SUGGESTIONS the initial 2025 target for dualling the A9 was “aspirational” have been described as “utter rubbish” by a former minister responsible for the programme.
Alex Neil (below) served as the infrastructure and capital investment secretary on the Scottish Government when the plan to dual the road was announced in 2011.
He told Holyrood’s Public Petitions Committee on Wednesday that “realistic” and fully-costed plans were set out by Transport Scotland officials in May 2012, and he dismissed assessments that the timeline was not set in stone.
The committee launched an inquiry into the unfinished project after a petition was submitted to Holyrood urging ministers to address safety concerns on the road – which links Perth with Inverness – and publish a revised timetable for completing the project by 2025.
First Minister Humza Yousaf has previously made it clear work to dual the A9 will not be completed before the next Holyrood election in May 2026, while insisting the Government is still “absolutely committed” to the programme.
Neil told the committee: “I asked them to be realistic, Transport Scotland, and they assured me that both physically and financially it was perfectly feasibly to achieve the dualling of the A9 between Inverness and Perth by 2025, and Inverness and Aberdeen (the A96) by 2030.”
Senior officials, he said, gave him a “detailed plan” in May 2012 setting out the timelines for when each part of the A9 would be dualled.
Addressing the delay, he said: “I think it’s extremely disappointing and very damaging to the Scottish economy, and even far more damaging to the Highlands and islands, that this well-thought-out project has not been completed, let alone on time.”
READ MORE: Police arrest Laurence Fox after footage shows his home being raided
Committee MSP Fergus Ewing, an outspoken critic of the delay, said Neil’s evidence had been “informative, revelatory and really quite explosive”, and he asked the former minister if he agreed with Transport Scotland’s intimations that the timelines were “aspirational” when it addressed the committee in June.
Neil told Ewing the assessment was “utter rubbish”, adding: “This was not aspirational. A lot of work was done both before it went into the plan.
“Before they could advise me by 2025 was the reasonable date when we could do this financially and physically, they clearly had to do a lot of work themselves to work that out – and they did.
“I think one of the things that may have happened is that with the change in cabinet secretary, that my successors have perhaps not tracked this as well as they could.”
He added he “suspects the foot was well and truly taken off the accelerator”.
Neil also said the Scottish Government had “betrayed a promise” to rural communities by putting the A9 dual project “on the backburner”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel