Delays on A9 (SGN Works)
To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to address the extreme delays reportedly being encountered by users of the A9 north of Dunkeld due to SGN gas pipe replacement works. (S6T-01602)
I understand that, regrettably, the works have caused significant disruption for communities and businesses in the region. That point was made forcibly to me by the local constituency member, John Swinney, with whom I have had a number of related discussions.
I met Scotia Gas Networks senior management yesterday to impress upon it the seriousness of the situation. SGN has given a commitment that it will reassess its road works strategy. As part of that, it will pause its works for the weekend of 3 November until Sunday night. That will see A9 lanes reopened and SGN issuing increased communication and stakeholder updates.
I thank the minister for her response. She will be aware of the extreme delays of up to two and half hours or more on the A9 north of Dunkeld, which have been devastating for those using the road to travel to and from the Highlands; for those making local journeys in Perthshire, for example to take children to and from school or to go to work; and for the tourist economy, including events such as the Enchanted Forest.
SGN told me yesterday that it is making changes to mitigate the delays, but there is a high degree of scepticism locally as to whether that will be enough. The roads authority here is Transport Scotland, which is an agency of the Scottish Government. How confident is the minister that we will not see a repeat of the unacceptable events that we saw just last week?
I trust that the member takes reassurance from the fact that I have been dealing with the matter personally over the past few days and that I met SGN yesterday. Since our intervention, some of the actions that SGN has taken are to have manual traffic lights, particularly at key times, and to make sure that there is vehicle recovery. The member may be aware that the incidents that caused the excessive delays involved a breakdown of a bus in particularly difficult circumstances and an emergency medical situation. Those would cause difficulties at any point in time.
The pause is to enable SGN to reassess whether there are better ways in which it can deliver the work in terms of timescale, in relation to both days and some of the issues around that, and where it completes the work.
On the responsibility, the utility company clearly has rights under United Kingdom legislation, which I am sure the member will be familiar with, but I have ensured that Transport Scotland will work with it to deliver the changes that it is making, and also with BEAR Scotland, which is the operating company.
It has, of course, not escaped the notice of many of those who were stuck in the road works that, had the Scottish National Party Government kept its promise to dual the A9 by 2025, we would not be seeing these delays. The previous Minister for Transport promised us a statement by the end of this year with an update on the dualling project. When can we expect that?
We are committed to the dualling of the A9. There will be a statement, but I would also reflect that the particular emergencies that I talked about would have caused disruption on the road anyway. I note that the changes are being made to meet what is, I think, a genuinely essential need. We have to make sure that the gas works are done so that, in SGN’s words, a “catastrophic loss” of gas supplies to towns in the area is not realised.
I reassure the member that the plans are still in place for that statement to be given, and I am sure that time will be given in Parliament when it is ready to be given.
I welcome the direct, personal involvement of the Minister for Transport on this significant constituency issue for me, which has resulted in huge economic and social damage to the people whom I have the privilege to represent.
During my years in this Parliament, I have had many calls with many leaders of corporate organisations. I have never had one quite so disengaged as with the chief executive of SGN on Friday. Will the minister take every opportunity to impress on SGN the importance of understanding that, although there may be legitimacy for the repair that it has to undertake, that cannot be at the expense of everybody else who is using the A9, and particularly the communities that I represent?
I reiterate that John Swinney is probably one of the most hard-working and assiduous MSPs in representing the interests of his constituents, who have clearly been severely impacted in the past week.
I share the concerns about SGN’s approach to the project and the level of engagement and communication. I think that it can be and should have been far more proactive. I think that it did reach out and try to consult, but it is one thing to try to let people know what you are doing and another to proactively engage to understand the issues.
I emphasise that the work is not a repair; it is a relocation of gas works that need to be moved because of the fast-flowing Tay and previous flood incidents exposing gas piping.
I understand the importance and the imperative nature of doing that work, but there is a right way of doing it. A corporate organisation may have the right under UK legislation as a utility company to do that work, but it also has a responsibility to the communities and individuals that John Swinney has the privilege to represent.
I have listened with interest. Having been one of the people who were caught in those delays—two hours and 30 minutes coming down and two hours and 23 minutes going north—I know how much those road works are strangling the Highlands. The sign says that it will take 18 weeks—there will be 18 weeks of this. The minister suggested that there will be a pause in the middle. Will the minister confirm that delays of two and a half hours are not acceptable and that she will not accept them because of the economic impact that they are having on the Highlands—in fact, on the whole of Scotland?
I am sure that the member has understood from my responses how seriously I take the issue. I want to reflect that the severe delays were due to specific circumstances, and that actions have been taken in the meantime to try to address those issues. The pause will allow SGN to rethink timescales. It was advised, and, understandably, we ensured, that the work would not be done during the summer, so it was refused in the summer. This is the quietest period for any such work on the A9.
The pause will allow SGN to reassess timescales and where it can do the work to try to alleviate the pressures that individuals and businesses have faced because of the utility works.
I refer to the previous point on how the situation impacts the whole of Scotland. Constituents from Fife have contacted me about the matter and mothers have told me that they have had to rearrange getting their kids picked up from school and so on. The A9 is an important road for the whole of Scotland.
I noticed that, in response to Mr Swinney on Twitter, SGN talked about a minibus and an abnormal load causing delays. Any other company doing that kind of work would factor in such things and have support in place to ensure that they do not stall traffic. If the company does not react to what the minister has said, what powers does she have to do more about it? Will she confirm that there will be a statement on the A9 in this calendar year?
As I said, the statement on the A9 will proceed as planned. Existing legal powers give statutory undertakers—that is, public utilities—powers to place their apparatus in public roads. They have to co-ordinate that with road authorities. There may be limits to what we can legally do to prevent them from doing such work should we want to do so, but I understand the rationale for the works on the A9, which are essential.
Messaging on vehicle recovery issues and the manual traffic light system will be communicated earlier en route to ensure that drivers with passengers such as schoolchildren will know further down the line how long the delays are taking. All those things have happened in the past few days as a result of Transport Scotland’s intervention and as stimulated by the elected representatives, such as Mr Swinney, who contacted me.
I welcome the Minister for Transport’s intervention on the issue. It is clear that recent flooding has destroyed pedestrian access between Inver and Dunkeld, forcing people to cross the A9 on foot. Coupled with the extreme traffic delays that were caused locally by the SGN works, that is causing real danger at that part of the A9.
For many years, the community has called for improved lighting at that junction to improve road safety. Does the minister agree that, more than ever, Transport Scotland must introduce emergency floodlighting at local junctions to keep everyone safe?
That question is not wholly on the substantive point.
The impact of storm Babet has had knock-on impacts elsewhere along the A9 and elsewhere in Scotland, which has affected the routing of extra-wide loads, which themselves cause issues. That point was also raised with me yesterday.
The River Bran goes under the A9, and I know that flooding has caused issues for a local pathway, which Mr Ruskell contacted me about.
Transport Scotland is working with Perth and Kinross Council to see what can be done to mitigate. It has met the local community and, indeed, it met councillors yesterday, I think, to identify the issues. I will leave it to Transport Scotland and the relevant authorities in Perth and Kinross to determine what form the operational response will take, but I am very aware of the issues.
As a consequence of recent storms—not just storm Babet, but storm Agnes, too—there have been further disruptions elsewhere on the A9, including on the slip road to Pitlochry south.
All of those things compounded make the situation very difficult, and everybody is working hard to resolve it.
As well as the extreme economic damage to businesses locally and in the whole of the Highlands—if that goes on until February, it will be on a devastating scale—is there not a further risk to human life? If drivers who plan the journey to expend three hours normally find that it takes six hours and not three hours and are fatigued, the risk of driver error and therefore fatalities surely increases exponentially. Will the minister therefore instruct the highly paid executives at Transport Scotland, who cannot subcontract responsibility, to get out of their plush offices in Glasgow and get to Dunkeld and supervise the matter being sorted out?
SGN is responsible for the works, and it is working with BEAR Scotland. It has had, and it will continue to have, co-operation and advice from Transport Scotland.
On the delays, I think that I have said that the issues around the excessive delays were caused by specific incidents, and mitigation to support people should those incidents happen in the future has already been undertaken. I can relay that, yesterday and today, the normal pattern, as predicted from the planning, from looking at figures from October last year, has been taken. However, I take the point that there has been a significant impact on individuals and the excessive times cannot be acceptable going forward. That is precisely why I asked to meet the senior management to impress on it its responsibilities to ensure that the reset of the programme is fit for purpose for the whole economy along the A9 and specifically the communities of Dunkeld.
Industrial Action (Schools)
To ask the Scottish Government whether it will provide an update on what action it is taking to resolve industrial action in schools. (S6T-01599)
Negotiations on local government pay are rightly between the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities, which is the representative of the employer, local government and the trade unions that represent the workforce. As recently as last week, COSLA re-emphasised the importance of the Scottish Government respecting that negotiating arrangement.
We have worked constructively with COSLA to find a solution, provided £155 million at stage 3 of the budget to support a meaningful pay offer, and provided funding assurances for 2024-25. We have also worked with COSLA to identify an additional £80 million for the improved offer of 21 September, which was accepted by two of the three local government unions.
The First Minister made it clear that COSLA is not in control of its own budgets. Will the minister meet Unison to discuss how the dispute can finally be resolved?
It is important to recognise the appropriate negotiating forums. The Scottish Government frequently meets COSLA to continue to consider what more we can do to support it in finding a resolution to the dispute, which no one wants to continue. Obviously, it is important that we respect the trade unions’ right to withhold their labour—that is absolutely a right, which the Government supports—but we cannot overstate the impact of the closures on the children affected and their parents.
Will the Scottish Government set out a timescale to get to a minimum of £15 per hour pay for all local government workers?
That is one of the interesting aspects of Unison’s ask. One of the challenges that COSLA is reflecting to us is that, although two trade unions have accepted the offer, it is not 100 per cent sure what the ask of Unison is. There is talk about the rate of £15 an hour. The Scottish Government and COSLA are certainly keen to look at language that might help. If that is what it takes to get a settlement that prevents more disruption of our children’s education, we should definitely sit round a table and discuss that.
Work is on-going across the Scottish Government on a much wider approach. It is important for the discussion of £15 an hour for local government workers to be part of that. We are agreeing to look at that, but it is clear that Unison is looking for something more.
To fund the teachers’ pay deal last year, the Government cut £155 million from elsewhere in the education budget. Does the minister expect further cuts in the education budget when the Government inevitably intervenes to resolve the current dispute?
It is important to emphasise how hard COSLA and Scottish Government officials worked to identify the £80 million—which, to be fair, everyone thought was the ask of the unions to settle the dispute—in a way that did not impact on front-line services. That was not easy to do and it took a huge amount of work. It feels as if we have pushed that envelope to the end, which is why COSLA will be keen to talk about the road map to £15 an hour, because there could be a cost this year. This year is particularly difficult; we cannot change the income this year.
If there is a suggestion that that is where Unison is going, I hope that it articulates that clearly so that COSLA can discuss that with Unison. COSLA is working hard to discuss with Unison what the asks are, because no one wants the dispute to go on for any longer than it has to.
That concludes topical question time.
Previous
Time for ReflectionNext
Business Motion