A92 (Upgrading)
The final item of business is a members' business debate on motion S3M-2148, in the name of Ted Brocklebank, on the upgrading of the A92. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament supports the campaign to dual the A92 from Glenrothes to the Melville Lodge roundabout in north east Fife and as a priority to upgrade the Parbroath junction, which is the only major intersection between Kirkcaldy and Dundee without a roundabout; commends the efforts of local people campaigning to upgrade the section between Preston roundabout and Balfarg junction, and notes that in terms of accidents the A92 is one of the most dangerous roads in Scotland with over 600 accidents in the last five years.
The motion before us tonight should concern all Fifers, and I would like to preface my remarks with a genuine tribute to the late John MacDougall. Although I did not know John personally, those whose judgment I respect, in the kingdom and beyond, talk of a doughty son of Fife who served his constituency well.
At the end of May, Tricia Marwick, Claire Baker and I took part in an open meeting in Glenrothes, at the invitation of the local area futures group, to discuss the state of the A92. We were left in no doubt about the strength of feeling that this road has been treated as the Cinderella among Scottish trunk roads for far too long. Shortly after, the futures group presented a petition of 3,000 signatures to the Parliament's Public Petitions Committee, recommending that the road be upgraded to complete the dual carriageway around Glenrothes.
For those like me whose recognition of Scottish roads by initials and numbers is not the best, I say that the A92 is the road that branches off the M90 motorway at Dunfermline when you are travelling north and then runs all the way through central Fife to the Tay road bridge. Again for the benefit of those not familiar with the road, I explain that it is dualled up to the Preston roundabout at Glenrothes and that there is then a stretch of approximately 3 miles of two-lane road passing the gates of the busy Tullis Russell paper mill to the Balfarg junction. After that, there is again a short section of dual carriageway to the New Inn toll, where to all intents and purposes the A92 becomes a rural two-lane road meandering through north-east Fife until another short dualled section immediately before the Tay bridge.
Although no one suggests that the A92 is as dangerous as the A9, what is clear from Scottish road transport statistics over the past five years is that, in terms of numbers of accidents, the A92 runs the Highland road fairly close, with a total of some 600 accidents, 23 of which were fatal. That represents a catalogue of broken families and human misery that is no longer sustainable.
Fife safety camera partnership has regularly expressed concern that warnings about speeding on the A92 are falling on deaf ears, with drivers at times exceeding 100mph on the 60mph stretches.
As far back as July 1996, when he was a minister of state at the Scottish Office, my distinguished colleague Lord James Douglas-Hamilton announced that the Conservative Government planned to upgrade the A92 around Glenrothes. However, in giving the scheme the green light, Lord James added a key proviso: he stressed that a dual carriageway between the Preston roundabout and the Balfarg junction was just a part of the proposed upgrading to the trunk route through Fife to the Tay bridge. In other words, the dualling of the Glenrothes section, important as it was, should be seen as part of a more ambitious transport project that the Conservative Government of the day had in prospect.
Of course, less than a year later, the Conservatives were replaced by Labour at Westminster and it is a matter of record that the A92 upgrading was put on hold. When it came before the new Scottish Parliament of 1999, the scheme was quietly shelved by the Minister for Transport, Sarah Boyack. Throughout all that time, Labour ran Fife Council and the Central Fife MSP was the Minister for Enterprise and Lifelong Learning, who was about to become First Minister in the Scottish Executive. Although members' business debates are consensual affairs, I wonder whether the Labour Party will show as little interest in the A92's future over the next few weeks as it has over the past few years.
The Scottish Conservatives have been consistent in their view that the dual carriageway around Glenrothes should be completed. However, we believe that, as part of Lord James's greater vision, in the short term, dualling should continue beyond Glenrothes to the Melville Lodges roundabout where the A92 crosses the A91. That section of the road is only an additional 5 miles beyond New Inn toll, bypassing the villages of Freuchie and Ladybank, but accident statistics suggest that it is one of the most dangerous stretches of the whole A92.
Additionally, we believe that, as a matter of urgency, the Parbroath junction where the A92 crosses the A913 between Cupar and Newburgh should also be upgraded. That is the only major intersection between Kirkcaldy and Dundee without a roundabout and it is a well-known local black spot for accidents. In recognition of the current economic realities, we are limiting the scope of Lord James's original aspirations for the A92 to the improvements that I have outlined, at least in the short term. Those proposed upgrades are consistent with Conservative manifesto commitments to improve the infrastructure that was neglected by the previous Lib-Lab pact and to specific black-spot funding that is targeted at dangerous junctions and bends.
Understandably, in the light of the forthcoming Glenrothes by-election, there will now be other voices clamouring for the upgrading of the section of the A92 that bypasses Glenrothes. At the meeting to which I referred, back in May, Tricia Marwick made it clear that, as far as her party was concerned, the campaign for upgrading had to be relaunched. She said that it had been pushed back in the queue by other priorities. I believe that she said that the reopening of the Levenmouth to Thornton rail link was a higher priority for her party than the upgrading of the A92. However, although we support the rail link project, we recognise that the lack of a Levenmouth rail link is not costing lives.
I appeal to the other parties not simply to play to the voters of Glenrothes in considering the upgrading of this dangerous road. By all means, let us commit to dualling the 3 miles between Preston and Balfarg, but let us not forget that other elections are already on the horizon. Voters in North East Fife will doubtless take their own view if parties are prepared to commit only to the Glenrothes section, to coincide with the by-election.
I look forward to hearing what the minister has to say, especially as we have not yet had a chance to see the Government's strategic roads review, which was promised this summer. I appeal to him to consider any prospective dualling of the A92 not simply in a Glenrothes context. I am sure that, as a good son of Cupar, he remembers the long years when Fife Council's spending was controlled by a raft of Labour councillors from the west and central parts of the kingdom. When motorists driving northwards on the A92 asked how they would know when they reached North East Fife, the answer was invariably, "That'll be where the dual carriageway runs out." I hope that the chamber's support tonight for my motion will put an end to that kind of thinking and that kind of politics.
I am grateful to Ted Brocklebank for securing the debate and I welcome the members of the Glenrothes area futures group who are in the public gallery. It was a great pity that, yesterday, because of a mix-up in Claire Baker's office, she did not turn up to a meeting with the minister that she had asked for. That is a shame, as it was a most productive meeting.
I would like to put on record the fact that there was a misunderstanding between our offices. We did not receive e-mail confirmation from the minister's office, and I had child care commitments last night. The meeting has now been rearranged, and I am grateful to the minister for that.
I think that it is quite clear that Claire Baker was not at the meeting yesterday. I recorded the fact that it was a great pity that there was such a mix-up.
I have always supported the dualling of the road from Preston roundabout to Balfarg. I have lived in Glenrothes since 1975 and am well aware of all the campaigns that have taken place.
I say to Ted Brocklebank—[Interruption.]
Would you like me to call the next speaker and let you continue your speech when you have stopped coughing?
I would be extremely grateful.
I call Claire Baker.
I share the sadness expressed by Ted Brocklebank regarding the untimely loss of John MacDougall. Speaking personally, I can say that he and his office were a great help to me in my first year in Parliament. His contribution to Fife will be missed and not forgotten.
I am not as long in the tooth as other parliamentarians who take an interest in the A92 and, accordingly, cannot reflect on decades of activism on this issue. However, I have been a frequent traveller on the road over the years and know well the frustration that arises from getting stuck behind a tractor and the anxiety that can be caused by some other drivers' foolish overtaking.
However, it has been the efforts of the Glenrothes area futures group that has focused the attention of all of us on the case for further improvements to the road. I have been happy to work with the group to support its efforts to raise the profile of the road, the state of which the group's members believe is affecting the quality of life of their communities.
Increasingly, the A92 is a road that needs attention. The circumstances around the road are different from what they were 10 or even five years ago. For a start, 25 per cent more traffic uses the road than was the case 10 years ago. Increasingly, it is recognised that connectivity between Fife and Dundee, in terms of road and rail networks, is in need of improvement. Dundee is a growing city, with key industries that Fife should be further engaged with. Fife's focus is frequently on Edinburgh, but we have another major economic centre on our doorstep, and it is important that we are able to take full advantage of it.
More immediately, Tullis Russell is proposing a new biomass energy system, which will bring around 200 lorries a day to this section of the A92. Two new retail developments are also being brought forward in Glenrothes, and Amazon has recently located to Glenrothes on the A92. All those developments will cause increased traffic on the road.
The safety record of the road has been referred to already and, as Ted Brocklebank said, accidents and injuries are increasing. There is also anecdotal evidence that drivers are choosing to avoid the road, especially in rush hour, due to safety concerns, even though it is often the most direct option. People deciding to take longer, less direct routes is not good for the Fife economy.
Ted Brocklebank is right to appeal for improvements to be made outside the Glenrothes boundary. If the issue is about improving the economic growth of Fife, particularly central and east Fife, and making it a more attractive place for businesses to locate themselves, improving the A92—along with securing a new Forth crossing—is vital to ensuring that Fife remains open for business.
The forthcoming by-election has already been referred to. By-elections often generate more heat than light, but the Glenrothes area futures group has been working hard to create a cross-party consensus on the matter. I hope that that is reflected in the support that the group receives when it comes before the Public Petitions Committee shortly. The campaign was going on for some time before the election and will continue after the election. I will be happy to work with the group on this issue for some time to come.
It is a bit disingenuous for Ted Brocklebank to suggest that the Conservative Government had any intention of delivering the dualling of the A92. It is well known that the Conservatives' package of transport projects was an election sweetener that was undeliverable, so it is a bit rich for Ted Brocklebank to accuse other parties of electioneering on the issue.
Of course, with regard to past decisions, the Scottish National Party is blameless on this issue, as it has only recently been in a position in which it is able to make decisions. However, it is worth noting that, so far, those decisions have not included a commitment to upgrading the A92. Although Tricia Marwick expresses her support for the campaign, that support is not shared by the SNP-led Fife Council, and we wait to see whether it is shared by the SNP Government.
I appreciate that the minister will announce his strategic transport projects review soon, which will make the Government's priorities much clearer. When he does so, I hope that he has something positive to say to the A92 campaigners.
Many thanks, Presiding Officer—I am now able to resume. I, too, pay tribute to John MacDougall, whom I knew for a very long time. He was a good man, who is missed by a great many people in the Glenrothes constituency.
I would respond to Ted Brocklebank by saying that the Leven to Thornton rail link has of course been one of my highest priorities for a long time. I point out to both Claire Baker and Ted Brocklebank that the Leven to Thornton link, which is the number 1 transport priority of Fife Council, has the support of all the other parties that are represented on the council: the Liberal Democrats, the Conservatives and the Labour Party. Fife Council's number 1 transport priority is not the A92, the Preston roundabout or the Redhouse roundabout; it is indeed the Leven to Thornton railway line. That is the decision of the council.
When I came to Glenrothes in 1975, it was clear that we needed the section of the A92 there to be dualled. As Ted Brocklebank has pointed out, the Conservative Government promised in 1995 that the A92 would be dualled from the Preston roundabout to Balfarg. Claire Baker is also right: it was clear from the press coverage at the time that, although the Conservative party was promising the dualling of the road, the minister of state, Lord James Douglas-Hamilton, was making it clear that there was no money available at the time and that the dualling would not take place until such time as it became available.
To jump forward a couple of years, Henry McLeish was elected in 1997 and became the Scottish roads minister. He was promising action at the notorious A92 junction in April 1998. In 1999, Sarah Boyack, under the strategic roads review, dumped the project completely, and mine was the only voice in opposition to Ms Boyack. I said in the chamber at the time:
"The minister has ditched the long-promised improvements to the Preston roundabout in Glenrothes on the A92 to Balfarg. She claims that there are more appropriate alternative measures. Has she spoken to Tullis Russell and Company Ltd, the town's largest employer, whose factory gates open out on to the A92? Has she spoken to … Henry McLeish, or to anyone in Glenrothes? Will she outline the appropriate alternatives and the time scale for their implementation?"—[Official Report, 4 November 1999; Vol 3, c 364.]
When it was under Labour Party control—interestingly, Christine May was the administration's leader at the time—Fife Council refused to back me in my call for dualling that stretch of road, insisting that minor improvements would suffice. I am indeed grateful to my dear friend Michael Woods, who was the councillor for Pitteuchar from 1992 to 2007, for his commitment to keeping the scheme alive when the Labour Party in Glenrothes did not want to know.
Over the past year, a campaign for dualling was started again by the Glenrothes area futures group. I have been happy to give it my support. I have made it clear to the group, however, that I believe that a lot of work and campaigning needs to be done to get the project back up the agenda. New approaches, appraisals and costings are needed. In 1995, the cost was £21 million, but it will have risen since then.
As Ted Brocklebank mentioned, a great deal of feeling was expressed at a public meeting that dualling was the preferred option and should go ahead. Other voices said that improvements could be made to the Balfarg junction in the meantime. Anybody using the A92 at the Balfarg junction knows that it is one of the most unsafe parts of the road. People take their lives in their hands every time they use it.
I urge the minister to reconsider the case for dualling the A92, and to consider reviewing the Balfarg junction and the stretch of the A92 as it enters Glenrothes at the Cadham junction. Despite the improvements that have been made over the years, exiting from those junctions does not fill anyone with confidence. I wonder whether the minister, in reconsidering those issues, could report back to the members who are most interested in them—and of course to the Glenrothes area futures group—about what he plans to do for the A92 in the immediate and longer term.
I congratulate Ted Brocklebank on securing this important debate. The Conservatives have had a solid track record on the issue for well over a decade and Ted Brocklebank has shown his commitment to it by introducing a members' business debate.
It is fair to say that the A92 has waited its turn. Back in 1996, the green light was given to what was then a £21 million scheme. After the Conservatives lost power in 1997, the scheme was put on hold until the Scottish Parliament was formed, but in 1999 it was scrapped by the transport minister at that time, with the claim that it would be put into the pot along with all the other roads projects.
Claire Baker described the Conservatives as disingenuous, but I point out most gently to her that a more accurate definition of disingenuous would be scrapping a project, doing absolutely nothing about it for eight years and then suddenly deciding that it is a priority. I hope that we hear warm words and promises of action from the minister. We certainly look forward to seeing what is in the strategic roads review, but perhaps the minister can provide a sweetener, or at least an inkling of what will be in that review.
Why is the A92 upgrade important? There are several reasons, but the overriding one is that the road is dangerous and busy. There are numerous reports about speeds and there are anecdotal reports of people driving at more than 100mph when the speed limit is 60mph. As Ted Brocklebank said, there have been 23 fatalities in five years and more than 600 accidents in a five-year period. There were not 23 fatalities in one year and zero in other years; there were fatalities in them all—five in 2003, seven in 2004, seven in 2005 and four in 2006. We do not want to have a similar debate in the next session of Parliament with similar or worse figures to look back on.
Ted Brocklebank set out clearly the specific measures for which the Scottish Conservatives are asking: a dual carriageway around Glenrothes on the 3 miles between the Preston roundabout and the Balfarg junction, with the added idea that the dualling should continue until Melville Lodges. Priority should be given to upgrading the Parbroath junction, which is a particularly dangerous part of the road where accidents occurred at regular intervals in the past five years and, no doubt, for a long period before that.
As I said, the Conservative party has a good track record on the issue. In 1996 we had plans for upgrades and dualling. At the most recent election, we had clear and strong manifesto commitments on transport. The transport budget would have had an extra £30 million per annum and, on top of that, we would have set aside an extra £15 million per annum for black-spot funding. A combination of those two funds would have been applied to the A92, which would have helped to make the road far safer. It is time for action, so I hope that we get action from the minister.
I, too, congratulate Ted Brocklebank on securing the debate and pay tribute to John MacDougall, whose untimely passing saddened me greatly as I had known him for a number of years, since I first joined Fife Regional Council in 1982. He was leader of the administration of Fife Regional Council and convener of Fife Council while I was leader of the opposition.
A significant stretch of the A92—the bit that runs from New Inn to the Tay road bridge—runs through the heart of my constituency. I welcome the opportunity to highlight some of the road safety concerns on which I have been campaigning for many years. Ted Brocklebank is right to highlight the significant accident record on the route. On the part of the A92 that runs through North East Fife, there have in the past five years been four fatal accidents, 27 serious ones and 71 that resulted in slight injury. I am pleased that, in 2007, the number of accidents reduced to 14 and there were no fatalities, but 14 accidents is 14 too many.
The Liberal Democrat transport ministers in the previous Government—Nicol Stephen and Tavish Scott—were responsible for developing and promoting a route accident reduction plan for the A92. Some of the plan—most notably the extension of the 40mph speed limit at Freuchie, which has been the site of several accidents over the years—has been implemented. I hope that that, improved signage, improved street lighting and vehicle-activated warning signs at Freuchie and other accident blackspots such as the Parbroath and Wormit junctions, contributed to the reduction in the number of accidents last year.
Significant schemes have yet to be progressed. They will require significant funding commitments from the Scottish ministers. I should perhaps declare an interest as a resident of Ladybank, but the most significant schemes relate to the junctions at Ladybank. There have been numerous accidents involving vehicles turning into or out of Ladybank at the southerly Monkstown junction and the northerly Cairnfield junction, as well as slightly further down the road at the junction with the B937 at Eden Bridge, where a sharp corner separates the two long straights from Ladybank and Freuchie.
The proposed roundabout at Monkstown would not only greatly enhance road safety for people who turn on and off the trunk road, but force all vehicles on the trunk road to slow down on a long, fast stretch of road.
The proposal at Cairnfield is to realign the junction and construct a staggered ghost island. I am sure that that sounds very exciting for staggered ghosts, but I hope that the lighting of the junction or, at the very least, the lighting of the traffic bollards, will also be considered. The poor visibility of the junction contributes to many of the accidents, particularly on dark and stormy—or foggy—nights. I have been battling since I was first elected as a councillor for the Ladybank area in 1982 to get the bollards lit, but I have consistently been told that it cannot be done because there is not a convenient power supply. Perhaps through modern technology and microgeneration we can find a way of lighting the bollards without plugging them into the mains and we can finally put the matter to bed.
I do not expect the minister to be able this evening to give a firm commitment to fund those vital road safety improvements, but I hope that he can give an assurance that he will ensure that Transport Scotland progresses them with some degree of urgency.
I also draw the minister's attention to Transport Scotland's proposal to stop up the gaps in the dual carriageway at Inverdovat and Station Brae at Newport-on-Tay, on the approach road to the Tay road bridge. I am sure that he is aware that there is substantial local opposition to the proposed closure and that it is probable that the traffic order will be subject to a local inquiry. The community has proposed an alternative: the introduction of a 50mph speed limit on the short stretch of dual carriageway, which would match that on the bridge. So far, Transport Scotland has been unwilling to investigate that option. I ask the minister to ask Transport Scotland to consider it fully.
A number of projects in Fife require investment from the Scottish Government. The Redhouse roundabout on the A92 has been mentioned. It is seen as the number 1 priority, in respect of roads, to deal with congestion, to unlock the development potential of the neighbouring land and to improve access to Levenmouth.
Dualling of the A92 between Preston and Balfarg has long been desired and it is time that a full appraisal was carried out of that missing link in Fife's road network. In that respect, I have no problem in backing the calls that have been made today by Ted Brocklebank and others, but I am less convinced that there is a case for dualling the A92 from New Inn to Melville Lodges, as is proposed in the motion. I am sure that the residents of Freuchie and Ladybank whose homes would probably have to be demolished to allow for such dualling would also be against it. The priority for the A92 in North East Fife is not more dual carriageway but completing the road safety improvements to which I referred. I will be interested in the minister's response to those points.
I was pleased to add my name to the motion to give Mr Brocklebank the opportunity to raise these matters in the Parliament, because I have been impressed with some of the members' business debates that we have had on Fife issues. I will come on to that shortly, but first let me say that I would be very careful about insinuating that my contribution is something to do with a by-election in Glenrothes. If Ted Brocklebank checks, he will see that I added my name to his motion in June, and I did so because I believe in supporting community action groups throughout Mid Scotland and Fife that have done the amount of work that has been done on upgrading the A92. I am always happy to help to give people a voice, for example through members' business debates.
Those of us who represent Mid Scotland and Fife have discussed many of the kingdom's transport priorities in the 16 months that I have been in Parliament. Most recently, we discussed the Rosyth to Zeebrugge ferry. We have also discussed the Leven to Thornton rail line and issues related to the Kincardine bridge and the upper Forth crossing. We have delayed the minister quite a lot over the past few months. Now, his knowledge of transport issues in Fife is probably better than most.
Fife is a key area in Scotland in respect of developing transport priorities. Having travelled the A92 many times, I have no doubt that it is a priority. I travel on it even more now on constituency business, and I know from first-hand experience that the conditions that individuals regularly face are dangerous and worrying.
I remember the significant improvements to and the extension of the A92 between Dunfermline, Kirkcaldy and Glenrothes in the late 1980s and early 1990s. I had had to travel the back roads on those routes, and I saw the difference that the completion and dualling of that connection made by easing travel across Fife. It certainly helped with road safety, too.
I mentioned the many debates that we have had on transport in Fife and, as Tricia Marwick, Claire Baker and Ted Brocklebank mentioned, it is clear that we need to work across traditional party lines, because the priorities are different. We need to ensure that projects are prioritised properly in the interests of those who live in Fife and neighbouring regions. We also need to manage the expectations of the campaign groups to ensure that they understand what can be achieved both in the Parliament and through links between Fife Council and the Parliament and Government.
As well as there being support for the projects that I mentioned earlier, there is wide support throughout Fife for a Rosyth bypass and a passenger rail link between Alloa, Dunfermline and Edinburgh. Although we have not debated those issues in members' business debates, groups have been campaigning on them and lobbying members. It is not just a question of the priorities that we have spoken about in Parliament; we need to consider carefully several other issues in Mid Scotland and Fife.
I wanted to contribute to the debate in a positive tone, and I have tried my best to do that, because I believe that through cross-party consensus and support we will meet the transport priorities of the people of Fife. I look forward to working with my colleagues across the Parliament on that.
I thank Ted Brocklebank for lodging the motion and giving members the opportunity to debate the A92.
Although I had no personal contact with John MacDougall, I join others in respecting the contribution that he made to political life in a different tradition from my own. I have heard from others that, as an individual and as a campaigner for the people whom he represented, he was a doughty man. Mesothelioma—the terrible disease that John suffered from—has been an issue close to my heart and one on which I have contributed in previous sessions.
There are always difficulties when we talk about numbers, and we have heard several different figures this evening. I most closely recognised the numbers that Iain Smith used, which came from the Scottish Parliament information centre briefing. We heard a reference to 600 accidents on the A92; I should stress that that reference covers the road all the way to Stonehaven, including the part of the road that is not a trunk road, north of the bridge.
The figures that I have suggest that, from New Inn to the south end of the Tay bridge, four people have been killed and 27 have been seriously injured in the past five years. None of the arguments that we might have about figures is intended to relieve us of the obligation to consider the important issue of safety on the A92, but we need to ensure that the numbers are in perspective.
I know that Ted Brocklebank has been engaged in the issue before. In 2006, he raised the issues of road signs and street lighting at Parbroath. Since the work that he promoted has been done, there has been a single accident with a slight injury in 18 months. If I may link that to some of Iain Smith's comments, that illustrates that we can, with relatively simple and quick interventions, make some significant improvements.
I do not want to cavil too much over exact figures, but from checking with Fife Constabulary this afternoon my understanding is that there have been significant accidents—although no fatalities—at the Parbroath junction in each of the past five years.
We could have a debate about that, but I do not want to fall out with members on the subject of numbers. The accident record, both serious and fatal, appears to be declining. If there are different numbers, I will be happy to engage on them with members after the debate.
Rather than get unduly hung up on that issue, let us turn to the substance of the matter. I have met Tricia Marwick and I hope to meet Claire Baker shortly—I understand that we have been able to rearrange that meeting fairly quickly. The first priority of our approach to road transport is to maintain and operate safely our strategic networks. Our second priority is to make use of existing capacity and our third is to proceed with targeted new infrastructure developments. Giving safety considerations primacy when we make our investment decisions represents a sensible and prudent approach to the allocation of scarce resources.
Across the piece, the road might be safe or it might be dangerous but, as with many roads, there are localised areas where safety is an issue and where the architecture or the design of the road contributes to the problems that lead to accidents. Two thirds of accidents are caused primarily by drivers, but that is a result of their interacting with the architecture of our roads.
We know that many organisations are involved in improving road safety. Our strategic road safety plan sets out how the Scottish Government works with the police, local authorities and organisations such as Road Safety Scotland further to improve safety on Scotland's roads. I pay tribute to all their efforts.
The statistics that were published last month revealed that 282 people were killed on Scotland's roads last year—that is the lowest figure since recording started, and it compares with a figure of 308 for the previous year, but it is still too high. For the relatives, friends and families of the victim, every such death is a 100 per cent tragedy, and neither for me nor, I believe, for anyone who is present this evening is it simply a statistic.
A number of changes have been made in the Glenrothes area. The geometry of the Balfarg junction has been improved, as have facilities for pedestrians, and anti-skid surfacing has been put in place. The A92 route action management plan reported in 2004, and centre hatching, red surfacing, bollards and improved signs have been put in place along the whole length of the route. Resurfacing and central island hardening are planned at the Redhouse roundabout during this financial year. Such measures, along with a range of smaller-scale improvements, play an important role in improving road safety without detracting from longer-term aspirations to deliver more significant interventions.
We believe that strategic transport links are critical to the achievement of the Government's central purpose. We fully recognise the kingdom of Fife's contribution to the economy of Scotland and the need for the people who live there to have every opportunity to gain from the improvement efforts that are made there.
The strategic transport projects review, which is about not just roads but all means of surface transport, will be concluded shortly, so I have no rabbits to pull out of the hat tonight. We have engaged in the drafting of the summary report and an announcement will be made in the not-too-distant future. Lord James Douglas-Hamilton was involved in the process; indeed, I think that all former ministers have had something to say on the matter. The accident count appears to be coming down.
Tricia Marwick asked whether I would consider reviewing the Balfarg and Cadham junctions. I am certainly prepared to have Transport Scotland assess whether some quick improvements could be made at those points. In a measured speech, Iain Smith highlighted the speed limit in Freuchie, where I acknowledge that there are difficult junctions, and mentioned the possibility of additional roundabouts. We will take all that on board.
Fife makes a significant contribution to the country's economy. That will be reflected in the opening later this year of the upper Forth crossing and it is reflected, too, in our commitment to provide a Forth replacement crossing, without which Fife would undoubtedly suffer severe economic impact. I have listened carefully to what has been said in the debate and will take away a great deal of it as food for thought. We will continue to make the upgrades that we are able to make as quickly as we can. The strategic transport projects review covers the ten years from 2012 to 2022, but there are some measures that we can take in the meantime.
Meeting closed at 17:39.