Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

A9 dualling: SNP government was told five years ago that 2025 timescale ‘unachievable’

New evidence released to the A9 dualling inquiry shows SNP leaders were aware for "years" that delays were coming.

The A9 was originally to be dualled between Perth and Inverness by 2025. Image: Sandy McCook/DC Thomson.

SNP leaders knew since 2018 that the target to dual the A9 by 2025 was “unachievable”, newly-released government papers suggest.

The significant new information came to light as part of a formal Holyrood inquiry into the Scottish Government’s pledge to dual the route between Inverness and Perth.

Evidence provided to the Scottish Parliament’s petitions committee reveals key ministers were made aware the deadline could not be met in November 2018.

But it was only in February this year that the government announced the 2025 target was no longer achievable due to economic pressures.

Campaigners are still waiting for a long-awaited update on the revised timetable for the remaining nine sections of the route.

On Wednesday, SNP government minister George Adam promised the statement would be delivered to parliament in the “coming days”.

‘Unachievable’

An extract from a November 2018 cabinet paper stated that the government intended to look at private finance options, rather than capital, for the remainder of the route.

It added: “The revised approach to delivery will mean the 2025 timescale is not achievable with the end date yet to be determined based on market appetite and the packaging of remaining projects.”

Meanwhile, a government paper from December 2021, indicated that the earliest completion date for the scheme would be 2032 for a privately financed option.

This increased to 2034 for a traditional capital financed option but both dates were subject to the availability of funding.

Very heavy traffic on the A9 between Tomatin and Moy. Image: Sandy McCook/DC Thomson.

It was further revealed that last December officials presented Scottish ministers with two options for the future of the A9 programme.

The first option – which the government did not take – suggested pausing the duallng programme “in its entirety for an indefinite period”.

SNP government ministers decided to take a second option which involves progressing certain elements of the programme “while reviewing and updating the work to determine the most suitable procurement options”.

‘Spiralling costs and delays’

Jackson Carlaw, who is leading the Holyrood inquiry, said: “The evidence we’ve received is stark, revealing a piecemeal process, with concerns raised repeatedly about spiralling costs and delays to completion.

Jackson Carlaw MSP. Image: PA.

“It’s evident that the Scottish Government have known for a considerable length of time that the 2025 deadline was in jeopardy, however it’s less clear what action ministers have taken to address this.

“We will review all of the evidence we’ve received at our next meeting , to consider our next steps, including if further evidence is required from Transport Scotland officials or previous transport ministers.

“In the meantime, with 2024 rapidly approaching, we eagerly anticipate the cabinet secretary’s promised update on the A9 dualling project to parliament at the earliest opportunity.”

Mr Carlaw said the committee will review the evidence it has received when it meets on December 20.

At that meeting, he said committee members will “consider our next steps, including if further evidence is required from Transport Scotland officials or previous transport ministers”.

Conversation