Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129

Current MSPs

415

MSPs ever elected

13

Parties on record

2,354,908

Hansard contributions

1999–2026

Coverage span

Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Showing 43 of 2,354,908 contributions. Latest 30 days: 0. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 25 Mar 2026.

Bill Butler (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab): Lab Committee

I am equally happy to be here. I suppose that I drew a medium-sized straw in that the SAK bill took just about a year to deal with—a bit longer than the time that Rhona Brankin's committee took to deal with its bill and considerably shorter than the time that the Waverley Rail...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

That will be in order. We will refer to the document as SAK/S2/04/3/88A. Reference will also be made to SAK/S2/04/3/87.Do you wish to ask questions at this juncture?

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

Are you referring to paper SAK/S2/04/4/11 or SAK/S2/04/4/19, Mr Bisset?

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

Thank you. You will have a chance to question other witnesses.I have a couple of questions for Mr Coventry. Paragraph 40 of Mr and Mrs Brewerton's evidence—paper SAK/S2/04/4/26—refers to the use of HTA wagons. That point is covered in paragraph 22 of your evidence in document ...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Proposed Amendment

The committee has paper SAK/S2/04/7/1, which explains the background to the objection from Mr Brydie and Mr Anderson to the proposed amendment about the Balfour Street level-crossing. We are invited to give the objection preliminary consideration and to consider the supplement...

Bill Butler Lab Committee

Current Petitions

Yes. Perhaps this is more for the conclusion of the discussion but, with regard to what Mr McAulay said about dealing with the present situation, a short to medium-term action has to be taken. I am aware that Transport Scotland and Clackmannanshire Council are working together...

Bill Butler: Lab Committee

My view is that there should be one approach to the process. I believe, as did the SAK bill committee, that the Transport and Works Act 1992 in England and Wales sets out the way in which detailed scrutiny of infrastructure projects of all types, varieties and sizes should tak...

Bill Butler: Lab Committee

In terms of what the bill could or could not do, I can set out the process that the SAK bill committee went through. The principles of the bill were established by the Parliament in the preliminary stage and, during the consideration stage, I ensured that people did not stray ...

Bill Butler: Lab Committee

Legal representation for individuals and private objectors should be considered in the context of the provision of legal aid—I have no objection to that. All committee conveners would give the maximum latitude to individuals who are not represented. The SAK bill committee was ...

Bill Butler: Lab Committee

I agree. The procedure that Bruce McFee described would lead to that situation between two well-paid sets of individuals. There is no real level playing field. I and the rest of the SAK bill committee members were impressed by at least one or two of the objectors, who gave as ...

Bill Butler: Lab Committee

Yes, there is absolutely no doubt about that. Although a considerable amount of work takes place at the preliminary stage, the consideration stage is much more onerous on members. I think that I am right in saying that we had four evidence-taking sessions at the consideration ...

Bill Butler: Lab Committee

The promoter would be averse to change, because it wants to promote the infrastructure development in question. However, I do not think that change is impossible.For example, if there are new objectors, who had not been identified because, for example, the promoter had not tol...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Preliminary Stage

Mr Hackett remains under oath.I will kick off the questions and start with a small point. I do not follow the first sentence of paragraph 5 in memorandum SAK/S2/03/4/4. Is it incomplete, or do I misread it?

The Convener (Bill Butler): Lab Committee

Consideration Stage Timetable

Good afternoon. I welcome committee members and members of the public to the Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill Committee's second meeting of 2004. I ask members and the public to ensure that mobile phones are turned off. As four committee members a...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Proposed Amendment

The committee is asked to consider its response to the explanatory memorandum that it considered at our last meeting, when we heard oral evidence from Alison Gorlov, the parliamentary agent for the promoter, on the Balfour Street accommodation crossing and the need for an amen...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Proposed Amendment

On the arrangements that are to be made by the promoter to notify affected persons, is the committee agreed that the promoter should carry out the notification arrangements that are outlined in paragraph 28 of paper SAK/S2/04/1/1 by issuing an affected persons notice to those ...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

Before I give Mr Abercrombie the opportunity to ask questions that might have arisen from the evidence that we have just heard, I have a question. Mr Ness, in paragraph 2.19 of Diageo's written submission, you deal with alternative routes. You return to the issue in SAK/S2/04/...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

Before I let Mr Martin back in, I have a question for Mr West. You will have seen that, in SAK/S2/04/3/6, Diageo is requesting that the committee satisfy itself that the promoter's preferred route is the best and most cost-effective solution. Can you provide the committee with...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

I thank everyone for their indulgence. We were just trying to clarify something there. I want to come back to Mr West on a couple of questions about document SAK/S2/04/3/10. Why was the route to the west rejected?

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

I have a number of questions to ask Ms Hamilton.Paragraph 10 of your evidence paper SAK/S2/04/3/7 refers to figure 2.1, sheet 10 of 17, in volume 1 of the environmental statement. It is difficult for us to pinpoint on figure 2.1 the numbered housing sites to which you refer la...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

Yes. Paragraph 10 of your evidence paper SAK/S2/04/3/7 refers to figure 2.1, sheet 10 of 17, in volume 1 of the environmental statement. It is difficult for us to pinpoint the numbered housing sites to which you refer later in the paragraph on figure 2.1. Could you help us out...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

We reconvene after that brief break, during which we were trying to get matters absolutely clear in the committee's collective mind. We got a little confused, but I ask Mr West to help us out by clarifying matters. Mr Martin asked whether a route to the west of line 4 in docum...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

I think that my colleague is referring to the 10th paragraph of SAK 84.

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

Are you referring to document SAK 87?

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

Thank you. That was very much to the point. As I said, no one is here to lead evidence from your group, so before I ask Mr Martin whether he has any questions perhaps I can ask you about a few specific points. The committee has read your objections and all the detailed evidenc...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

You have seen the latest evidence from the promoter on the loss of amenity, which is contained in document SAK/S2/04/3/87. Is there anything in it on which you provided written evidence and on which you would like to comment?

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

We move on to the subject of alternative routes. Mr Adam, you will have seen the latest evidence from the promoter, which is contained in paper SAK/S2/04/3/87. Is there anything in that paper, relating to alternative routes, on which you would like to comment in the context of...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

Certainly. It is paper SAK/S2/04/3/88A.

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

I think that you must ask the questions, Mr Adam. The document is numbered SAK/S2/04/3/49.

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

I thank Ms Martin and Mr Milligan for attending. They are here to give evidence for the group 4 objectors. Mr Milligan will give evidence on human rights and consultation and Ms Martin will give evidence on the issue of proximity of property to the railway. We will take the th...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

Okay. We now move to the subject of consultation. Mr Milligan, in the light of the promoter's evidence in paper SAK/S2/04/3/87, do you want to highlight anything in or add to your evidence?

The Convener: Lab Committee

Proposed Amendment

Prior to the main business of the day, the committee will consider a paper from the promoter on the Balfour Street level-crossing and a proposed amendment to the bill. The committee will hear from Alison Gorlov from John Kennedy & Co, the promoter's parliamentary agent.Mrs Gor...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

We will move on to group 18.The committee does not intend to hear evidence on sections 6 and 7 of Mr Bisset's written paper, SAK/S2/04/4/14. The sections relate to the general principles of the scheme, which have already been agreed by the Parliament.The witnesses for the prom...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

Thank you very much for appearing before us.That concludes the evidence for group 8, which is the last group to be considered today. I thank all witnesses and their representatives for their attendance and contributions. The committee will consider all evidence in due course. ...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

I have a couple of questions for Ms Whitworth.Paragraph 4 of the promoter's evidence SAK/S2/04/4/30 states that no decision has yet been made on the provision of air-conditioning in Mr and Mrs Brewerton's house. For the benefit of the committee, will you explain why no decisio...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

I understand that. I only mentioned air-conditioning because you did. In paragraph 7 of your paper, you answer the question that is asked in paragraphs 19 and 20 of SAK/S2/04/4/26. However, that answer leads to another question. If acceleration is taking place, there will pres...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

Thank you for that. In addition to compensation for depreciation in property values, the objectors are looking for compensation for the emotional stress that they contend they have suffered. That is mentioned in paragraph 48.8 of committee paper SAK/S2/04/4/26. In your experie...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

I have a few questions for Mr and Mrs Brewerton. In paragraph 4 of your written evidence—SAK/S2/04/4/26—you state:"We neither question the basis for the calculation of the noise levels since CRN was used, nor do we question the methodology of calculation. However we do questio...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

I am grateful for that response. Paragraph 8 of document SAK/S2/04/4/26 refers to information from Network Rail on noise impacts. It might be buried somewhere in the paperwork that we have, but can you tell us the source of the information and whether it is already before the ...

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

It would be helpful if you could do that. Paragraph 3 of your response to the promoter's evidence, in document SAK/S2/04/4/29, describes difficulties with fencing. Will you remind me of the level of your property in comparison with that of the railway line?

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

We have a copy of document SAK/S2/04/5/14A here and we will take it into consideration.

The Convener: Lab Committee

Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine Railway and Linked Improvements Bill: Consideration Stage

We are puzzled. In relation to paragraph 2.4 of document SAK/S2/04/5/14 you referred to four level-crossings, but it seems to us that only three are seen as AHB and the one at Kincardine Station Road is seen differently.

Bill Butler: Lab Committee

Perhaps we could link the petition to PE1273, which is specifically about the Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine line.I agree with John Wilson about writing to the Scottish Government and a variety of councils including Clackmannanshire Council. I suggest that, when we write to the Sco...

← Back to list

Committee

Procedures Committee, 09 Nov 2004

09 Nov 2004 · S2 · Procedures Committee

Item of business

Private Bills

Butler, Bill Lab Glasgow Anniesland Watch on SPTV

I am equally happy to be here. I suppose that I drew a medium-sized straw in that the SAK bill took just about a year to deal with—a bit longer than the time that Rhona Brankin's committee took to deal with its bill and considerably shorter than the time that the Waverley Railway (Scotland) Bill Committee, for example, is taking to deal with its bill.As colleagues will know, the SAK bill was the first works bill to be introduced in the Parliament. The SAK bill committee was concerned that the amount of work involved placed a strain on not only members but the resources of the Parliament. So concerned was the committee that all members—Richard Baker was one of them—agreed that I as the convener should write to the Presiding Officer expressing our concerns. The final paragraph of my letter of 17 June says:"the whole procedure (including whether to go down a Transport and Works Act type route) needs to be re-examined with a view to a new procedure being established that achieves proper scrutiny of complex projects without overloading the work of the Parliament and its members."Given that that was the considered view of the committee, I am delighted that the Procedures Committee has decided to scrutinise the private bill procedure to see whether there is another way of dealing with private bills.

In the same item of business

The Convener: LD

Item 2 is our private bills inquiry, for which two panels will give evidence. The first panel comprises John Thomson, who is the west areas director, and Pau...

John Thomson (Scottish Natural Heritage):

I will keep my comments brief. We have three concerns about the procedures and the way in which they operate. First, they do not ensure that environmental co...

The Convener: LD

Does anyone from Historic Scotland wish to make a few opening remarks?

Lily Linge (Historic Scotland):

I have little to add to the views that we have set out in our submission, on which we stand.

Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab): Lab

How does your consultation involvement in the private bill process differ from that in a public inquiry about major roadworks, for example? Are there lessons...

John Thomson:

I will refer the question about roads procedures to my colleague Paul Lewis, because he is more familiar with those than I am.The planning system is the rout...

Paul Lewis (Scottish Natural Heritage):

The road orders process builds in consultation with us in the same way. For instance, we have been consulted on the road orders for the second Forth crossing...

Mr Bruce McFee (West of Scotland) (SNP): SNP

You advocate an environmental impact study to accompany an application or a bill. Who would be responsible for undertaking that study and how would you test ...

John Thomson:

The responsibility for undertaking an assessment would rest with the promoter—the developer. In advising local authorities in planning cases, we would expect...

Mr McFee: SNP

Given that the onus to provide information and to undertake an assessment lies in different places, how can that all be rolled into one?

John Thomson:

The onus to ensure that environmental information is made available is on the developer. We hope that any refinement of procedures would require the develope...

Karen Gillon: Lab

So, in essence, you are suggesting a procedure similar to what currently exists in the planning system. You would be the statutory consultees, we would take ...

John Thomson:

That is broadly what we are suggesting. It would rationalise the procedure and ensure that the environmental aspects were teased out adequately, but it would...

The Convener: LD

One of your suggestions is that SNH, Historic Scotland and other statutory bodies should be involved at an earlier stage and be consulted by the developer. A...

John Thomson:

We can fairly claim that we are familiar with that double role—exactly the same arrangement applies under planning legislation. We have to be careful in our ...

The Convener: LD

If Mairi Black and Lily Linge want to add anything at any point, they should just chip in. Are there any other questions from members?

Richard Baker: Lab

Obviously, the process is different in England, where there is no such private bill procedure. Are you aware of any satisfactory process south of the border ...

John Thomson:

Again, I will refer that question to Paul Lewis. He has been in touch with our sister agencies to find out what has happened in England, because one of our f...

Paul Lewis:

There is not much to add to that. Certainly, English Nature and the Countryside Agency felt that they were thoroughly engaged. For such a considerable engine...

Richard Baker: Lab

So the fact that the process changed from being a parliamentary one to a planning one did not lead to a diminution of consultation with those agencies.

John Thomson:

I am not fully familiar with the nature of the process in England; you are probably better informed about it than I am. However, the need for adequate enviro...

Lily Linge:

Having glanced through the legislation, I think that there seem to be adequate technical provisions in the Transport and Works Act 1992 for consultation with...

Mr Jamie McGrigor (Highlands and Islands) (Con): Con

You mentioned the possibility of things being overlooked because of a lack of consultation. Can you give any practical examples of where that might have happ...

John Thomson:

Again, I refer that question to Paul Lewis, who has had more detailed involvement with the schemes that have followed the procedure than I have.

Paul Lewis:

The problems tend to be twofold. One problem is a lack of detail about what is proposed and a lack of an adequate assessment of that detail. For example, one...

John Thomson:

Our experience with other major road development schemes, such as the M74 upgrade, suggests that issues often arise about the way in which activities are und...

Lily Linge:

We appreciate that private bills establish the principle of a development and that consequently there is a limit to how much detail about costly work the pro...

The Convener: LD

Can you expand slightly on that important point? What exactly do you mean? What is the difference between the bill process and the planning process for a roa...

Lily Linge:

Generally speaking, the planning authority will attach a set of conditions to the consent for a planning project and the development will have to take place ...

Mr McGrigor: Con

You gave the example of the way in which a development may be carried out. Surely impacts such as damage to boggy ground would be covered by the impositions ...