Chamber
Plenary, 22 Apr 2009
22 Apr 2009 · S3 · Plenary
Item of business
High-speed Rail Services
The evidence that was presented during its inquiry has left the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee in no doubt about the compelling case for a high-speed rail link for Scotland. I hope that the report will play a pivotal role in shaping policy in this area.
After decades of neglect, Scotland's creaking infrastructure is simply not up to the job in the 21st century. Many of Scotland's businesses feel that the network does not meet their needs. Given that the first step to finding a solution to a problem is to admit that there is a problem in the first place, what a shame that Lord Adonis—who I have no doubt is a rail enthusiast in a personal capacity—told the Scottish Affairs Committee yesterday that he wanted to maintain the existing "excellent" road, rail and air links between Scotland and England. We perhaps need to do slightly more on rail, and the report goes some way to make the case for that.
Throughout Europe, the benefits of high-speed rail have been recognised for some time. Nearly 3,500 miles of high-speed line are in operation and major expansions are under construction. As Patrick Harvie pointed out, many services manage to cross country boundaries. London to Paris or Brussels is one of many examples. By contrast, the United Kingdom has only the 67 miles connecting London to the Channel tunnel. It takes twice as long to get from Glasgow to London as it does from London to Paris. In Spain, one can travel the 621km from Barcelona to Madrid in just two hours and 38 minutes, but Edinburgh to London—roughly the same distance—takes an average of four and a half hours. Perhaps life in the slow lane is the mysterious union dividend that opponents of independence are so keen to point out. If our European neighbours have what it takes to connect via high-speed rail networks, so does Scotland.
Unfortunately, it is only recently that the UK Government has woken up to the strength of the case for high-speed rail. I welcome the UK Government's recent announcements on the issue. I welcome its establishment of High Speed Two Ltd and its commitment to consider the case for a new high-speed rail service between London and Scotland.
However, I am still seriously concerned that Scotland remains very much on the periphery of the plans for new high-speed services in the UK, rather than at their heart.
After decades of neglect, Scotland's creaking infrastructure is simply not up to the job in the 21st century. Many of Scotland's businesses feel that the network does not meet their needs. Given that the first step to finding a solution to a problem is to admit that there is a problem in the first place, what a shame that Lord Adonis—who I have no doubt is a rail enthusiast in a personal capacity—told the Scottish Affairs Committee yesterday that he wanted to maintain the existing "excellent" road, rail and air links between Scotland and England. We perhaps need to do slightly more on rail, and the report goes some way to make the case for that.
Throughout Europe, the benefits of high-speed rail have been recognised for some time. Nearly 3,500 miles of high-speed line are in operation and major expansions are under construction. As Patrick Harvie pointed out, many services manage to cross country boundaries. London to Paris or Brussels is one of many examples. By contrast, the United Kingdom has only the 67 miles connecting London to the Channel tunnel. It takes twice as long to get from Glasgow to London as it does from London to Paris. In Spain, one can travel the 621km from Barcelona to Madrid in just two hours and 38 minutes, but Edinburgh to London—roughly the same distance—takes an average of four and a half hours. Perhaps life in the slow lane is the mysterious union dividend that opponents of independence are so keen to point out. If our European neighbours have what it takes to connect via high-speed rail networks, so does Scotland.
Unfortunately, it is only recently that the UK Government has woken up to the strength of the case for high-speed rail. I welcome the UK Government's recent announcements on the issue. I welcome its establishment of High Speed Two Ltd and its commitment to consider the case for a new high-speed rail service between London and Scotland.
However, I am still seriously concerned that Scotland remains very much on the periphery of the plans for new high-speed services in the UK, rather than at their heart.
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...