Chamber
Plenary, 28 Mar 2007
28 Mar 2007 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Airdrie-Bathgate Railway and Linked Improvements Bill
With regard to how strategic a view the Scottish National Party takes of this and other transport projects, the fact that the shadow transport minister visited only one place shows that the visit was more about politics than transport strategy.
As a member of the Airdrie-Bathgate Railway and Linked Improvements Bill Committee and the Parliament, I take great pleasure in recommending the approval of the bill and the railway. In my first parliamentary speech, I raised the issue of the need for communities throughout Scotland to be connected by rail and to have proper integrated public transport links. That is particularly important for rural and urban deprived areas.
Inevitably, and unsurprisingly, my maiden speech focused on my own constituency. Other members have spoken with determination about how important the project is to their area. However, today we are at the final stage of a project for Scotland, for the people of West Lothian and North Lanarkshire, and, with its associated works, for the wider network. I am happy that my final speech of the parliamentary session—although I hope to be returned—is also about rail projects.
In 1993, when I was a student, I was lucky enough to be in the House of Commons on the night of the vote on the Maastricht treaty. The House of Commons was divided and it was a late-night debate. Mr Gallie was directly involved in debates around that time, and he has consistently held his views over the years since then, which is to be admired. However, division was not needed and did not exist on the committee under his convenership. Even with his evident enjoyment in tackling the line of questioning about whether the bill is ECHR-compliant, he was consistent in his support of the project. I never determined whether he was glad or disappointed that the bill is ECHR-compliant. I wish those colleagues who are not returning to the Parliament well.
As other members have said, we owe a debt of gratitude to the committed, determined and persistent clerking staff. We would not be able to do the job for the communities that we represent without such dedication from the clerking staff, which all committee members have seen during the past few months.
With my interest in the Borders rail line, membership of the Edinburgh Tram (Line Two) Bill Committee and my membership of the bill committee for this important bill, I am proud to have played a very small part in facilitating a record level of investment in rail infrastructure in Scotland.
I see that my chief whip is sitting in front of me, so I stress that my relatively positive experience on the Airdrie-Bathgate Railway and Linked Improvements Bill Committee should not in any way be construed as enthusiasm to be a member of another private bill committee if I am returned as a member in the next parliamentary session.
The Parliament has a duty to scrutinise thoroughly proposals for calls on the public purse—more than £300 million in this case—as well as major pieces of planning legislation. Within those areas, the committee was disappointed with some of the promoter's approach in presenting its evidence to us. Our preliminary report determined that the housing forecasts that were presented to us were incomplete. Given that that is such an important matter, and given the impact that new residents will have on the patronage forecasts that underpin the benefit cost ratio of the railway and the on-going subsidies that will be required if it is to provide a satisfactory service for those communities, we were disappointed. It was particularly disappointing because, in the preliminary stage debate, I highlighted the fact that the committee did not think that there was the necessary relationship between the local authorities and Transport Scotland or the required clarity of information. We got the information that we needed only because of the persistent questioning of committee members.
On the positive side, the picture in West Lothian was somewhat more conclusive. The committee can draw much greater comfort from the work that has been done there. West Lothian Council officials should be commended for responding positively at preliminary stage to the committee's requests for more information. Much of the new housing that is planned in the western part of West Lothian, about which members have spoken, will benefit the scheme directly. The council gave evidence that there is a commitment to deliver more than 6,000 houses in the period to 2011, rising to more than 7,000 by 2015. The committee saw that as positive, but appreciated that it would place considerable burdens on the local infrastructure in the areas concerned.
The picture in North Lanarkshire was less clear. We leave the bill process without having a clear picture of the housing that is associated with the project, as the statutory local plan process is still in its early stages.
The committee was disappointed that it did not receive clarification on home loss payments. There is inconsistency between the process in Scotland and that south of the border. The Minister for Transport knows that I have an interest in how the matter affects the proposed rail line in my constituency. It is not acceptable for constituents not to have a clear response from the Executive on its intention for home loss payments. I hope that the Minister for Transport will have an opportunity to respond on that point today or, if not, that he will come back to the Parliament at the earliest opportunity with clarification of the position from the Minister for Communities.
Mary Mulligan was absolutely right to say that today we are making a hard-headed business decision, but it is more than that. The Executive is delivering record investment in the rail infrastructure, connecting all areas of Scotland. Communities in Midlothian and my constituency in the Borders, communities in Lanarkshire and West Lothian, and Scotland as a whole will benefit from that investment. That is why I have no hesitation in recommending today that the bill be passed.
As a member of the Airdrie-Bathgate Railway and Linked Improvements Bill Committee and the Parliament, I take great pleasure in recommending the approval of the bill and the railway. In my first parliamentary speech, I raised the issue of the need for communities throughout Scotland to be connected by rail and to have proper integrated public transport links. That is particularly important for rural and urban deprived areas.
Inevitably, and unsurprisingly, my maiden speech focused on my own constituency. Other members have spoken with determination about how important the project is to their area. However, today we are at the final stage of a project for Scotland, for the people of West Lothian and North Lanarkshire, and, with its associated works, for the wider network. I am happy that my final speech of the parliamentary session—although I hope to be returned—is also about rail projects.
In 1993, when I was a student, I was lucky enough to be in the House of Commons on the night of the vote on the Maastricht treaty. The House of Commons was divided and it was a late-night debate. Mr Gallie was directly involved in debates around that time, and he has consistently held his views over the years since then, which is to be admired. However, division was not needed and did not exist on the committee under his convenership. Even with his evident enjoyment in tackling the line of questioning about whether the bill is ECHR-compliant, he was consistent in his support of the project. I never determined whether he was glad or disappointed that the bill is ECHR-compliant. I wish those colleagues who are not returning to the Parliament well.
As other members have said, we owe a debt of gratitude to the committed, determined and persistent clerking staff. We would not be able to do the job for the communities that we represent without such dedication from the clerking staff, which all committee members have seen during the past few months.
With my interest in the Borders rail line, membership of the Edinburgh Tram (Line Two) Bill Committee and my membership of the bill committee for this important bill, I am proud to have played a very small part in facilitating a record level of investment in rail infrastructure in Scotland.
I see that my chief whip is sitting in front of me, so I stress that my relatively positive experience on the Airdrie-Bathgate Railway and Linked Improvements Bill Committee should not in any way be construed as enthusiasm to be a member of another private bill committee if I am returned as a member in the next parliamentary session.
The Parliament has a duty to scrutinise thoroughly proposals for calls on the public purse—more than £300 million in this case—as well as major pieces of planning legislation. Within those areas, the committee was disappointed with some of the promoter's approach in presenting its evidence to us. Our preliminary report determined that the housing forecasts that were presented to us were incomplete. Given that that is such an important matter, and given the impact that new residents will have on the patronage forecasts that underpin the benefit cost ratio of the railway and the on-going subsidies that will be required if it is to provide a satisfactory service for those communities, we were disappointed. It was particularly disappointing because, in the preliminary stage debate, I highlighted the fact that the committee did not think that there was the necessary relationship between the local authorities and Transport Scotland or the required clarity of information. We got the information that we needed only because of the persistent questioning of committee members.
On the positive side, the picture in West Lothian was somewhat more conclusive. The committee can draw much greater comfort from the work that has been done there. West Lothian Council officials should be commended for responding positively at preliminary stage to the committee's requests for more information. Much of the new housing that is planned in the western part of West Lothian, about which members have spoken, will benefit the scheme directly. The council gave evidence that there is a commitment to deliver more than 6,000 houses in the period to 2011, rising to more than 7,000 by 2015. The committee saw that as positive, but appreciated that it would place considerable burdens on the local infrastructure in the areas concerned.
The picture in North Lanarkshire was less clear. We leave the bill process without having a clear picture of the housing that is associated with the project, as the statutory local plan process is still in its early stages.
The committee was disappointed that it did not receive clarification on home loss payments. There is inconsistency between the process in Scotland and that south of the border. The Minister for Transport knows that I have an interest in how the matter affects the proposed rail line in my constituency. It is not acceptable for constituents not to have a clear response from the Executive on its intention for home loss payments. I hope that the Minister for Transport will have an opportunity to respond on that point today or, if not, that he will come back to the Parliament at the earliest opportunity with clarification of the position from the Minister for Communities.
Mary Mulligan was absolutely right to say that today we are making a hard-headed business decision, but it is more than that. The Executive is delivering record investment in the rail infrastructure, connecting all areas of Scotland. Communities in Midlothian and my constituency in the Borders, communities in Lanarkshire and West Lothian, and Scotland as a whole will benefit from that investment. That is why I have no hesitation in recommending today that the bill be passed.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Mr George Reid):
NPA
The next item of business is a debate on motion S2M-5760, in the name of Phil Gallie, that the Parliament agrees that the Airdrie-Bathgate Railway and Linked...
Phil Gallie (South of Scotland) (Con):
Con
How strange life can be: here we are debating legislation in a building that neither you, Presiding Officer, nor I wanted, in a Parliament that you fought fo...
Janis Hughes (Glasgow Rutherglen) (Lab):
Lab
I thank Mr Gallie for taking an intervention. Does he agree that, although the Airdrie to Bathgate link will vastly improve rail services across that part of...
Phil Gallie:
Con
I could not agree more with Janis Hughes. It is a pity that she will not be here to fight for crossrail in the next session of Parliament. I hope that the me...
The Minister for Transport (Tavish Scott):
LD
Such a young Parliament, so many historic events. I pay tribute to Phil Gallie's years of public service. I understand that he was with Cunninghame District ...
Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP):
SNP
I, too, wish Phil Gallie well for the future. His was a voice that was always heard in this Parliament—albeit sometimes from a sedentary position. We never h...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
You have one minute.
Fergus Ewing:
SNP
Thank you very much. I have no complaints about that whatsoever.The minister trespassed somewhat more widely than the confines of the Airdrie-Bathgate Railwa...
Mr David Davidson (North East Scotland) (Con):
Con
Consensus is breaking out. I begin with the retiring members who have spoken today. Phil Gallie has been a quiet, mild-mannered man all the way through his p...
Karen Whitefield (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab):
Lab
I am delighted that the last speech that I will make in this Parliament prior to dissolution is on the Airdrie to Bathgate rail line. Mary Mulligan, Bristow ...
Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I agree with much of what the member says, but does she agree that it reinforces the lunacy of closing the accident and emergency department at Monklands hos...
Karen Whitefield:
Lab
We are talking about a railway line today, and there will be more to discuss during the election campaign than accident and emergency services. However, my v...
Mark Ballard (Lothians) (Green):
Green
Fergus Ewing and David Davidson began their speeches by talking about the consensus that has broken out in the chamber. When they are feeling so consensual, ...
Mrs Mary Mulligan (Linlithgow) (Lab):
Lab
Like many members, I am delighted to have reached the final stage of the legislative process and I look forward to the reopening of the Airdrie to Bathgate l...
Phil Gallie:
Con
I understand the point that Mary Mulligan makes about train companies not liking trains stopping. They think that too many stops reduce the number of custome...
Mrs Mulligan:
Lab
Absolutely. I have always contended that, with a bit of imaginative thought, Network Rail could have planned a timetable that would have allowed that, partic...
Fiona Hyslop (Lothians) (SNP):
SNP
On behalf of my constituents in the Lothians, I thank the committee for its diligence. It has served the people of West Lothian and Lanarkshire well in its d...
Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD):
LD
Did the shadow transport minister visit Plains as well?
Fiona Hyslop:
SNP
I am sorry. I did not quite catch what the member said. It is important that we recognise—
Jeremy Purvis rose—
LD
Fiona Hyslop:
SNP
Sorry. I will give way.
Jeremy Purvis:
LD
Did the shadow transport minister visit Plains as well?
Fiona Hyslop:
SNP
I think that there is an outstanding invitation. I represent the Lothians. Not only did Fergus Ewing visit Blackridge, he visited the Avon gorge, which has o...
Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD):
LD
With regard to how strategic a view the Scottish National Party takes of this and other transport projects, the fact that the shadow transport minister visit...
Bristow Muldoon (Livingston) (Lab):
Lab
I agree with many previous speakers, including Karen Whitefield and Mary Mulligan, that the project will bring economic, environmental, social and educationa...
Alex Neil (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
At the risk of repetition, I repeat what I said last week in the chamber: as a resident of Ayr, I vouch that Phil Gallie is the best member of Parliament tha...
Elaine Smith (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab):
Lab
Does the member agree that the line will also very much benefit the people of Coatbridge?
Alex Neil:
SNP
Of course I do. Indeed, that will be a very important consideration, particularly over the next five weeks. This project, which will involve public sector in...
Margaret Mitchell (Central Scotland) (Con):
Con
I support this much-wanted bill, which provides for the reopening of the former Airdrie to Bathgate line by re-laying missing track between Bathgate and Drum...
Donald Gorrie (Central Scotland) (LD):
LD
I congratulate the committee, which has clearly done a good job, and which, by studying the issues intensively, has done what committees are supposed to do. ...