Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 23 February 2012
23 Feb 2012 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Rail Services (Consultation)
I am pleased to have a chance to reiterate once again the Government’s position. It is important to bear it in mind that the process was a consultation and that there are no plans to close stations in Glasgow or anywhere else in Scotland. We finished the consultation only on Monday this week, so it is only right that we respect the people who responded and take time to consider what they had to say before we come to conclusions.
The consultation rightly raised a number of issues, including how to contract for services and how to pay for them, and how to get the best use out of the rail network. There is no question but that 2014 is a crucial year for a number of reasons, including the fact that there will be a new funding package for Network Rail and a new contract for rail passenger services. We must consider all the options in preparation for 2014. Had we not done so and had that not been evident in the consultation document, I am pretty sure that the Opposition parties would have demanded that we do exactly that.
Richard Baker’s motion implies that there has not been full and adequate consultation, although he also seemed to suggest that we rule out certain things rather than consult on them. I assure members that there has been considerable debate across Scotland in the past three months. There were detailed presentations and discussions with regional transport partnerships; presentations were given for stakeholders in each of those regions, to which all members of this Parliament, council leaders, members of the United Kingdom Parliament, business groups, local interest groups and the rail industry were invited. We also held public events at railway stations across the country. Self-evidently, the consultation was not a paper exercise. All the views that were expressed at those events will be taken into account.
It is surprising that Richard Baker, who clearly has an interest in the matter, did not take the opportunity to find out more about the issues that were raised at some of those events. We have made it clear throughout that the consultation process has been about options. Richard Baker continually used the word “proposals”, even though it does not appear in the consultation document. He will find that the paragraph from which he quoted does not contain the word “closure” at all. It says:
“We do not intend to reduce the size of the Scottish rail network, or reduce the number of stations”.
However, Richard Baker manages to take from that a proposal to close stations. Perhaps he can elaborate.
The consultation rightly raised a number of issues, including how to contract for services and how to pay for them, and how to get the best use out of the rail network. There is no question but that 2014 is a crucial year for a number of reasons, including the fact that there will be a new funding package for Network Rail and a new contract for rail passenger services. We must consider all the options in preparation for 2014. Had we not done so and had that not been evident in the consultation document, I am pretty sure that the Opposition parties would have demanded that we do exactly that.
Richard Baker’s motion implies that there has not been full and adequate consultation, although he also seemed to suggest that we rule out certain things rather than consult on them. I assure members that there has been considerable debate across Scotland in the past three months. There were detailed presentations and discussions with regional transport partnerships; presentations were given for stakeholders in each of those regions, to which all members of this Parliament, council leaders, members of the United Kingdom Parliament, business groups, local interest groups and the rail industry were invited. We also held public events at railway stations across the country. Self-evidently, the consultation was not a paper exercise. All the views that were expressed at those events will be taken into account.
It is surprising that Richard Baker, who clearly has an interest in the matter, did not take the opportunity to find out more about the issues that were raised at some of those events. We have made it clear throughout that the consultation process has been about options. Richard Baker continually used the word “proposals”, even though it does not appear in the consultation document. He will find that the paragraph from which he quoted does not contain the word “closure” at all. It says:
“We do not intend to reduce the size of the Scottish rail network, or reduce the number of stations”.
However, Richard Baker manages to take from that a proposal to close stations. Perhaps he can elaborate.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Tricia Marwick)
NPA
Good morning. The first item of business today is a debate on motion S4M-2086, in the name of Richard Baker, on concerns about rail proposals. I call Richard...
Richard Baker (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
In our last Labour Party debate, we discussed the impact of Scottish Government policies on bus passengers. Today, we return to two more transport issues tha...
The Minister for Housing and Transport (Keith Brown)
SNP
Can Richard Baker point to where in the consultation document it is proposed that stations be closed?
Richard Baker
Lab
Yes I can. As the minister is well aware, the proposal is in section 7.The proposal to close a number of railway stations is just one of our concerns about t...
The Minister for Housing and Transport (Keith Brown)
SNP
I am pleased to have a chance to reiterate once again the Government’s position. It is important to bear it in mind that the process was a consultation and t...
Elaine Murray (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Lab
I refer the minister to paragraph 7.11, which states:“We would welcome views on what locations may be more appropriate for stations and which current station...
Keith Brown
SNP
It is a distortion of the English language to say that that is a proposal for closure. The word “closure” is not in that paragraph. The first part of the par...
Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green)
Green
Will the minister give way?
Keith Brown
SNP
I will make progress, then I might come back to Mr Harvie.We have made it clear throughout the consultation period that we are talking about options and not ...
Patrick Harvie
Green
Will the minister give way on that point?
Keith Brown
SNP
No.Richard Baker talked about a request for information on which stations are under threat, but that was not the nature of that request. People asked for inf...
Richard Baker
Lab
Is the minister saying that, as long as he is in office, none of the 11 stations in question will close?
Keith Brown
SNP
I do not know on how many occasions we have said that we have no plans to close those stations. However, we must listen to what people have said in the consu...
Alex Johnstone (North East Scotland) (Con)
Con
I congratulate Richard Baker on lodging the motion. I know that its subject has been dealt with in a members’ business debate, but it is important that we sh...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
We now move to the open debate. I remind members that they have a strict four minutes. If members try to go over that, we are likely to cut them off mid-stre...
James Dornan (Glasgow Cathcart) (SNP)
SNP
Since I was elected to the Scottish Parliament, I have had the honour of representing my constituents in the parliamentary chamber and in Glasgow City Counci...
Richard Baker
Lab
Will the member take an intervention?
James Dornan
SNP
I would love to, but I have only four minutes.Why does the Labour Party not bring something positive to the table? Where are its plans for the railways in Sc...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
You must end now. I call Patricia Ferguson.09:42
Patricia Ferguson (Glasgow Maryhill and Springburn) (Lab)
Lab
Thank you, Presiding Officer. The motion recognises the real concern felt by many in communities in and around Glasgow about the future of their local train ...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
I am sorry, but your time is up. I call John Mason.09:46
John Mason (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP)
SNP
This reminds me of Westminster, which is much stricter with time.I thank the Scottish Government for its many investments in rail, especially those that have...
Bob Doris (Glasgow) (SNP)
SNP
I must say at the outset, for absolute clarity, that, given the process that surrounds consultations, the transport minister could not have been clearer that...
Anne McTaggart (Glasgow) (Lab)
Lab
I am glad to speak—quickly—in the debate, on an issue that, as we have heard, is of great interest to the people of Glasgow. I thank my colleague Councillor ...
Keith Brown
SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Anne McTaggart
Lab
I am sorry, but I have only four minutes—unless the Presiding Officer is willing to give extra time.
The Presiding Officer
NPA
No.
Anne McTaggart
Lab
In relation to the stations in Glasgow that could be affected by closure, we need to consider the impact on our communities. For example, the elderly rely on...
Humza Yousaf (Glasgow) (SNP)
SNP
Following the members’ business debate at the end of January, I welcome a second opportunity to put on record my views. Since speaking in that debate, I have...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (John Scott)
Con
We move now to closing speeches.10:02