Chamber
Plenary, 22 Apr 2009
22 Apr 2009 · S3 · Plenary
Item of business
High-speed Rail Services
The report of the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee is indeed very welcome but, of course, it does not stand alone among the recommendations of the Parliament. The Economy, Energy and Tourism Committee considered the national planning framework earlier this year, and we, too, heard a lot about the importance of strategic rail connections to sustainable economic growth. We, too, agreed across the parties that there were three national developments that should have been included in NPF 2 but were not. One was the subject of today's debate: a high-speed rail link between Scotland and England, including facilities for rail freight. Another was the enhancement of rail services in the north of Scotland, in parallel with planned enhancements in the west, and another was strategic rail connections between the north of Scotland and the central belt.
Good reasons were given for promoting high-speed rail to England alongside improvements to services in the north of Scotland and to services between the north and the central belt. Those improvements, if not the high-speed rail link, were acknowledged by ministers as desirable, as we saw in their inclusion in the strategic transport projects review. Specifically, there is the building of a direct dual-track rail link between Inverkeithing and Halbeath in Fife, with new rail junctions at both ends to improve journey times between the north and the central belt. It was precisely that project that was raised with the committee by Confederation of British Industry Scotland, which had pressed for strategic transport projects to be included in NPF 2 and wanted to know why Inverkeithing to Halbeath was not one of them. I would be interested to hear more from the minister on that important point when he replies to the debate.
If we are serious about bringing the benefits of high-speed rail to the north of Scotland, another valuable improvement would be a new bridge and dualling of the railway at Montrose. That, too, would bring strategic benefits by cutting out avoidable delays. It is in the strategic transport projects review, and it would be useful to know how much priority the Government attaches to the scheme, and when it believes that the scheme can be taken forward.
Today, I am interested above all in how ministers intend to affirm the relevance of a high-speed rail link to travel to and from the north of Scotland. We have heard that high-speed rail can compete with air travel on the routes from London to Glasgow and Edinburgh if it can achieve a three-hour journey time—as on the Paris to Lille route, or the Barcelona to Madrid route. High-speed rail is clearly less well placed to compete directly with air travel between Aberdeen or Inverness and London, but a high-speed link could certainly make rail travel a more competitive alternative than it is now. It is currently possible to travel from Aberdeen to London by sleeper, going via Carstairs and Crewe, and getting into Euston station in good time for an early-morning meeting. Likewise, the sleeper service provides a good alternative for people who are travelling to the north—it is especially well used by leisure visitors to Kyle of Lochalsh as well as to Aberdeen and other destinations in the north. A high-speed link could surely offer other options for long-distance rail travel in both directions.
We have heard that the high-speed rail link between London and Paris has a journey time of just over two hours. We also know that there are existing rail links for freight between Scotland and Europe, for which the journey times are slower but which show the potential connections that might be made for passenger travel. If a high-speed rail link can be made a priority by both the British Government and Scottish ministers, overnight services that would bring benefits to the north of Scotland could surely be achieved along with benefits to the central belt.
At the moment, a rail journey from Aberdeen to London takes upwards of eight and a half hours, or longer overnight. An onward rail journey to Paris involves a walk of only a few hundred yards between King's Cross or Euston and St Pancras for someone wanting to take the high-speed train from there. Given the straightforward alternative of a two-hour flight from Aberdeen to Paris by Air France, not many people travel from Aberdeen to Paris by train. However, if it were possible to link up the high-speed train connections that exist south of London and those that are being discussed for north of London and to upgrade the strategic links between Aberdeen and the central belt, the opportunity of joining a sleeper train in Aberdeen and waking up in Paris might not be so far away as it currently seems.
I hope that, in responding to the debate, ministers will consider all those opportunities to secure benefits for the whole of Scotland. In that context, improving links to the north must be considered as a priority from the outset. In addition, all the operators of Scottish railway services—including National Express and CrossCountry Trains—must not only take their franchise commitments seriously but maintain their rolling stock, make their services user friendly and not sacrifice the customer experience in the pursuit of marginal savings here and there. The minister will know that it is, in part, his job to hold franchise operators to account. He will also want to be involved in planning the enhancement of all those services for the future. I hope that he will do so in the context of the benefits that are available for Scotland as a whole.
Good reasons were given for promoting high-speed rail to England alongside improvements to services in the north of Scotland and to services between the north and the central belt. Those improvements, if not the high-speed rail link, were acknowledged by ministers as desirable, as we saw in their inclusion in the strategic transport projects review. Specifically, there is the building of a direct dual-track rail link between Inverkeithing and Halbeath in Fife, with new rail junctions at both ends to improve journey times between the north and the central belt. It was precisely that project that was raised with the committee by Confederation of British Industry Scotland, which had pressed for strategic transport projects to be included in NPF 2 and wanted to know why Inverkeithing to Halbeath was not one of them. I would be interested to hear more from the minister on that important point when he replies to the debate.
If we are serious about bringing the benefits of high-speed rail to the north of Scotland, another valuable improvement would be a new bridge and dualling of the railway at Montrose. That, too, would bring strategic benefits by cutting out avoidable delays. It is in the strategic transport projects review, and it would be useful to know how much priority the Government attaches to the scheme, and when it believes that the scheme can be taken forward.
Today, I am interested above all in how ministers intend to affirm the relevance of a high-speed rail link to travel to and from the north of Scotland. We have heard that high-speed rail can compete with air travel on the routes from London to Glasgow and Edinburgh if it can achieve a three-hour journey time—as on the Paris to Lille route, or the Barcelona to Madrid route. High-speed rail is clearly less well placed to compete directly with air travel between Aberdeen or Inverness and London, but a high-speed link could certainly make rail travel a more competitive alternative than it is now. It is currently possible to travel from Aberdeen to London by sleeper, going via Carstairs and Crewe, and getting into Euston station in good time for an early-morning meeting. Likewise, the sleeper service provides a good alternative for people who are travelling to the north—it is especially well used by leisure visitors to Kyle of Lochalsh as well as to Aberdeen and other destinations in the north. A high-speed link could surely offer other options for long-distance rail travel in both directions.
We have heard that the high-speed rail link between London and Paris has a journey time of just over two hours. We also know that there are existing rail links for freight between Scotland and Europe, for which the journey times are slower but which show the potential connections that might be made for passenger travel. If a high-speed rail link can be made a priority by both the British Government and Scottish ministers, overnight services that would bring benefits to the north of Scotland could surely be achieved along with benefits to the central belt.
At the moment, a rail journey from Aberdeen to London takes upwards of eight and a half hours, or longer overnight. An onward rail journey to Paris involves a walk of only a few hundred yards between King's Cross or Euston and St Pancras for someone wanting to take the high-speed train from there. Given the straightforward alternative of a two-hour flight from Aberdeen to Paris by Air France, not many people travel from Aberdeen to Paris by train. However, if it were possible to link up the high-speed train connections that exist south of London and those that are being discussed for north of London and to upgrade the strategic links between Aberdeen and the central belt, the opportunity of joining a sleeper train in Aberdeen and waking up in Paris might not be so far away as it currently seems.
I hope that, in responding to the debate, ministers will consider all those opportunities to secure benefits for the whole of Scotland. In that context, improving links to the north must be considered as a priority from the outset. In addition, all the operators of Scottish railway services—including National Express and CrossCountry Trains—must not only take their franchise commitments seriously but maintain their rolling stock, make their services user friendly and not sacrifice the customer experience in the pursuit of marginal savings here and there. The minister will know that it is, in part, his job to hold franchise operators to account. He will also want to be involved in planning the enhancement of all those services for the future. I hope that he will do so in the context of the benefits that are available for Scotland as a whole.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Alasdair Morgan):
SNP
The next item of business is a debate on motion S3M-3883, in the name of Patrick Harvie, on behalf of the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Commit...
Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green):
Green
In speaking to the motion and committee report, I begin, as is traditional, by thanking my committee colleagues who contributed to our work, the various witn...
The Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change (Stewart Stevenson):
SNP
I thank Patrick Harvie for securing the debate. I am grateful for the opportunity to present my thoughts on the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change ...
Des McNulty (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab):
Lab
Like Patrick Harvie, I congratulate my fellow committee members and the committee clerks on the production of an excellent report. As Patrick Harvie and Stew...
Patrick Harvie:
Green
I do not disagree with anything that Des McNulty has said, but does he agree that we could do a great deal with the existing system? For example, we could si...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
SNP
I ask Mr McNulty to watch the clock.
Des McNulty:
Lab
I agree with Patrick Harvie's point, which is particularly salient in light of today's announcement of fare increases between London and Edinburgh. Environme...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
SNP
I am afraid that the member must conclude.
Des McNulty:
Lab
In that case, I will do so.
Alex Johnstone (North East Scotland) (Con):
Con
I begin by saying how much I enjoyed taking part in the inquiry. In some committee inquiries, the usual suspects come forward and can be rather on the weary ...
George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab):
Lab
I am encouraged by Mr Johnstone's comments. Will he confirm whether it is now the policy of the UK Conservative party to support a high-speed link up to Scot...
Alex Johnstone:
Con
I can confirm that. The announcement that was made at the time of the Conservative party conference last year concerned proposals to take the line north to L...
Alison McInnes (North East Scotland) (LD):
LD
I thank the convener of the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee, fellow committee members and the committee clerks for their work on the i...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
SNP
We move to the open debate.
Rob Gibson (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
SNP
I thank the clerks for bringing together an excellent report and for keeping us on the rails.In debating high-speed rail, we need to take into account how th...
George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab):
Lab
I, too, welcome the debate. I congratulate Patrick Harvie and his committee not just on an excellent report but on—rightly and not before time—moving high-sp...
Alex Johnstone:
Con
Does the member agree that it would be extremely difficult to carry out that project if Scotland and England were two separate countries? Does he agree that ...
George Foulkes:
Lab
Absolutely. Alex Johnstone and I are again at one on the issue. Of course, he is absolutely right. I found the minister's use of the phrase "neighbouring Adm...
Patrick Harvie:
Green
Could George Foulkes confirm that those are separate countries that have managed to get over the issue of providing high-speed rail across borders?
George Foulkes:
Lab
But those countries have separate companies—France has a different railway company from Spain, for example. However, Patrick Harvie makes a good point, which...
Shirley-Anne Somerville (Lothians) (SNP):
SNP
The evidence that was presented during its inquiry has left the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee in no doubt about the compelling case ...
George Foulkes:
Lab
Geography.
Shirley-Anne Somerville:
SNP
Yes, geography is a factor, but we are talking about principles and whether the Labour Government in London is interested in the principle of a high-speed ra...
Gavin Brown (Lothians) (Con):
Con
Given Shirley-Anne Somerville's enthusiasm for high-speed rail, does she think that it should have been in the strategic transport projects review?
Shirley-Anne Somerville:
SNP
There is no reason why it cannot be in future strategic transport project reviews, and it has been discussed and included within the draft national planning ...
Des McNulty:
Lab
Will the member take an intervention?
Shirley-Anne Somerville:
SNP
I am still dealing with the previous intervention.The draft national planning framework covers some of the strategic planning issues that are going through. ...
Lewis Macdonald (Aberdeen Central) (Lab):
Lab
The report of the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee is indeed very welcome but, of course, it does not stand alone among the recommendat...
Christopher Harvie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP):
SNP
I thank the committee for its encouraging report. I am also pleased with the atmosphere of general agreement during the debate this afternoon. I declare an i...
Tom McCabe (Hamilton South) (Lab):
Lab
The case for high-speed rail and high-speed ground transport is unanswerable, and I warmly congratulate the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Comm...