Hansard

I thank those members who have stayed behind to engage in the debate and the many others who signed my motion.

This is the last members' business debate of the second session. We have just taken the positive step of passing the bill to reopen the Airdrie to Bathgate railway line, so this is a good time to look up and to look ahead to the further steps that are needed to bring about a renaissance of our railways in Scotland. It is clear that Scotland is ahead of England and Wales in restoring its railways and reconnecting the communities that were rubbed off the rail map by the Beeching cuts. However, we still lack the integrated transport that is enjoyed in many other European countries. The reopening of lines such as the Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine line has shown what is possible, but we must go ever further forward, building on that success and expanding the network so that it is fit for the needs of a low-carbon Scotland in the 21st century.

In my motion, I pay tribute to campaigns in my region of Mid Scotland and Fife to reopen stations and routes. I welcome to the gallery some of those who are working to make that progress a reality. In the west of the region, the campaign to reopen Blackford and Greenloaning rail stations has been spirited. It is rooted in the desire for a reconnection to the rail network not just of those two communities, but of the wider area of Strathallan and Strathearn. It is clear to the many people who commute from Perthshire to Edinburgh and Glasgow that reopening Blackford and Greenloaning stations is needed. Gleneagles station was built to serve a hotel, but it does not meet the needs of many current commuters in terms of convenience or safe access from the A9. As a result, many people drive to Dunblane station, which is turning into a giant, overcrowded car park during the week. Reopening Blackford and Greenloaning stations would serve Perthshire better, taking pressure off Dunblane as the railhead and providing public transport connections for growing commuter communities. There is also synergy with the potential for rail-freight facilities at Highland Spring Limited in Blackford, which would cut down the number of lorries that use the A9.

The potential for freight and traffic reduction on the A9 is real, given the other proposals that are coming from business. Diageo wants to open a spur off the Stirling to Kincardine route to serve the vast spirit warehouses at Cambus. It also wants the Levenmouth rail route to be reopened, to allow rail freight to serve the Cameronbridge distillery. Such a facility would remove the company's impact and dependence on the Forth road bridge. Currently, 20 per cent of Scotland's wheat crop is driven in on the roads to Cameronbridge, so there is the potential in future to get the wheat, the bottles and the spirit moving on the rails once again. When that facility is in place, other companies such as Tullis Russell will have the option of using it.

Just as significant for the communities of Methil and Leven would be the option of a passenger service to connect them once again to the Fife circle, through the Levenmouth line. Those communities should never have been rubbed off the rail map in the first place. Given the communities' profile of low car ownership and low income, there can be no greater need, in social and economic terms alone, for the line to be reopened to both passenger and freight traffic.

That does not mean that St Andrews should be forgotten in transport planning in Fife, as it has so quietly been forgotten in the draft south-east Scotland transport partnership plan. The arguments for a new link between Leuchars and the town, as well as arguments for the reopening of the Levenmouth line, are strong, but for slightly different reasons. St Andrews is a big economic driver for Fife, through tourism and the university. It is also a world-class venue for golf tournaments, but it lacks the public transport infrastructure that would put it clearly above other venues' ability to deliver. When I talk to people in St Andrews about what for many is a daily commute to Dundee, the bridge tolls are an issue, but not the biggest issue. It is the lack of convenient rail transport to get people efficiently over the Tay that forces many people into cars. It is time to reinvigorate the community's bid to get back on to the rail map.

What is needed to help the communities that I have mentioned and other communities across Scotland to reconnect to the rail network? In my motion I highlight the strong and emerging role that community rail partnerships can play in Scotland. We have seen how successful the Highland Rail Partnership and CRPs in England have been in building communities directly into the planning and promotion of new services, as well as developing the use of station facilities for commuter use and small business lets.

There is also a role for CRPs in tackling route crime, such as vandalism and antisocial behaviour, through community development. CRPs are well placed to work with Network Rail, linking into existing community projects, including youth projects and community arts. Ultimately, communities need to see rail stations as their own stations, as they would have done at the dawn of the railways. The partnerships are one excellent way of achieving that sense of ownership.

Regional transport partnerships that are busy submitting their final plans to ministers this week need to shift the focus away from increasing trunk road capacity towards asking ministers for increased spending on rail network improvements. For example, the SESTRAN plan highlights the Levenmouth link and potential links from Kincardine to Dunfermline, but it does not promote St Andrews, Wormit or even Newburgh as candidates for reopening.

Meanwhile, to the bewilderment of many communities, TACTRAN—the Tayside and central Scotland transport partnership—has pushed through bypasses for Dundee and Bridge of Allan and a Scone road bridge into its draft plan as short-term and high-priority transport measures, while Blackford and Greenloaning stations hardly warrant a mention. That is not good enough and, as I did last week, I call on ministers to view the regional plans critically, particularly where communities feel that the priority given to road building is running well ahead of debate on and amendments to structure plans.

We need a network that is fit to run more services serving local communities as well as improved intercity routes. Network Rail must adopt a can-do approach to bring the vision into reality. That means implementing the network utilisation strategy, planning for further growth and eliminating pinch points.

Finally, we need to make tough choices. If £3 billion is spent on a tunnel under the Forth and at least a further £500 million on dualling the A9, plus all the other road projects that I have mentioned, that will blow not only the transport budget but the aspirations of communities to get connected to the rail network. It is time to make those tough choices, build on our achievements so far and put our communities back on to the rail map, where they belong.