MSP's PRESSED ON RAIL LINK

[berwickspotter]

The following news comes from todays teletext

A Borders councillor has written to all of scotlands 129 msp's in a bid to stop
the waverley rail line going ahead.
NICHOLAS WATSON claims the railway is unwanted and is a waste of £300m.
The Borders party member organised a public debate about the plans
and found the vast majority of residents were opposed to the reintroduction
of trains between Edinbrgh and Tweedbank

YOUR VIEWS PLEASE..............

 

[Greenback]

He is entitled ot his opinion. Of course, anyone canvassing people who have gone to a public meeting against the rail link, is likely to find people in agreement, otherwise they probably wouldn't have gone!

 

[Aictos]

What is a waste of our money is paying un-needed expenses for MPs of all parties - they are on much better money so shouldn't be any reason why they can't pay out of their own pockets like the rest of us have to!
By cutting all expenses, we would save quite a bit which would go into improving the country and not to people who don't really need it - MPs are like benefit cheats, they claim for money that they have no right to do so.

 

[route:oxford]

The following news comes from todays teletext

A Borders councillor has written to all of scotlands 129 msp's in a bid to stop
the waverley rail line going ahead.
NICHOLAS WATSON claims the railway is unwanted and is a waste of £300m.
The Borders party member organised a public debate about the plans
and found the vast majority of residents were opposed to the reintroduction
of trains between Edinbrgh and Tweedbank

YOUR VIEWS PLEASE..............

Much in the same that for 20 years councillors were saying that the Alloa rail link was unwanted and that noone would use it...

 

[tbtc]

Fair enough.

On a purely railway basis, it's a lot of money considering what it is - £300m could be spent a lot better elsewhere.

However on a "political"/ "social" basis, there's an argument that the Borders are a big area without any railway.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Much in the same that for 20 years councillors were saying that the Alloa rail link was unwanted and that noone would use it...

True, but at least the Alloa line was an existing railway and only a short extension from Stirling.

Just because the Alloa line was a sucess doesn't automatically mean that anything currently expected to give poor cost/ benefit ratio would work

 

[dave12435]

Unwanted??
tell that to the towns and villages along the route that have said there communities dies after it closed

 

[berwickspotter]

Unwanted??
tell that to the towns and villages along the route that have said there communities dies after it closed

Very true. I walked part of the waverley line last summer and it was sad to see the buildings, bridges, etc not being used any more:cry:

 

[me123]

To be honest, I'd rather that that was cancelled instead of GARL. The benefits of GARL are greater, especially with the Commonwealth Games coming up.

There seems to be a lot of problems with this line. Some sources say it's wanted, other don't. Why you wouldn't want it is beyond me; the trains will beat the current buses by quite a bit. It will serve a huge population, create lots of jobs and open up a huge commuter corridor to Edinburgh. But it is being done on the cheap; it's mostly single track and non-electrified line, which will need upgraded in the future.

If they really don't want it, though, scrap it and give us back GARL! Better use of money. But, seeing as how that councillor is biased, perhaps his sources are equally biased, and perhaps there are people who want the link.

 

[90019]

But it is being done on the cheap

Why am I not at all surprised about that?

Any bets it'll end up being over-budget as well? :roll:

 

[gingerheid]

People who have cars and live in rural areas next to where the tracks will be don't want it.

Someone who lives in a building built on the site of one of the intended stations and will be subject to a CPO doesn't want it.

Various other people won't want it either; people that commute happily by car, people that never go to Edinburgh because it's big and scary and miles away, people that don't want their village to become a dormitory town for Edinburgh.

But other than that, every new rail link or station built or reopened in Scotland over the last 20 years (and there's been an impressive number) has been a resounding success. The only problems there have been have been things like overcrowding and the need to add extra stations to new lines.

Now I know that doesn't mean the borders rail link will be too as it's different in nature to the others, and I actually worry that it might be the exception to the rule. But I reckon it'll be well patronised whatever happens. My fear is that's it's too rural an area and that the linespeed is too slow. But on the other hand, the Invernet project did well, and that was about increasing services in a very rural area with a very relaxed linespeed to a sort of usable level.

What they should be campaigning for is a whole Borders rail link not the Borders Rail Half-link that is being proposed. If it extended to Carlisle on decent quality track it could offer wonderful things for the area and for Scotland as a whole.

 

[Greenback]

It's rare that 100% of people are in fvour of something, there's always an alternatvie view. This is why the biger picture needs to be looked at. I think that the Scottish Parliament is looking at the Borders link as a tactical issue, when it may well provide more benefits as a strategic through link with Carlisle. Would this be politically acceptable though???

 

[yorkie]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/8306486.stm

Rail route 'value' query for MSPs

A councillor has written to all of Scotland's 129 MSPs urging them to reconsider plans to reopen a railway line to the Scottish Borders.

Borders Party member Nicholas Watson wants the project reviewed after plans for the Glasgow Airport link were scrapped.

He has questioned whether the Edinburgh to Tweedbank line is "value for money".

Construction work on the £295m project is due to start in 2011 with completion expected in 2013.

The Scottish government announced it had dropped the Glasgow Airport rail link plans last month.

Mr Watson said the Borders project should be compared with that scheme and others to see if it should be taken any further.

Economic test

"Even if the economy is starting to recover, it's very clear that public finances will be under enormous pressure over the years to come," he said. "What we are asking for is not for the railway to be scrapped. "But we are asking that the Borders railway should be tested against all other big capital projects in Scotland to see whether or not it offers value for money."

The Scottish government has reaffirmed its commitment to the rail line in south east Scotland.

Last month south of Scotland SNP MSP Christine Grahame confirmed that the multi-million pound project remained on track.

This does seem a rather odd action for someone who himself "arrived in the Borders by train and just remembers riding his tricycle down Melrose station platform in the snow", he wants to make sure that there are no more newcomers, like he once was, to the Borders arriving by train.

The main reason he does not want the railway line to be rebuilt appears to be cause he fears that if it is built, then more houses will be built in the area, which he does not want. I suspect he can afford to run a car so it won't affect him that his constituents who do not will have to continue to endure a bus journey if the line is not built.

Perhaps it's a shame there wasn't someone like him around before he moved to the area, to ensure that he himself didn't move there and, even worse, arrive by train! Now that would have been ironic!

His right-wing party want to upgrade the A7 and or A68 instead. They claim that "Trains are heavy consumers of diesel and the overall pollution per passenger would far exceed that of a bus service" yet trains are more fuel-efficient than buses. They claim that it is more environmentally friendly if all commuters use cars instead! They also claim that the railway will increase car journeys.

If the people of the Borders area really do think like him, then I say scrap it and let us have the money in Yorkshire instead to reopen the Hull-York via Market Weighton line, I think that'd cost significantly less too, and we'd not moan about it! Can someone stop giving money to people who don't want it and let us have some new railway schemes where we actually want it please?

 

[Aictos]

One line that should come back but won't due to be being built on is the former March to Spalding line, would certainly help as a bypass for freight which don't use the yards at Peterborough plus act as a useful diversionary route for engineering works as it would mean though trains no longer having to go via Peterborough and having more long distance services terminate and start there.

Or how about finally electrifiying Norwich to Ely, Ely to Peterborough via March which would all help, 91s and though services on diversions anyone?

Still, if the Liverpool to Norwich route/Birminhgam to Stansted route gets OHL, then maybe, just maybe they would get EMUs instead

 

[tbtc]

To be honest, I'd rather that that was cancelled instead of GARL. The benefits of GARL are greater, especially with the Commonwealth Games coming up

For the cost of the GARL, you could have given each Commonwealth delegate a new car when they touched down at Paisley...

It will serve a huge population,

There's a lot of people (100,000+), but spread out - a line from Gala to Einburgh is little use for people in Peebles or Coldstream. It's a shame that the speeds wouldn't be good enough to enable an Edinburgh - Gala - Carlisle service compete with the existing route past Carstairs (I know they're not planning on building to Carlisle etc)

 

[yorksrob]

I think wherever you have a large expensive project there will always be people who feel the money would be better spent elsewhere. Bearing in mind Mr Watson's party only won two out of thirty four councillors during the last local election (2007) we should probably assume that there aren't too many people agreeing with him - at least until the views of the population are canvassed more methodically.

Personally I think it would make sense for structures such as bridges to be built to double track dimensions so as not to jeopardise future extension. I also think it's telling that the original line closed so late - 1969, when so many of the missing links which should never have been closed were shut.

 

[harz99]

It's rare that 100% of people are in fvour of something, there's always an alternatvie view. This is why the biger picture needs to be looked at. I think that the Scottish Parliament is looking at the Borders link as a tactical issue, when it may well provide more benefits as a strategic through link with Carlisle. Would this be politically acceptable though???

All the time the SNP have power, almost certainly not acceptable - their only interest in public transport is to get people into the central belt and Edinburgh in particular.

The SNP would never wish to be seen building a link which would enable Scots to "escape" across the border to England - heaven forbid!

 

[90019]

The SNP would never wish to be seen building a link which would enable Scots to "escape" across the border to England - heaven forbid!

Why on earth would we want to go to England!

 

[royaloak]

More to the point, why would we want you!
We have enough political refugees as it is


PS only joking, I think Scotland is a wonderful place!

 

[me123]

All the time the SNP have power, almost certainly not acceptable - their only interest in public transport is to get people into the central belt and Edinburgh in particular.

The SNP would never wish to be seen building a link which would enable Scots to "escape" across the border to England - heaven forbid!

SNP don't have a problem with England. They have a problem with the UK. And they don't have all the power; they're a minority government which needs the backing of at least one other major political party to get anything through; everything from new rail links to minimum pricing of alcohol to an independence referendum needs parliamentary backing. They must therefore have the support of Lib, Lab or Con to do just about anything.

And the anti-Glasgow argument doesn't work. It's well known that the SNP opposed the Edinburgh trams, and only continued them because it had gone too far by the time they could do anything; they'd already thrown too much money at the trams. And when you consider public transport in Glasgow to public transport in Edinburgh, you'll see which one really needs further expansion.

 

[harz99]

SNP don't have a problem with England. They have a problem with the UK. And they don't have all the power; they're a minority government which needs the backing of at least one other major political party to get anything through; everything from new rail links to minimum pricing of alcohol to an independence referendum needs parliamentary backing. They must therefore have the support of Lib, Lab or Con to do just about anything.

And the anti-Glasgow argument doesn't work. It's well known that the SNP opposed the Edinburgh trams, and only continued them because it had gone too far by the time they could do anything; they'd already thrown too much money at the trams. And when you consider public transport in Glasgow to public transport in Edinburgh, you'll see which one really needs further expansion.

I never said they have ALL the power, and yes I agree they need others votes to get their way - shame Mr Salmond doesn't seem to recognise his lack of a mandate though!

I also never said anything about Glasgow! I stay in rural South West Scotland, and with the possible exception of Dumfries - which just happens to be the local authority seat of power - we who stay in this region are being royally shafted at all turns by the SNP. The downgrading from national status of the Stranraer Waterfront proposals being the worst example.

Could have something to do with us having the temerity to elect tory Alex Fergusson as our MSP...................

 

[me123]

You were certainly bordering on the anti-Glasgow argument; the other side of that is that everything goes to Edinburgh. It's an argument that's, frankly, rubbish.

I don't have much experience of the South West but I can say that, in Lanarkshire and Glasgow, things have improved in the SNP administration from the Lib-Lab coalition. Rural SW Scotland is a rural area I've never heard the SNP go on about; they seem to do well in the Highlands and Isles which is similarly rural, but of course your area's completely different. I'd be foolish to try and discuss this because, simply, I can't find enough information either way regarding the SNP in that area. You should vote for who you want to and, if they're not doing the best job for your area, you shouldn't vote for them.

What I will say; you can hardly criticise the SNP's power or "meddling" in non-devolved affairs when you consider that Labour in Westminster (and the Tories before them) had a majority government and could, should they desire, bypass the entire democratic process and push through anything they want to.

BTW, all the work for an independence referendum isn't without a mandate; as they have been democratically elected into government, they have every mandate to work towards their manifesto commitment. It's their job!

 

[harz99]

Rural SW Scotland is a rural area I've never heard the SNP go on about; they seem to do well in the Highlands and Isles which is similarly rural, but of course your area's completely different. I'd be foolish to try and discuss this because, simply, I can't find enough information either way regarding the SNP in that area.

QUITE, THEY HAVE NIL INTEREST IN OUR AREA! NOT ENOUGH VOTES TO BE HAD?

BTW, all the work for an independence referendum isn't without a mandate; as they have been democratically elected into government, they have every mandate to work towards their manifesto commitment. It's their job!

Please don't attempt to put words into my mouth, I made no reference at all to independence, and have no wish to discuss that.

What I will say, is democratically elected or not, the SNP have a minority both in terms of voter% of the eligible voters and in terms of seats, nothing will change that until the next Scottish elections.

My previous comments (one albiet tongue in cheek) are all in relation to transport matters, which is the point of this forum, not political diatribe.

 

[me123]

I was just pre-empting what you may have been getting at; they get a hell of a lot of random abuse the SNP (alongside some justified criticisms). Generally, when you hear this rather poor "no mandate" argument, people go on about independence, and rarely mention their other policies. I wasn't intending to "put words into your mouth".

On transport, I believe that there's actually a lot of parliamentary thoughts going into the Ayr-Stranraer rail timetable. It's not well used because it's so irregular and therefore there looks set to be a full recast down that way to improve journey options. I've had a look, and there's mixed messages from the SNP to your area. They want to reopen some stations on the existing line via Dumfries and have mentioned improving services to Stranraer, but none of this has yet come to fruition, and they haven't spoken much about Lockerbie station.