Chamber
Plenary, 28 Mar 2007
28 Mar 2007 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Railways
Given that I have no stations in my constituency I, unlike others in this end-of-season debate, cannot be parochial about rail, which is probably just as well. I accept members' concerns and their desire to do more on rail and to see more improvements and a better rail network throughout the country. I do not always agree with Murdo Fraser, but I agree absolutely with him and others who argued in favour of rail being both complementary to other transport modes and a strong alternative to the car. Rail cannot always absolutely displace other forms of transport, but we have to find ways to provide it as a choice, so that we can address wider climate change issues—on which there is probably general cross-party agreement—at the same time as ensuring that we provide the systems for people to use the car, which is still a necessity in many parts of Scotland.
Alex Fergusson is right: for every member who raises a rail issue there is a member who argues the importance of certain road links in Scotland, as Mr Fergusson has done consistently in the two years in which I have been Minister for Transport. That will not stop—nor should it—as we develop our country's economy. I suspect that that is where some of us have a philosophical difference with our Green colleagues.
We all spent quite a lot of money this evening. I saw a few worried looks when Sandra White was holding forth on £200 million here and Mark Ballard mentioned another £15 million to £30 million there. To be fair, Roseanna Cunningham said that one station would cost only £1 million, but we all spent a bit of money.
There are choices to be made. I would love the transport budget to grow even more, but any Government has to make hard choices about rail versus other investments. With the greatest respect, Chris Ballance got the tone wrong. This Government has put 70 per cent of its transport budget into public transport. We have ensured that there has been a fundamental switch in expenditure in that regard. I would have thought that those of us who believe passionately in ensuring that public transport alternatives exist would support that, rather than denigrating it as Chris Ballance did, which was a great shame. I do not and will never agree with the Greens' heads-in-the-sand policy on EARL. The link to Edinburgh airport is one of the most important projects that we will take forward. Those of us on the Executive benches and, to be fair, the Conservatives, who supported the project in Parliament last week, were absolutely right and I hope that we get the project done. I feel strongly about it and I do not agree with either the SNP or the Greens about it.
Mark Ruskell made a good speech. I agreed with many of his arguments and he made powerful points. I believe that a renaissance in rail is happening. We are ensuring that the investment is there and will continue to do so.
As I said earlier in the debate on the Airdrie-Bathgate Railway and Linked Improvements Bill—Mark Ruskell also made this argument—stations must be transport interchanges where we can ensure that different modes of transport connect. I accept what Roseanna Cunningham said about circumstances where that is not happening. We do not have it right everywhere by any means. However, we will take forward the options in different localities in Scotland to the best of our ability.
I take the point that Rob Gibson and others made about regional transport strategies. I understand members' concerns. As we said at question time last week, when Mark Ruskell pursued the issue, there will be opportunities to ensure that the transport strategies reflect the needs of local people. However, hard choices will always have to be made about transport expenditure. For every occasion that Mr Gibson has raised the issue of rail in the north, Mr Ewing and others have raised the issue of investment in roads. They have every right to do that—I would never attack that—but that is what choices are about and we will have to continue to take that approach in the coming years.
Alex Fergusson is right: for every member who raises a rail issue there is a member who argues the importance of certain road links in Scotland, as Mr Fergusson has done consistently in the two years in which I have been Minister for Transport. That will not stop—nor should it—as we develop our country's economy. I suspect that that is where some of us have a philosophical difference with our Green colleagues.
We all spent quite a lot of money this evening. I saw a few worried looks when Sandra White was holding forth on £200 million here and Mark Ballard mentioned another £15 million to £30 million there. To be fair, Roseanna Cunningham said that one station would cost only £1 million, but we all spent a bit of money.
There are choices to be made. I would love the transport budget to grow even more, but any Government has to make hard choices about rail versus other investments. With the greatest respect, Chris Ballance got the tone wrong. This Government has put 70 per cent of its transport budget into public transport. We have ensured that there has been a fundamental switch in expenditure in that regard. I would have thought that those of us who believe passionately in ensuring that public transport alternatives exist would support that, rather than denigrating it as Chris Ballance did, which was a great shame. I do not and will never agree with the Greens' heads-in-the-sand policy on EARL. The link to Edinburgh airport is one of the most important projects that we will take forward. Those of us on the Executive benches and, to be fair, the Conservatives, who supported the project in Parliament last week, were absolutely right and I hope that we get the project done. I feel strongly about it and I do not agree with either the SNP or the Greens about it.
Mark Ruskell made a good speech. I agreed with many of his arguments and he made powerful points. I believe that a renaissance in rail is happening. We are ensuring that the investment is there and will continue to do so.
As I said earlier in the debate on the Airdrie-Bathgate Railway and Linked Improvements Bill—Mark Ruskell also made this argument—stations must be transport interchanges where we can ensure that different modes of transport connect. I accept what Roseanna Cunningham said about circumstances where that is not happening. We do not have it right everywhere by any means. However, we will take forward the options in different localities in Scotland to the best of our ability.
I take the point that Rob Gibson and others made about regional transport strategies. I understand members' concerns. As we said at question time last week, when Mark Ruskell pursued the issue, there will be opportunities to ensure that the transport strategies reflect the needs of local people. However, hard choices will always have to be made about transport expenditure. For every occasion that Mr Gibson has raised the issue of rail in the north, Mr Ewing and others have raised the issue of investment in roads. They have every right to do that—I would never attack that—but that is what choices are about and we will have to continue to take that approach in the coming years.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Trish Godman):
Lab
The final item of business today is a members' business debate on motion S2M-5762, in the name of Mark Ruskell, on reconnecting communities by rail. The deba...
Motion debated,
That the Parliament welcomes the work undertaken by communities across Scotland to enhance the rail network; recognises in particular the long-standing need ...
Mr Mark Ruskell (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green):
Green
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 th...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
We move to the debate; speeches will be three minutes.
Roseanna Cunningham (Perth) (SNP):
SNP
I congratulate Mark Ruskell on securing the debate. Given the bill that Parliament passed this afternoon, it is particularly appropriate that we continue to ...
Mr Ted Brocklebank (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):
Con
I congratulate Mark Ruskell on securing the debate. Of course, no group in the Parliament has a God-given right to give itself the "green" accolade—and I say...
Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP):
SNP
Will the member give way?
Mr Brocklebank:
Con
I would rather not; I have only three minutes.I realise that, as a single car occupier, I am doing little to cut emissions or, for that matter, to help the o...
Mr Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD):
LD
I, too, congratulate Mark Ruskell on securing the last members' business debate in this session of Parliament and endorse his remarks about freight on rail.I...
Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):
Con
Not by the member, I am sure.
Mr Stone:
LD
I hasten to assure Mr Fraser about that.Mr McMorran's point was that we need somebody to own the building, in the sense of use and maintenance, as well as in...
Christine May (Central Fife) (Lab):
Lab
I, too, congratulate Mark Ruskell on securing the last members' business debate of the session. I was pleased to sign his motion. My interest in rail goes ba...
Ms Sandra White (Glasgow) (SNP):
SNP
I, too, congratulate Mark Ruskell on securing this debate on reconnecting communities by rail. I hope that other MSPs will not mind a Glasgow MSP intruding o...
Mark Ballard (Lothians) (Green):
Green
I join other members in congratulating Mark Ruskell on securing the debate and on highlighting the desire of communities throughout Scotland to be reconnecte...
Stewart Stevenson:
SNP
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I wonder whether I might take the liberty of moving a motion without notice that the debate be extended until five to...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
It is not possible for me to extend the debate—I am doing the best I can. If you had not stood up and taken so long, I could probably have got somebody else ...
Iain Smith (North East Fife) (LD):
LD
Thank you, Presiding Officer. I will try to be brief to help you get someone else into the debate.I, too, congratulate Mark Ruskell on securing the final mem...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
You should be finishing now, Mr Smith.
Iain Smith:
LD
I have had only two and a half minutes, but I will finish with a final comment.The Levenmouth development is important because it would have significant rege...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
I call Rob Gibson. If members stick to their times I will manage to get everyone in.
Rob Gibson (Highlands and Islands) (SNP):
SNP
I welcome the chance to speak in the debate and congratulate Mark Ruskell on securing it.I am glad that there is such a positive attitude in Mid Scotland and...
Chris Ballance (South of Scotland) (Green):
Green
I will speak quickly in support of the motion in the name of my colleague Mark Ruskell. Communities throughout Scotland have campaigned hard to expand their ...
Tricia Marwick (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP):
SNP
I congratulate Mark Ruskell on securing the debate.I will start with a declaration of interest: I believe in rail travel and I travel by rail every day. I th...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Lab
I call Alex Fergusson, to be followed—very briefly—by Murdo Fraser.
Alex Fergusson (Galloway and Upper Nithsdale) (Con):
Con
I will be as brief as I possibly can be. I congratulate Mark Ruskell on securing the debate. I have every intention of being as parochial as Roseanna Cunning...
Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con):
Con
I will be succinct in my remarks, although I fear that, on this occasion, I might not be able to take any interventions. I commend Mark Ruskell for the motio...
The Minister for Transport (Tavish Scott):
LD
Given that I have no stations in my constituency I, unlike others in this end-of-season debate, cannot be parochial about rail, which is probably just as wel...
Mr Ruskell:
Green
The regional transport plans will be submitted to the minister this week. What is his view of transport plans that put forward projects that are not yet in s...
Tavish Scott:
LD
It is important that there is consistency between documents. That is in the interests of regional transport partnerships and their constituent councils in re...