Inverness and Nairn MSP Fergus Ewing calls for clarity over next steps of delivery for A96 dualling scheme between Inverness and Nairn and Nairn Bypass as Cabinet Secretary for Transport Fiona Hyslop to be questioned over timeline and funding
The Transport Secretary will be asked when the Scottish Government will be able to provide a detailed timetable for the dualling of the A96 between Inverness and Nairn.
On Wednesday, the Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee members agreed to write to Fiona Hyslop asking for clarification on the delivery of the project, which also includes the Nairn Bypass.
This comes after Ms Hyslop gave evidence in front of the committee concerning the Inverness Courier’s petition calling for a timeline on works for the scheme to be published by Easter 2025.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN THE PETITION
The call for further clarification was issued by Inverness and Nairn MSP Fergus Ewing, who is also a member of the committee — and a campaigner for the dualling scheme.
During the meeting Mr Ewing said that Ms Hyslop’s evidence at the start of April “raised more questions than provided answers” and that he suggested writing her to seek clarity on a number of issues.
“Firstly, what progress the Scottish Government is making to develop a detailed timeline for the dualling of the A96 between Inverness and Nairn, and the construction of a bypass for Nairn, given that the acquisition of the land is now about to take place or is about to be completed.
“Secondly, whether the expected statement on the decision on the use of the Mutual Investment Model (MIM) contracts for the remaining sections of the A9 will also include an update on the use of MIM as a procurement option for dualling the A96 between Inverness and Nairn or if the cabinet secretary expects that there will be separate parliamentary statements, one for the A9 and one for the A96.”
He also raised concerns over the MIM, saying that the Auditor General has expressed criticism of it as it may not be attractive to our civil engineering contractors operating here due to the large scale of the works to be carried out.
He said: “Even if the funding is agreed, is there not a risk that there will be no willling contractors ready to do the work, because they have much other potentially more lucrative work to do in pump storage, grid, wind turbines, rail and Scottish Water?
“Why will they not use framework contracts as is used in Scottish Water and also SSEN for its major works?”
Funding for the scheme was also involved in another request of information.
He said: “The capital budget this year is over £6billion, and it is to be expected that it would be of that order for the next 10 years. In other words, £50 or £60 billion over the next 10 years. By my reckoning, the combined cost of the commitments on the A96 and the A9 would be far less than one tenth 10 of that.
“So why can't we use the existing capital budget and design and build options?
“Because it does seem that if the highlands are to be attributed the priority that I believe they should be given, then there is more than enough money for the Highlands to have these investments in these roads, given the likely scale of the capital budget historically and going forward.”
The committee approved the questions suggested by Mr Ewing, with the petition remaining open.
