we are really only talking about the Dundee to Aberdeen railway line and the A90, both of which run through my constituency. There are no realistic alternative routes from the south.

On the railway issue, I again press the Scottish Government to look at the fact that there is a single track running just south of Montrose at Usan. Perhaps it should be bypassed; maybe we should have another line up the route of the A90 from Dundee to Laurencekirk via Forfar and Brechin. That will not be done overnight, of course. However, the route up to the north-east and through Aberdeen is not particularly good, and it will not last for ever. At a national level, the report points out the need for a consistent upgrading of the loading gauge across the tracks. We would welcome activity on that.

On the issue of the roads across my constituency, I am delighted that the Aberdeen western peripheral route is under way. For reasons that have nothing to do with this Government, that is long overdue. It will make a huge difference to traffic on the roads going north of Aberdeen, and it will enormously improve the connectivity of that part of the world.

The AWPR simply extends the A90. Therefore, I must return to the issue that my constituents routinely have when crossing the Laurencekirk junction. There is no need to add any more on that—the minister is smiling knowlingly. My constituents expect me to press upon the Government the need to do something about the junction, and I do so once more.

I have written to the Government about the idea that we should have a 50mph limit all the way up the A90. The response says that there are no plans to introduce such a limit, but the A90—there are many other roads in the same situation—is a very busy road with a lot of very small junctions, and it is extremely difficult to join it when the traffic, whether freight or ordinary vehicles, is doing 70mph. That issue needs to be looked at in the round across the country.

Infrastructure costs a lot of money, takes a lot of time and needs a long-term plan. I commend the Government for having that long-term plan, and I look forward to developments in the years ahead. The changes will not be done quickly; we just need to keep at them.

16:37  

It has been a consensual debate and one that I hope will take us forward in this difficult process. A couple of things that come from the report are worthy of mention, specifically on the models of the ports that we have in Scotland. As has been mentioned, there was some concern about a lack of investment at Grangemouth. We heard evidence that that is perhaps the result of trying to make equipment last as long as possible.

We have seen other port models achieve positive outcomes in different ways. Nigel Don mentioned John Paterson’s work at Montrose Port Authority. It was made clear during the evidence that he had achieved a great deal in managing to gather every bit of European grant money that had been available over the past three years and spending it on the one project to replace a dock in Montrose. Similarly, the ambition that Aberdeen Harbour has shown to progress the proposed major expansion at Nigg makes it an example of a port that under a different model has the ambition to go forward and achieve what it needs to. There is no one-size-fits-all approach for Scotland’s ports. If we look, success is to be found in every model.

A number of members have mentioned speed limits. I have commended the Scottish Government for the 50mph limit for heavy goods vehicles travelling on the A9. We have heard initial evidence from a number of operators that that has been a success. I hope that, at time goes by, we will be able to use that experiment to give us statistics that indicate that there is little risk associated with the limit. It is a concern for many people to see HGVs going at higher speeds in built-up areas—we would never wish to see that—but, on longer routes in Scotland, where transport times are important, we need to get vehicles moving more quickly. I hope that the experiment will produce figures.

Does Alex Johnstone accept that, on some of the west coast roads, such a speed limit would make it virtually impossible to overtake the goods vehicles, which are forced to slow down to 20mph on bends and hills?

Indeed. It is horses for courses, but the experiment on the A9 will give us vital information. The results and feedback so far seem to be positive.

It would be remiss of me not to support Nigel Don’s call for the minister to consider the issues surrounding the junction of the A90 with the A937 at Laurencekirk, where many people whom I know personally play Russian roulette with the traffic daily. However, I would not support any suggestion of introducing a 50mph speed limit the length of the A90. Aberdeen and the north of Aberdeenshire are already a long way from many of their markets and we do not want to make them any further away by unnecessarily reducing the speed of traffic on that road.

Sadly, there have also been one or two suggestions during the debate that we should have some grand, centralised strategy—like a five-year plan—for Scotland’s freight industry. That is not necessary. We have good people working in the industry with good intentions who, with a little help and a little direction, can achieve a great deal more. The approach that the minister is taking and that he outlined in his opening speech is an indication that we are doing the right things. We just need to do them sooner and, perhaps, a little more effectively.

16:41  

This has been a short but nonetheless important debate. I thank everyone for their speeches and thank my fellow Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee members and the clerks for an interesting and insightful report.

The inquiry was good to do. All of us on the committee became freight anoraks in our own way. I look at trains and ships in a different way since doing the inquiry, which is a good thing.

Scotland has a thriving freight industry. Its largest port, Grangemouth, handled more than 250,000 20-foot equivalent units in 2013. Freight by sea is flourishing, but further investment is needed, as demand for larger vessels and containers will increase.

Road transport consistently makes up around two thirds of all freight movements in Scotland and therefore plays a key role in our freight industry. Although it is becoming less polluting as a result of innovation in the industry, such as better driving practices and tougher standards on emissions from engines, it is estimated that up to one third of lorry journeys at United Kingdom level run empty. We must do all that we can to minimise the impacts on the environment while striving towards sustainable economic growth.

I welcome the improvements to Scotland’s road network, such as the M74 extension, although more needs to be done to ensure that Scotland remains a competitive player in the freight industry. For example, the Road Haulage Association described the routes to the Cairnryan port via the A75 and A77 as

“inadequate and outdated to cope with current traffic and freight volumes.”

Although the majority of Scottish freight travels by road, a number of retail companies, including major supermarkets, are choosing to use rail freight. The modal shift to rail is a key element in helping Scotland to achieve its challenging climate change targets. Network Rail has forecast that Scottish rail freight will grow from the present 14 million tonnes per annum to 26 million tonnes per annum by 2026.

The Freightliner terminal at Coatbridge, which has daily services to deep-sea container ports throughout the UK, is of key importance to Scotland’s rail freight sector. However, I was concerned to learn that the cranes that operate there are 45 years old and therefore require to be upgraded to ensure that the terminal remains competitive. I urge the Government to work with Freightliner to help to deliver the necessary investment.

Investment in last-mile infrastructure is another key challenge. The last mile is crucial for access to terminals and for ease of movement between modes of transport. All forms of freight are important for achieving sustainable economic growth, and I hope that the Scottish Government will agree that we must work more closely with the air freight sector to ensure that our infrastructure best meets the industry’s needs.

I welcome the investment in our infrastructure networks to support Scotland’s thriving freight industry, but a number of areas require attention—for example, improvements are needed at Scotland’s primary rail freight terminal in Coatbridge and there needs to be greater engagement with the air freight sector. I hope that the Government will work with us to tackle those issues and that it will, as Jim Eadie requested, introduce a new freight transport policy to invigorate and re-energise our freight industry.

16:45  

The debate has been characterised by a feeling that we are in roughly the same place and that we are doing the right things but that we simply need to do more of the same more quickly. I share that view. We will do as much as we can to the extent that resources allow. The Government cannot be accused of not putting its money where its mouth is when it comes to infrastructure investment. Our multibillion-pound investment in infrastructure has been welcomed, and of course we want to do more of the STPR projects as quickly as possible. They are in the STPR for a reason and are supported for a reason, and delivering them will deliver further sustainable economic growth.

The big ask that Jim Eadie and other members have made is whether I will produce a new, revitalised and re-energised freight transport policy. Yes, I will. I will produce such a policy as part of the national transport strategy, which should be complete by Christmas.

I will make a further commitment—this is decision making in real time. If the freight transport policy looks so big and comprehensive that it might dominate the national transport strategy, I will produce it as a separate document. However, my ambition is to have it as part of the national transport strategy, which will capture the Government’s economic strategy, the national planning framework 3, the position on Scottish planning policy and our marine plan. It is important to align all our economic and investment strategies so that we can make the recommendations in the committee’s report happen.

A new and rejuvenated policy will be produced. It will capture many of the interventions that the Government is already making, which I mentioned to Jayne Baxter. I do not wait for a new policy to be written before I intervene to deliver infrastructure investment that will realise sustainable economic growth. The Rosyth to Zeebrugge service is a good example of our intervening to sustain waterborne freight. That involved private sector leadership. The extension of Aberdeen harbour at Nigg, where the potential exists for a multimillion-pound development to proceed, is another good example of private sector-led development.

There is much to be positive about and more to do to support our economy and the transport of goods. Sarah Boyack is right that, in my previous role, I was heavily involved in work on the national planning framework 3 and the national designations there. There is an action plan on supporting freight and infrastructure enhancement.

There is also the question of port models. We have mixed models, and we have the potential for deepwater ports at Hunterston and Scapa Flow. We can bring together a range of plans to provide the leadership that people seek.

On our investment, we have delivered an agenda and a mantra of on time and on budget, and even—in relation to the Queensferry crossing—under budget. However, I have been disappointed by the failure to spend some grant support, such as that which is available through the freight facilities grant. Sometimes, that has been because of complexity or because of competition between private sector companies. In some cases, there has been a failure to achieve critical mass. I am happy to play the role of honest broker in encouraging collaboration and greater partnership working.

I very much take that point. The issue was well explored in the committee’s report. Given that the money has been identified, it would be a huge missed opportunity not to find ways to get the innovation that we all want in the freight industry.

Absolutely. I want to ensure that the funds are as streamlined as possible and can reach their objectives. I give the reassurance that, when we were not able to spend money on the freight facilities grant, I ensured as best I could that the money stayed in the future transport fund and was spent on other future transport objectives that the member would welcome, such as sustainable travel.

The good news is that we are not only on the precipice of big announcements on port infrastructure and private sector port infrastructure spend; I can also say very carefully that we are considering a live freight facilities grant application from a well-known Scottish company, which we hope to make an announcement on soon. I cannot reveal the details yet, because the proposal will be subject to planning conditions and so on, but there will be a big announcement that will be a helpful step forward in respect of the freight facilities grant, which will remain under review.

Mike MacKenzie made helpful points about infrastructure, and a number of members talked about speed limits for road haulage, which are a sensitive matter. On the A9, for example, it was the package of measures, including average-speed cameras, that allowed us to increase the speed limit from 40mph to 50mph for HGVs. I would look at increasing the limit elsewhere only if there was an appropriate package of measures that made doing that safe.

Members will know that, south of the border, the Department for Transport has increased speed limits wholesale, in a blanket way, from 40mph to 50mph. I am not attracted to that proposition, because it is estimated that there will be more fatalities and casualties as a result. I am not willing to take that gamble with Scottish lives in a Scottish context. However, I will learn the lessons from what happens south of the border and look very closely at our findings on the A9.

I heard again the plea for Laurencekirk. I have established a team to take that work forward by way of a funding commitment as a further intervention.

With the report that I have committed to, the investment plan, the constant review and the energy that we continue to put into infrastructure investment, I hope that we can support freight in Scotland across the modes and deliver modal shift to achieve our objective of sustainable economic growth.

I call Jim Eadie to wind up the debate on behalf of the committee.

16:52  

Before I try to summarise the debate, I again thank my fellow committee members, our expert adviser and, of course, the clerking team, whose work in the inquiry was invaluable. The inquiry was a true example of MSPs leaving any political baggage at the door of the committee and properly reflecting on the evidence that we received as a committee.

The report and the debate have demonstrated that, if Scotland makes the right choices and we encourage collaborative working in taking those choices forward, despite our geographical position at the northern tip of Europe a successful freight transport sector can be at the heart of our economy and can also play a significant role in helping to meet our environmental targets. Those themes ran throughout the contributions to the debate.

The minister reiterated the Government’s commitment to identifying strategic freight routes in its wider approach to transport infrastructure. I was glad that he acknowledged the committee’s call to accelerate projects that have already been identified in the strategic transport projects review. He talked about the importance of continuing to make significant investment in transport infrastructure, including investment in the rail and road networks and projects that can bring about the modal shift that we all wish to see, which can improve transport links and ensure connectivity with international transport routes. I very much look forward to the minister putting his money where his mouth is, to use his words.

The minister reminded us of the importance of the Scottish freight and logistics advisory group—ScotFLAG—in ensuring that the Government engages with the sector and that there is the necessary leadership and strategic direction in taking the issues forward. That, too, was a very welcome contribution from the minister. Many of those issues can also be taken forward through the strategic rail investment fund. That will, of course, be another opportunity for the minister to put his money where his mouth is.

Sarah Boyack spoke of the challenges and the need for innovation and investment, which will be necessary in overcoming those challenges, and she rightly placed an emphasis on the role of a freight transport policy and strategy in bringing about the transition to a carbon-free economy. That is particularly important as we look at bringing about modal shift from moving freight on road to moving it on the rail network. She also talked about the interrelationship of the national planning framework with our freight strategy—a point that was also well made.

For the first time in this chamber, I agreed with every word of Alex Johnstone’s contribution. I look forward to that being repeated in future debates, but perhaps I should not hold my breath. He talked about Cairnryan, and the importance of having appropriate links along the A75 and A77, given its importance in facilitating trade with Northern Ireland. He also talked about the challenges of getting goods on to the quayside, of passing loops and of being able to free up capacity if we are to run longer trains and increase capacity to move freight along those routes.

Mike MacKenzie shared with us his experience of the committee’s trip to Falköping in Sweden, and the fact that the rail freight facility had been funded by a Swedish local authority, which could provide an exemplar of good practice for local authorities closer to home to follow. He used a plumbing and heating diagram analogy, which I confess I did not fully understand, despite being the son of a plumber; perhaps that is more of a reflection on me than it is on Mike MacKenzie. However, he made an important point about getting goods to market when he spoke about the need for greater co-operation between operators and about the role of the Scottish Government as an honest broker in facilitating and bringing about that co-operation in a competitive market.

James Dornan, in a contribution that was perhaps not unsurprising, reminded us of the good practice that took place during the Commonwealth games in terms of barriers to urban freight, and of the fact that night-time deliveries during the Commonwealth games did not produce the complaints that might have been expected. He also talked about the contribution that consolidation centres could make in reducing road use—another point that was well made.

Jayne Baxter reminded us of the importance of the Rosyth to Zeebrugge service, not just in terms of passenger numbers but in terms of freight. Nigel Don, not for the first time, mentioned the Laurencekirk junction and I think that he received some of the reassurance that he was seeking from the minister in his summing up.

Mary Fee reminded us of the air freight sector, on which we received less evidence from stakeholders than perhaps we would have wished; it is an important issue nonetheless. She also talked about the need for investment at the Freightliner terminal in sunny Coatbridge, which the committee also visited during its inquiry.

In bringing my remarks to a close, I want to point out that the committee went to some lengths to highlight both the importance of freight transport in Scotland and the role that the Scottish Government, local authorities, transport operators and other stakeholders and users in the sector can all play in supporting and facilitating innovation, growth, efficiency and sustainable operations. That theme has run through the contributions to this afternoon’s debate from across the chamber, just as it ran through the evidence that the committee received during our evidence sessions and on the numerous visits that we undertook. All that has informed our work and is reflected in the report that the committee published; the theme was also addressed in the Government’s response to the committee’s inquiry.

The committee—and, I hope, any successor committee—will continue to closely scrutinise that work. The aim must be to continue to identify, understand and overcome the challenges that face the freight transport industry in Scotland, to ensure that we overcome barriers to moving goods by rail, road, air and sea, and to ensure that Scottish businesses have high-quality links, by all modes of transport, within Scotland and between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom and the rest of the world. Scotland has always connected with the world and will continue to do so. The report has been invaluable in pointing the way forward for the Government and the sector.

Thank you for that valiant effort to take us up to 5 o’clock.