Hansard

I am pleased to speak in the debate, and I appreciate the efforts of my colleague Tim Eagle in lodging the motion and bringing the debate to the chamber. From listening to the contributions from colleagues across the chamber, it is absolutely clear how much we depend on bridges. Bridges are not an abstraction—as Alexander Burnett has just said, they are the difference between whether or not people get to work, whether an ambulance takes the direct route or a long diversion, and whether a local business is able to cope or is closing its doors.

I remember when the replacement work was done on the bridge on Kerse Road in Stirling, which connected the city centre with the Springkerse industrial estate. The bridge was closed for nearly a year, which caused chaos, not just for traffic but for access to Stirling and for the businesses on the industrial estate.

Across Central Scotland and broader Stirlingshire, we see the value of such structures and the consequences of leaving maintenance work too long. Many of the bridges were built for a different age—the bridge on Kerse Road that I just mentioned was more than 100 years old when it was eventually replaced by Network Rail. Those bridges have served us well, but they are under increasing strain. Traffic is heavier—electric vehicles alone weigh a tonne—and the weather is harsher, and there have been years of constrained investment, as Alexander Burnett and Finlay Carson highlighted.

In Falkirk, the Jinkabout bridge near the golf club in Grangemouth is an example of what happens when decisions are delayed. Years of severe weight restrictions affected local movement and economic activity, and only full replacement restored capacity. It was the right decision, but it required capital funding, which it is increasingly difficult, if not nigh-on impossible, for councils to secure.

In Stirlingshire, the Cardross bridge between Arnprior and the Lake of Menteith is a good example. It is a historic crossing and a vital local route. The council invested more than £1 million to keep it in use but, even after that work, it will reopen only with a permanent weight limit. That tells its own story. We often no longer talk about improving capacity; we talk about preventing loss. There are similar pressures on other such structures, such as Blane Water bridge on the B834 road connecting Killearn and Croftamie, where intervention was essential simply to keep the route open.

What concerns me most—my colleagues, including Davy Russell, have talked about this—is the description of “managed decline”. That is not a neutral technical term; it is a policy choice and an act of selective neglect, driven by funding constraints, that accepts the gradual loss of vital infrastructure. Communities feel that loss through longer journeys, reduced resilience and declining confidence in the network on which they rely every day.

This is not about blaming councils, which are making hard choices with limited resources. In addition, there are significant shortages of bridge engineers, and councils are finding it harder to secure the specialist skills that are needed to keep structures safe and operational.

If we continue to neglect maintenance, we will continue to pay more later through emergency closures, rushed repairs and avoidable disruption. In Central Scotland and elsewhere, bridges are lifelines: they underpin economic activity, connectivity and public safety. Recognising the problem is necessary, but it is not sufficient. As Finlay Carson said eloquently, we now need a future Government to ring fence funds for a bridge fund in order to provide the sustained, realistic investment that is required. There needs to be a clear national commitment to stop vital infrastructure being allowed to fail by default and neglect.