The next petition is PE894, in which Rob Gibson has expressed a particular interest. It is by the association of Caithness community councils, and it calls for the Scottish Parliament to consider investment in infrastructure, rolling stock and timetabling as part of a strategic root-and-branch review of the provision of rail services between Inverness, Thurso and Wick, with unrestricted thinking—that is a lovely phrase—on how best to shorten journey times and ensure the continuing future of the railway to those destinations. Thought should also be given to ensuring that the existing communities of the Lairg loop are provided for.Committee members received written submissions from the Highlands and Islands strategic transport partnership on 25 April 2007, from Caithness Partnership on 4 and 15 June and from the petitioner on 22 September. We have also received a number of unsolicited responses that support a Dornoch rail link and draw attention to the consultation process undertaken by HITRANS.Do members have any strong views? I am sure that, as the Green committee member, Robin has a view.
Official Report · Committee
Current Petitions
Railway Infrastructure and Services (Inverness, Thurso and Wick) (PE894)
Speakers
Choose an MSP to read only their contributions- Frank McAveety Lab 4
- Rhoda Grant Lab 2
- John Farquhar Munro LD 2
- Robin Harper Green 1
- Rob Gibson SNP 1
The record
10 contributionsAs someone who has travelled frequently on the network in question and who intends to travel on it during the coming break, I sympathise with the petitioners. Network Rail is making general improvements to parts of the line that runs along the coast, but a reduction in journey times, in particular, would meet with considerable approval in the Highlands—I speak as a visitor, rather than a resident, although I was born in Thurso.
Substantial work is needed on the petition. The speeding up of journey times would be a huge improvement and would open up the north. Much work is going on to consider economic development in the area in the context of the decommissioning of Dounreay. The rail line and journey times are important.I have concerns about the Lairg loop. It would be wrong to have a crossing of the Dornoch Firth that bypassed Lairg, because the Lairg area needs good transport links. Sutherland is probably more economically deprived than other areas.We should refer the petition to the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee. I know that the Public Petitions Committee does not often refer petitions, but the work that is needed falls outwith the scope of this committee and would benefit from the scrutiny of a subject committee.
The issue has been on the agenda of Highland Council and Network Rail for many years. I am sympathetic to the implementation of any measure that could cut journey times between destinations. It is estimated that the journey time between the far north and Inverness could be cut by half an hour or more.Like Rhoda Grant, I am conscious of the problem that would be created by a crossing of the Dornoch Firth that cut out the Lairg loop, which has been served by rail for many years. However, we cannot halt progress. There is a strong lobby for a rail crossing of the Dornoch Firth in the communities of Caithness, Sutherland and the wider Highlands. We could support such a crossing. I am not sure to whom we should refer the petition, but I note the suggestion that it be referred first to the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee of the Scottish Parliament.
If no other member of the committee wants to comment, I will bring in Rob Gibson, who has expressed an interest in the petition.
Thank you. I have been involved with the issue for a while, but now that I am a member of the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee I am aware of discussion about the Scottish Government's tier 3 rail projects, which are being costed. Of course, other projects must form a queue.The issue that the petition raises has been discussed since the 1980s, but it is becoming more urgent as a result of the decommissioning of Dounreay and the development of the far north, as Rhoda Grant said. The 45 minutes that could be saved by building the Dornoch rail link between Tain and Golspie, via a new station at Dornoch, would start to make rail competitive with road. In the context of climate change, that is more relevant than it has ever been.There have been many arguments about the Lairg loop, which affects 2,000 or 3,000 people. Those people's interests must be looked after. However, there are commuter links between Lairg and Inverness. The 50,000 people who live north of Golspie, in east Sutherland, Caithness and Orkney, are greatly disadvantaged by a service that takes well over four hours to make a journey of 100 or so miles. It takes longer to get from Wick to Inverness than to get from Inverness to Edinburgh, although the distance is far shorter. The Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee could consider what studies are required, because often the Government, through HITRANS, has asked the wrong questions. That has forced the Dornoch link action group to commission its own studies, the first of which cost £15,000, from Corus rail engineering. That showed the intent of people in the far north to find the money for such studies. A second study, which will consider the potential impact of the project on passenger numbers, is to follow.I do not want to take up too much of the committee's time, but it would be a good idea for the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee to consider the complex issues that have been raised. It would help the discussions of how tier 3 rail projects stack up if this project were put into the pot. We have an opportunity to do that and to take the issue forward. At present it is in the hands of the Public Petitions Committee and is unresolved.
There is a reasonable consensus on what the next stage should be. I am sure that I will endear myself further to the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee by referring another petition to it; I await the committee's letter with interest. The Public Petitions Committee has been cautious about referring petitions to other committees when we think that we can take up the issues that they raise. However, given the detail of this petition and the fact that major organisations such as the local authority have been involved in the history of the transport network in that part of the country, it strikes me that a policy committee would bring more rigour to the process. Do we want to draw attention to particular issues that the petition raises, or should we allow the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee to determine the matters that it wishes to pursue?
We should allow the committee to take on the petition without any constraints.
Plenty of information has been gathered over the years, so there is no scarcity of documentation.
I note with interest that the members for the Highland region did not declare an interest before we discussed the petition, but what can we expect? I thank Rob Gibson for his time. We will refer the petition to the Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee. That is a Glaswegian's response to such issues.
In this meeting
Everything on 2 Oct 2007 →- Scottish Parliament Public Petitions Committee Tuesday 2 October 2007 Petitions · 1
- Interests Procedure · 3
- New Petitions Petitions · 3
- New Petitions Petitions · 52
- New Petitions Petitions · 62
- New Petitions Petitions · 6
- New Petitions Petitions · 6
- New Petitions Petitions · 13
- New Petitions Petitions · 9
- New Petitions Petitions · 7
- New Petitions Petitions · 6
- Current Petitions Petitions · 4
- Current Petitions Petitions · 4
- Current Petitions Petitions · 9
- Current Petitions Petitions · 10
- Current Petitions Petitions · 11
- Current Petitions Petitions · 3
- Current Petitions Petitions · 16
- Current Petitions Petitions · 6
- Current Petitions Petitions · 7
The type of each item (debate, statement, questions, members’ business and so on) and the times shown are worked out by this site from headings, the chair’s opening words and the Official Report’s running timestamps. They are not the Parliament’s own classification. Text: the Scottish Parliament Official Report.