Chamber
Plenary, 13 Apr 2005
13 Apr 2005 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Scotland's Needs and Aspirations
Not only did I expect an intervention, but I expected the very intervention that Janis Hughes has made. I have put down the answer to her question on paper, so she should bear with me.
I described how the Executive is carrying out consultation and making promises in one area, while forging ahead in another—to hell with the hopes and aspirations of the people. I remind the chamber that the M74 motorway was conceived before most of us were. Consultation was conducted in the communities in 1965. At the time, concrete was king and the ill effects of increased car use had not yet been revealed to us. I say to Janis Hughes that we now have hindsight, which means that we know that increased motorway construction creates increased car use. That is bad for society, the planet and the member's community.
The M74 northern extension construction project has also been bad for democracy. It involves 5 miles of motorway and will be 50 feet high. It will have parapet lighting 24 hours a day, seven days a week, which will run through Janis Hughes's community. It will carry 110,000 car journeys per day through that community and urban Glasgow, yet there has been no proper consultation of those who live along the route.
I have voiced my opposition to the road all along, but I am not the only person to do so over the years. While it was in opposition, the Labour Party called for a moratorium on all motorway construction, including construction of this monster. The SNP now supports the superhighway and has caved in to the chambers of commerce, the Confederation of British Industry and the pro-car lobby, despite the fact that in the past it stood in election campaigns in opposition to the M74 northern extension. Frank McAveety, MSP for Shettleston, the sick old man of Britain—not Frank, Shettleston—was elected to Glasgow City Council on a manifesto that stated that the council regretted the construction of the M77 and would oppose that of the M74. However, the same council gave planning permission for that monster in the blink of an eye. I hope that, if I wanted to make a structural change to my home, I would receive a visit, but in this case the council did not even take the time to make a site visit.
To those members who tell us that the superhighway will boost the local economy I say a big fat, "It won't." The Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Assessment has said that it will not. The local public inquiry, which the Executive has chosen to tear up and throw in the bin, has said clearly that it will not. If motorways help their local economy, why do Easterhouse and Pollok not have booming economies? Although big motorways cut swathes through both areas, both suffer from a great deal of poverty and have social inclusion partnership money pumped into them.
Businesses that set up alongside motorways are tin-shed businesses. They are grant grabbers—they come along, take what they can get and leave. They do not supply long-term skilled employment. The chamber should note that surveys carried out several years ago by Glasgow Development Agency along the proposed route found that businesses would set up along it regardless of whether a motorway was located there. Communication was what really mattered to them—goods coming in and out, and workers getting to work and home again. Ironically, the route of the M74 northern extension straddles a railway line for most of its length. A site visit might have helped to establish that.
The route is littered with toxic waste. Chromium, arsenic and lime are all over it. Glasgow City Council and others have noted some sites, but the locals say clearly that workers along the route know where other sites were, because up to 100 years ago there was fly-tipping for White's chemical works, which was opposed by Keir Hardie at the time. The chemicals are carcinogenic, and when the road is built they will be thrown up into the atmosphere. The sick old man of Britain will get sicker, and the Executive will be to blame.
The M74 northern extension will pollute the planet and local communities. No allowance has been made for democracy and compassion, and there is no environmental justice involved. The motorway and its construction fly in the face of the aspirations of the people of the world.
I described how the Executive is carrying out consultation and making promises in one area, while forging ahead in another—to hell with the hopes and aspirations of the people. I remind the chamber that the M74 motorway was conceived before most of us were. Consultation was conducted in the communities in 1965. At the time, concrete was king and the ill effects of increased car use had not yet been revealed to us. I say to Janis Hughes that we now have hindsight, which means that we know that increased motorway construction creates increased car use. That is bad for society, the planet and the member's community.
The M74 northern extension construction project has also been bad for democracy. It involves 5 miles of motorway and will be 50 feet high. It will have parapet lighting 24 hours a day, seven days a week, which will run through Janis Hughes's community. It will carry 110,000 car journeys per day through that community and urban Glasgow, yet there has been no proper consultation of those who live along the route.
I have voiced my opposition to the road all along, but I am not the only person to do so over the years. While it was in opposition, the Labour Party called for a moratorium on all motorway construction, including construction of this monster. The SNP now supports the superhighway and has caved in to the chambers of commerce, the Confederation of British Industry and the pro-car lobby, despite the fact that in the past it stood in election campaigns in opposition to the M74 northern extension. Frank McAveety, MSP for Shettleston, the sick old man of Britain—not Frank, Shettleston—was elected to Glasgow City Council on a manifesto that stated that the council regretted the construction of the M77 and would oppose that of the M74. However, the same council gave planning permission for that monster in the blink of an eye. I hope that, if I wanted to make a structural change to my home, I would receive a visit, but in this case the council did not even take the time to make a site visit.
To those members who tell us that the superhighway will boost the local economy I say a big fat, "It won't." The Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Assessment has said that it will not. The local public inquiry, which the Executive has chosen to tear up and throw in the bin, has said clearly that it will not. If motorways help their local economy, why do Easterhouse and Pollok not have booming economies? Although big motorways cut swathes through both areas, both suffer from a great deal of poverty and have social inclusion partnership money pumped into them.
Businesses that set up alongside motorways are tin-shed businesses. They are grant grabbers—they come along, take what they can get and leave. They do not supply long-term skilled employment. The chamber should note that surveys carried out several years ago by Glasgow Development Agency along the proposed route found that businesses would set up along it regardless of whether a motorway was located there. Communication was what really mattered to them—goods coming in and out, and workers getting to work and home again. Ironically, the route of the M74 northern extension straddles a railway line for most of its length. A site visit might have helped to establish that.
The route is littered with toxic waste. Chromium, arsenic and lime are all over it. Glasgow City Council and others have noted some sites, but the locals say clearly that workers along the route know where other sites were, because up to 100 years ago there was fly-tipping for White's chemical works, which was opposed by Keir Hardie at the time. The chemicals are carcinogenic, and when the road is built they will be thrown up into the atmosphere. The sick old man of Britain will get sicker, and the Executive will be to blame.
The M74 northern extension will pollute the planet and local communities. No allowance has been made for democracy and compassion, and there is no environmental justice involved. The motorway and its construction fly in the face of the aspirations of the people of the world.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Murray Tosh):
Con
The next item of business is a debate on motion S2M-2619, in the name of Margo MacDonald, on meeting the needs and aspirations of people in Scotland. Given t...
Margo MacDonald (Lothians) (Ind):
Ind
I have to say that my best idea was not to have this debate—although that was not a bad one—but to invite the Rev Bob Brown to lead time for reflection. I an...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
Thank you. Margo MacDonald will make her substantive speech later. I call Tavish Scott to speak for the Executive. He has eight minutes.
The Deputy Minister for Parliamentary Business (Tavish Scott):
LD
I am grateful for that clarification. To avoid doubt, I had better stick to the ministerial script. Margaret Curran is here to make sure that I do not speak ...
The Minister for Parliamentary Business (Ms Margaret Curran):
Lab
Not a bunch of flowers?
Tavish Scott:
LD
Not a bunch of flowers, but a minute. After all, we are Liberals.Today's debate is about the future of Scotland. Margo MacDonald introduced the topic today b...
Fergus Ewing (Inverness East, Nairn and Lochaber) (SNP):
SNP
We all agree with those sentiments about alcohol, but can the minister reconcile them with the current proposals to remove limitations on opening hours to en...
Tavish Scott:
LD
Mr Ewing should read the bill and the explanatory memorandum—there is a presumption in the bill against 24-hour opening. I state that for the record here and...
Margo MacDonald:
Ind
I hate to be a party pooper; that was an impressive list of objectives and perhaps even half-achievements. However, why does the Executive think so many youn...
Tavish Scott:
LD
I was going to come to exactly that point. Growing the economy is this Government's number 1 objective. When I look at the statistics for the number of gradu...
Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP):
SNP
I have been critical in the past of Executive motions that have lacked a substantive point around which debate can pivot. The last such debate about which I ...
Campbell Martin (West of Scotland) (Ind):
Ind
Will the member give way?
Mr MacAskill:
SNP
Not at the moment.Many people criticise the role of political parties, but political parties are important in the body politic because they provide cohesion ...
George Lyon (Argyll and Bute) (LD):
LD
I have listened with interest to Mr MacAskill's speech. Is not he surely proving that the argument that he continually makes—that more powers and independenc...
Mr MacAskill:
SNP
If the member reads what I have said, he will see that I have never argued for powers and independence on their own. If we do not have the powers we cannot m...
Bill Aitken (Glasgow) (Con):
Con
I like to think that the Conservatives can adopt a rather more constructive approach to the debate than that which was advanced by Mr MacAskill. The debate i...
Tavish Scott:
LD
As far as I am aware, every minister—from the First Minister on—has said that the economy is the number 1 priority of this Administration. Is that not good e...
Bill Aitken:
Con
Of course, words are easy.The Executive claims that economic growth is one of its top priorities; if that is the case, performance belies the statement. In 2...
Fergus Ewing:
SNP
The Scottish National Party agrees that we need to focus on economic growth—as Bill Aitken said—but is the Scottish Conservatives' way to achieve that to fol...
Bill Aitken:
Con
The Conservative group has made clear its commitment to the Parliament and to making it work. Fiscal responsibility requires to be addressed and will be addr...
Mike Rumbles (West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine) (LD):
LD
Will Bill Aitken give way?
Bill Aitken:
Con
No, I have to move on.Scottish Water's performance has been abysmal by any standard, and its inability to provide an economical and satisfactory service to b...
Margo MacDonald:
Ind
Will Bill Aitken give way?
Bill Aitken:
Con
I am sorry, but I am running out of time.Instead of collecting fines by means of deduction from salaries or benefits, the Executive chooses to let them remai...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
We come now to the open debate. The first speeches will be on justice. I intend to call two speakers on the subject: Margo MacDonald will be followed by Kare...
Margo MacDonald:
Ind
I would have liked to answer some of the charges that Mr MacAskill made, but we have tried to give all members an opportunity to speak on subjects on which t...
Karen Whitefield (Airdrie and Shotts) (Lab):
Lab
I welcome the opportunity that the independents group has given me to highlight an issue that I believe reflects and addresses the needs and aspirations of t...
Mike Rumbles:
LD
Let us be clear. Is the member's proposal to close shops on Christmas day and new year's day, or is it just to ensure that people are not forced to work on t...
Karen Whitefield:
Lab
The proposal would prevent shops from opening on Christmas day and new year's day.If, as Margo MacDonald's motion points out, the Parliament exists"to reflec...
Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green):
Green
Although I support, in principle, any measure that allows people to spend more time with their families and friends at times of the year that are special to ...