Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 23 February 2012
23 Feb 2012 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Rail Services (Consultation)
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 attended public meetings about some of the stations that are mentioned in the fact sheet. I attended one last month, along with Johann Lamont. To my surprise, there was barely a fag paper between us, as the saying goes.
All of us would, of course, express our concern should any of the stations that are mentioned in the fact sheet that accompanies the rail 2014 consultation close but, from the outset, the minister has been robust and unequivocal about the fact that there are no plans to close any stations in Glasgow or anywhere else in Scotland. I do not fault colleagues for asking the Scottish Government for reassurances about rail stations or local amenities that they fear for—that is part of the job that we are elected to do. However, as Alex Johnstone said, with an elected position comes a responsibility not to peddle fear and not to scare communities into believing that there is a threat to local services when one does not exist.
All of us in the chamber—including Opposition members—know fine well that no station in Glasgow is truly under threat. We know that the stations that were mentioned were simply on the fact sheet in response to a stakeholder question, whose context James Dornan laid out.
Although they are dwindling in number, some former ministers remain on the Labour benches, and they must remember—although perhaps they choose to forget—how consultations work. Are they seriously suggesting that they would not have bothered to answer the question had it come before them?
As they have offered such vociferous and robust debate, I am sure that all the Labour MSPs who have spoken today have made submissions to the rail 2014 consultation. It will be interesting to read whether they present a vision for Scotland’s rail network. My own submission to the consultation stated that it is vital for our local communities to be connected to public transport hubs and railway stations—especially as increasing numbers of people rely on public transport. The Scottish Government’s transport policies have helped to shift people from their cars on to our railways. Of course more can and should be done, but we are heading in the right direction.
The consultation is an opportunity to develop a vision of the kind of rail network that we want for our communities. Like John Mason, I have suggested that additional stations could be built in areas where housing developments are expanding. I will continue to work with local councillors, other MSPs and the Scottish Government to help to push the case for a new rail station in the Robroyston area in the north-east of Glasgow, and anywhere else where provision might be needed.
As James Dornan highlighted perfectly, none of us is oblivious to the context within which the debate is raging: we are less than 10 weeks away from local elections. All eyes are on Glasgow. The Labour Party’s domination of the city is being challenged, its iron grip is being loosened, and it is trying every tactic in the handbook to hold on desperately to its last bastion of power.
A couple of weeks ago, a councillor—a friend of many of those on the Labour benches—was in tears, claiming that her son’s apprenticeship had been threatened for a vote for the ruling Labour administration. Serious allegations have been made. That is no way to run a city.
The people of Glasgow are entitled to an honest debate over the next 10 weeks about local issues, including railway stations. They are entitled to an honest debate—not bluff, not bluster, not smoke and mirrors, and not being scaremongered into a vote. The people of Glasgow deserve better.
All of us would, of course, express our concern should any of the stations that are mentioned in the fact sheet that accompanies the rail 2014 consultation close but, from the outset, the minister has been robust and unequivocal about the fact that there are no plans to close any stations in Glasgow or anywhere else in Scotland. I do not fault colleagues for asking the Scottish Government for reassurances about rail stations or local amenities that they fear for—that is part of the job that we are elected to do. However, as Alex Johnstone said, with an elected position comes a responsibility not to peddle fear and not to scare communities into believing that there is a threat to local services when one does not exist.
All of us in the chamber—including Opposition members—know fine well that no station in Glasgow is truly under threat. We know that the stations that were mentioned were simply on the fact sheet in response to a stakeholder question, whose context James Dornan laid out.
Although they are dwindling in number, some former ministers remain on the Labour benches, and they must remember—although perhaps they choose to forget—how consultations work. Are they seriously suggesting that they would not have bothered to answer the question had it come before them?
As they have offered such vociferous and robust debate, I am sure that all the Labour MSPs who have spoken today have made submissions to the rail 2014 consultation. It will be interesting to read whether they present a vision for Scotland’s rail network. My own submission to the consultation stated that it is vital for our local communities to be connected to public transport hubs and railway stations—especially as increasing numbers of people rely on public transport. The Scottish Government’s transport policies have helped to shift people from their cars on to our railways. Of course more can and should be done, but we are heading in the right direction.
The consultation is an opportunity to develop a vision of the kind of rail network that we want for our communities. Like John Mason, I have suggested that additional stations could be built in areas where housing developments are expanding. I will continue to work with local councillors, other MSPs and the Scottish Government to help to push the case for a new rail station in the Robroyston area in the north-east of Glasgow, and anywhere else where provision might be needed.
As James Dornan highlighted perfectly, none of us is oblivious to the context within which the debate is raging: we are less than 10 weeks away from local elections. All eyes are on Glasgow. The Labour Party’s domination of the city is being challenged, its iron grip is being loosened, and it is trying every tactic in the handbook to hold on desperately to its last bastion of power.
A couple of weeks ago, a councillor—a friend of many of those on the Labour benches—was in tears, claiming that her son’s apprenticeship had been threatened for a vote for the ruling Labour administration. Serious allegations have been made. That is no way to run a city.
The people of Glasgow are entitled to an honest debate over the next 10 weeks about local issues, including railway stations. They are entitled to an honest debate—not bluff, not bluster, not smoke and mirrors, and not being scaremongered into a vote. The people of Glasgow deserve better.
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