Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Plenary, 22 Apr 2009

22 Apr 2009 · S3 · Plenary

Item of business

High-speed Rail Services

Gordon, Charlie Lab Glasgow Cathcart Watch on SPTV

As the convener of the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee said, the debate has been timely. When I suggested to the committee that we look into the issue, I wanted to raise the stakes in the debate. I had no idea then that the UK Government would break its policy logjam. If I had known how much work the pesky Climate Change (Scotland) Bill would generate at the same time, I might not have suggested what I suggested—indeed, I might have resigned from the committee.

The debate has been timely; it has also been important. As Des McNulty said, the idea is one whose time has come. I welcome the minister's commitment, as far as it went, that he will say a bit more about the matter in an announcement that he will make soon on national planning framework 2.

Des McNulty called me an old railwayman. I plead guilty on both counts. I think that he meant it as a compliment.

While the country is in a recession, a project of such significance and magnitude could be our Tennessee valley project. I find that interesting.

Alex Johnstone made good points about the environmental drive from the London end, which will mean that many UK opinion formers will not regard Scotland's particular case as being near the back of the queue. He also made the welcome announcement that the Tories think that the railway should come to Scotland. Of course, he was wrong to say that it should go via Leeds, and I will tell members why it must go via Manchester and then up the west coast. It is true that there are no great population centres in the 100 miles between Carlisle and Edinburgh or Carlisle and Glasgow, but, as Rob Gibson said, there is Carstairs junction, which is a significant piece of railway infrastructure. If the Scottish Government's commitment to a 35-minute end-to-end journey between Glasgow and Edinburgh can be adapted, that can be an incremental phase in a high-speed railway, with trains serving both Glasgow and Edinburgh. High-speed trains to both cities would maximise the interchange opportunities for all the other communities in Scotland. It should not be a case of either/or.

Alison McInnes was right: the minister must roll up his sleeves and get a bit more high speed. Rob Gibson was also right about starting the project at both ends. We should not build it from one end in the way that conventional railways are built. Let us build it as we would build a bridge by starting work at both ends and meeting not necessarily in the middle but eventually.

George Foulkes was a wee bit hard on the minister—but hey, that is what he does. He was right to quote the vastly experienced Mr Bostock, who has 30 years' experience of high-speed rail, from the recent issue of Holyrood Magazine. Mr Bostock is in no doubt that the line must go to Scotland via Manchester.

Shirley-Anne Somerville, who is a member of the committee, should have read the committee's report rather than read out lines that party whips give to hacks. For her to say that Scotland is peripheral in the issue is to ignore the compelling logic of a point that Alex Johnstone reminded us about, which is that the people in London who do not want the expansion of Heathrow—I will not go into the merits of that argument—understand that high-speed rail must benefit all parts of the UK before it brings the benefits that they seek in relation to Heathrow. The High Speed Two company has been asked to build a fast track between London and Birmingham, which would reduce the journey time between Glasgow and London by half an hour. That development would bring early benefits to Scotland without rail infrastructure physically coming anywhere near Scotland, and it would get us close to the tipping point in journey times that would shift aviation traffic on to the rails.

Lewis Macdonald made excellent points about connectivity with the rest of Scotland, and Professor Harvie was his usual erudite self. I am sure that he is right that the shrine of high-speed rail will be not France or even his beloved Germany but in fact Japan. I share Tom McCabe's passion for the issue, as well as his frustration. Scottish Labour is committed to high-speed rail, as is the UK Government. When the Scottish Government makes its announcement on national planning framework 2, it should steal a march for Scotland by adapting its current plans into phase 1 of high-speed rail. Let us be high speed about this.

Search Hansard contributions

Plenary, 22 Apr 2009

In the same item of business