Railways (Airdrie to Bathgate Line)
The final item of business is the members' business debate on motion S1M-1511, in the name of Karen Whitefield. We are running late, so I appeal to members to leave quickly if they are not staying for the debate.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament recognises the continuing need for the rail line between Airdrie and Bathgate to be reopened; agrees that such a project would provide a service to around 200,000 people and as a result would improve labour market access to businesses in the M8 corridor, and welcomes the joint work being undertaken by North Lanarkshire and West Lothian Councils to highlight the benefits and value for money that the reopening of the rail line would offer.
I begin by thanking all the members who signed my motion, which enabled this debate to take place. In particular, I thank my colleagues Mary Mulligan and Bristow Muldoon, with whom I have worked in partnership on the on-going campaign to reopen the Airdrie to Bathgate rail line. I also thank the staff and elected members of North Lanarkshire Council and West Lothian Council, in particular David Jarman, the head of strategic planning and transportation for West Lothian Council. Before this speech starts to sound too much like a speech at the Oscars, I will move to the substance of the motion.
The Airdrie to Bathgate rail line closed to passengers in 1956. A lot has changed since then. Most of Lanarkshire's heavy industry has been wiped out, West Lothian is now a major centre for the electronics industry and Edinburgh is now the home of the Scottish Parliament. Despite the fact that more and more employment opportunities are emerging in west and central Lothian, public transport facilities from Airdrie and Coatbridge to Edinburgh have never been worse.
If people want to travel by train from Airdrie to Edinburgh, they have to head in the opposite direction for 30 minutes to catch the Edinburgh train from Glasgow Queen Street, which means a total journey time of approximately 90 minutes. I have been contacted by many constituents who are frustrated that they are unable to take public transport that goes directly between Airdrie and Edinburgh. At present, the best they can do is drive to Harthill and join an express coach service to Edinburgh. They feel that it is time that Airdrie and Edinburgh were connected once again.
Although the M8 is in severe danger of grinding to a halt, many travellers continue to choose to travel by car rather than public transport, because they have no viable alternative. For the key reasons of economic development and tackling congestion on the M8, I believe that the time has come to examine seriously reopening the Airdrie to Bathgate rail line.
The M8's viability is vital if we are to ensure the continued growth of industry in the central belt. We cannot allow the M8 to seize up. Reopening the Airdrie to Bathgate line would help to alleviate peak traffic on the M8. We need only consider the number of people who each day cram themselves on to the Bathgate to Edinburgh line to find evidence of the attraction of a regular, reliable and convenient train service to the city centre. Each of those people represents a potential car on the M8.
To put it simply, reopening the Airdrie to Bathgate line would complement the Executive's congestion goals and would be in line with the Executive's social justice aims. Despite recent improvements, many of my constituents still struggle to find work. The growth of the electronics industry in West Lothian offers significant potential for employment opportunities for men and women from Airdrie and Coatbridge. Improving access to those jobs would have a significant impact on the Executive's goals for economic development and social justice.
I am sure that the Executive is well aware that use of the Bathgate to Edinburgh line, which was reopened in 1986, has exceeded all expectations; the line has three times the predicted number of users. I have no doubt that my colleague Bristow Muldoon will highlight the need for further development of that line. Similar success on the rail line between Airdrie and Bathgate would create a service that would require relatively little subsidy. West Lothian Council estimates that a subsidy of about 70p per trip would be required. That compares favourably with an average ScotRail subsidy of £4.34 and a Strathclyde Passenger Transport subsidy of £2.50.
The Airdrie to Bathgate line would provide good value by serving a large number of people. For example, the Edinburgh to Galashiels line would serve a population of 60,000 at a cost of £86 million. In contrast, the Airdrie to Bathgate line would serve about 200,000 people at a cost of about £30 million, according to Railtrack. The reopening and running of the Airdrie to Bathgate line compares well with other proposals that the Executive is considering, on financial viability and the number of potential users.
Reopening the Airdrie to Bathgate line would give my constituents easier access to their capital city, which is home to our Scottish Parliament. If devolved democracy is to be meaningful, our Parliament and the institutions that develop around it must be accessible.
I accept that reopening the Airdrie to Bathgate line is a long-term goal. However, I restate my commitment to the project. I call on Strathclyde Passenger Transport Executive to commit itself to reinstating the service. I ask the Scottish Executive to give serious consideration to methods of funding a feasibility study for the project. Reopening the Airdrie to Bathgate line would be of great benefit to the people of Airdrie, Coatbridge and the adjacent villages and would be a tangible demonstration of the Executive's commitment to giving people an alternative to using their cars. Now is the time for the Airdrie to Bathgate line.
I thank Karen Whitefield for lodging today's motion for debate. I often disagree with her, but I am pleased to support her motion in this case. Indeed, some time last year, we both attended a public meeting in Bathgate on the matter, from which she was lucky to escape unharmed after confessing that she is one of the people from Lanarkshire who bring their car to Bathgate and park it in Bathgate railway station car park.
I point out that there has been a long history of campaigning for the reopening of the line. People such as Councillor Jim Sibbald of Armadale were part of earlier campaigns that took place 20 years ago or more. Although Karen Whitefield refers to the Airdrie to Bathgate line, I would like to point out that the line should be known as the Bathgate to Airdrie/Shotts line. Certainly, the late Jim Walker of Bathgate ensured that I always refer to it in such terms.
The reopening of the line would deliver practical benefits and send out a signal about how we see strategic economic development and regeneration for the Scotland of the future. I am disappointed that the Government has failed to respond positively up until now. I hope that we will hear some positive comments in the minister's response.
From a practical point of view, the M8 is grinding to a halt. Commuters now move across Scotland. For example, I understand that after the opening of Croy station, the busiest part of the line was Croy to Edinburgh, not Croy to Glasgow. A lot of the traffic that goes along the M8—indeed, throughout central Scotland—is not from city to city but between Lanarkshire and West Lothian.
If we want to take the heat out of the Edinburgh property market, let us consider new build in West Lothian, which has one of the fastest-growing populations. We need to think about what has happened in the past. Bathgate and Airdrie are the towns that have suffered the most in the past 30 years. It is interesting that executive housing is now being built on the old Leyland site in Bathgate.
We need to consider the fact that we are encouraging businesses to locate on the M8 corridor and need to create access for more than just car users.
We should also think strategically. There is an artificial divide at Harthill. It is not just a matter of salt 'n sauce v salt 'n vinegar on chips. We need to ensure that we bring Scotland together. We need a focus that allows us to open up the potential of central Scotland in its own right for business and residential development.
We need to regenerate former mining areas such as Blackridge, Armadale, Caldercruix, Plains, Airdrie, Shotts and—dare I say it—surrounding villages. They are, too often, forgotten lands, although we can be sure that the west of West Lothian and the east of Lanarkshire are remembered when it comes to deciding where to site opencasting and where to have landfill sites.
We need imagination and vision. There are businesses that are prepared to invest and build in the area. People want to live there because they can see the practical solutions that it can provide to accessing other parts of Scotland. If the Executive is seriously considering ideas, I suggest that a practical solution would be to consider setting up a Scottish trust for public investment. Councils may want to bypass the Executive to do that. As Karen Whitefield pointed out, the reopening of the Bathgate to Edinburgh line showed that the line was highly profitable. There is great potential in the reopening of the Airdrie to Bathgate line, but we need leadership, imagination and vision.
We need a practical demonstration that the central belt can be not just an intercity commuting corridor but the heart of Scotland, in which Harthill is considered not just a border gateway, but the centre spot of a vibrant region that reaches east and west. Reopening the Bathgate to Airdrie/Shotts line would do just that.
I congratulate Karen Whitefield on securing the debate. She has worked tirelessly for the project and I am happy to work alongside her and Bristow Muldoon to achieve the reopening of the Airdrie to Bathgate line. I also welcome the councillors and officials from West Lothian Council, who are in the gallery this evening.
Why have so many people put so much time and effort into the reopening of the line? I will start, as Fiona Hyslop did, by taking members back to 1986, when the Edinburgh to Bathgate line was reopened. At that time, some said that that should not happen and that there was not enough business to reopen that line. Just look at it now—it is a success. We should be prepared to follow on from the foresight that those who reopened the Edinburgh to Bathgate line had and to deliver the extension of the Airdrie to Bathgate line that will make life better for people in West Lothian and North Lanarkshire.
How feasible is the project? There are only 14 miles of track to re-lay. The whole route is intact and under single ownership. There are no major physical problems. The capital costs could be in the region of £30 million, but even that is modest compared to the motorway projects that could be an alternative. Revenue support might be an issue, but the line has to be compared to other projects.
Karen Whitefield referred to the economic benefits—there is no doubt that the M8 is crucial to economic development in the central belt. West Lothian has an expanding economy, but the west side of the county has seen less growth. I want Armadale and Blackridge to enjoy the benefits that the provision of rail links, both east and west, would assist the people there to access. Employers will site their operations where they have the biggest catchment of workers. We must expect that people will continue to increase the length of their journey to work, often in preference to moving home. However, we must be able to offer them alternative transport to the private car. I would be interested to know what research is available to inform us about home-to-work journeys—perhaps the minister can respond to that.
There are many multi-income households, and the rail link would allow members of the same household to travel in different directions. We see that pattern already on the Edinburgh to Glasgow line—for example, for many people who live in Linlithgow. However, housebuilding there is limited and, as has been said, there are more opportunities for housebuilding in Armadale and Blackridge.
A matter that might be less important, but which should also be considered, is the social benefits. A significant number of my constituents in West Lothian have family in North Lanarkshire. One constituent complained recently about how difficult it was for him to fulfil his caring responsibilities for a relative in Airdrie, especially when the two buses that he has to use do not meet.
I am pleased about the partnership that has brought about the present situation. There is cross-party agreement in the Parliament, and two local authorities—West Lothian and North Lanarkshire—are working together. Strathclyde Passenger Transport and ScotRail have voiced support for the project. We want such support from the Scottish Executive. We have witnessed the success of the Edinburgh to Bathgate line. People travel to Bathgate from the west—let us give them their own railway stops. We still need to consult widely with local authorities, SPT, local enterprise companies and local communities. The Executive must see this as a viable option and support its further investigation.
I ask the minister to ensure that the ScotRail franchise renewal process paves the way for the Airdrie to Bathgate line by creating sufficient capacity on the existing Edinburgh to Bathgate line. Will he confirm that the two local authorities and the SPT will have an opportunity to bid for a full feasibility study from the public transport fund later this year?
I have been asked to announce that the presentation by the electoral commission, which was due to start at 6, has been deferred to 6.15 to allow those of us who wish to go to it to be there at the beginning. I ask for brief speeches so that we can get everybody in.
I congratulate Karen Whitefield on bringing this matter before us today. I confess that I do not know the railway line especially well, but the arguments that she rehearsed sounded sensible, comprehensive and applicable to those campaigns that I know rather better, such as the Campaign for Borders Rail. I have a brief point to make in support of what Karen Whitefield said.
I am not sure whether this is Lewis Macdonald's first speech as a minister. He is nodding his head, so I extend my congratulations to him on his appointment and welcome him to his role this afternoon in the Parliament. I hope that, when he sums up, he will be able to confirm that the multimodal corridor study for the M8 is capable of considering the issues that have been raised today. There is congestion, not only on the M8, but on both the principal railway routes across central Scotland. If we consider the issue in the round, it makes perfectly good sense to do the initial scoping study, and then consider the request that has been made for a proper feasibility study. If the costs and the value merit it, I hope that the Executive will pursue the matter with the vigour that other members have urged that it should.
I congratulate Karen Whitefield on securing today's debate and I join her in thanking the two local authorities that have been largely developing and promoting the campaign. In addition to Mary Mulligan's welcome to the people from West Lothian Council, I welcome the representative of the West Lothian Courier, which has been active in bringing the issue to the attention of people in West Lothian.
I shall concentrate on three areas: the benefits of reopening the line; the need for expanded capacity on the existing Edinburgh to Bathgate line; and the action that I would encourage the Executive to take in progressing those matters. I also ask the Presiding Officer to note that the clock was not reset when I started to speak.
First, on the benefits of reopening the line, I express my support for the arguments that were outlined by Karen Whitefield. Reopening the line meets several of the policy aims of the Executive. First, as Karen said, it accords with the Executive's transport aims of encouraging greater use of rail and trying to reduce reliance on the private car, particularly on the very congested Edinburgh to Glasgow corridor. Secondly, it accords with the Executive's social justice objectives, both by allowing people access to social facilities and by giving them access to employment opportunities. Thirdly, I think that congestion is likely to increase in the near future by the continuing success of Livingston Football Club. There will obviously be a greater need for people from Livingston to make journeys to Ibrox, Parkhead and, I hope, Hampden on many occasions in the coming years. I also hope that, in due course, we will also be joined by Karen's local team, Airdrie, in the premier league.
From my own experience as a regular commuter on the existing Edinburgh to Bathgate line, and from correspondence from constituents, I know that there is a significant problem with overuse of the line. That causes congestion on the trains themselves at peak times, but it also causes congestion in the car parks that serve the various railway stations. In addition to considering an extension of the line, it is equally important for the Executive to hold discussions with ScotRail to ensure that the current line capacity is increased through a series of measures such as platform extensions, increased rolling stock and passing points on the line. Those are issues that I have discussed with ScotRail in the past. I know that ScotRail is keen to make progress and I encourage the Executive to consider those issues further.
I endorse the view that much of the successful regeneration of West Lothian has been due to improvements such as the Bathgate line, which was reopened in 1986 and which I believe has made a contribution to improving the prosperity of West Lothian.
I ask the minister to respond to three proposals for action. First, I urge him actively to pursue with ScotRail and Railtrack measures that will expand capacity on the existing line, even in advance of a new franchise. Secondly, I ask him to confirm that full and active consideration will be given to a forthcoming bid to the public transport fund for funding for a full feasibility study on the extension to the line. Thirdly, I urge him to give full consideration to the inclusion of a reopened Airdrie to Bathgate line in any guidance that is given to the Strategic Rail Authority on a future franchise for Scotland's passenger railways.
I shall have to ask members to keep their speeches to three minutes from now on. I call Donald Gorrie.
I do not know whether I have to declare an interest in this subject. As a list member who has to get around the 10 constituencies in Central Scotland, I know that it is very much easier to visit places with an effective station and railway line, such as Polmont, Falkirk and Croy, which serves Cumbernauld. One can even get to Motherwell by train if one times it right. It would be very beneficial to me personally if there was a much more sensible railway line serving Coatbridge, Airdrie and the places round about there.
I reinforce the argument that the railway line, if reopened, will do much better than the officials tend to make out. I am reminded of the time when Lothian Regional Council first achieved the opening of the South Gyle station on the Fife line. There was a time when I was the only person in the world who agreed with the proposal, and the railway authorities said that it was rubbish. Now, that route is so crowded that nobody actually pays their fares because the trains are so full that nobody can go round to collect them. I am not advocating that, but it is a mark of the success of that station.
We then got a railway station at Livingston South on the Edinburgh to Glasgow Central line, which was also a success. As other members have said, there was also a great deal of opposition to the Bathgate line from people who thought that they knew about those things. The fact is that they did not, and that line has been a great success. As Karen Whitefield said, there is a big public to serve in Armadale, Coatbridge and Airdrie, coming into and going out of Edinburgh and working in all those places. It should improve the Coatbridge junction with the A8, which I think, in my limited experience—I am not a great traveller—must be one of the silliest junctions in the world. Anything that makes it less silly is an improvement.
We should support this rail link. The area is covered by two councils, two different transport organisations, ScotRail, Railtrack—and the Executive has an interest. I suggest to the minister that if the Executive got a grip on this and brought everyone together, it would avoid the risk of the matter falling between several stools because on some occasions people have not co-operated. A road in one local authority came to a grinding halt—it looked like a ski jump—because the next council did not have the money to carry it on.
We want to bring people together. The Executive has a role in that. This rail line should have a high priority. I cannot say how high, because my colleagues in the Borders would shoot me if I suggested that it was as high a priority as the Borders rail link. This is an important and good project. I strongly support it.
Like other members, I am pleased that Karen Whitefield has secured this debate.
In my short speech, I will reiterate some of the points that I made 18 months ago in my submission to Sarah Boyack's consultation paper, "Tackling Congestion". At that time, I pointed out the benefits for my constituents of reopening the Bathgate to Airdrie line.
If someone has to travel to Edinburgh from the main town of Coatbridge in my constituency by the existing public transport, it is an extremely difficult and time-consuming exercise. It can take between an hour and an hour and a half. As Karen Whitefield said, it is necessary first to travel in the opposite direction, to Glasgow.
If the railway line between Drumgelloch and Bathgate were to be reopened, I am sure that many people would use rail as their favoured mode of transport. It would open up employment opportunities for my constituents and, as Bristow Muldoon mentioned, social opportunities.
Edinburgh and West Lothian have two of the fastest-growing economies in Scotland and an increasing number of people in North Lanarkshire are looking to the east for employment. They may choose to work in the east but, as Mary Mulligan said, because of high house prices, or for personal or family reasons, they may want to continue living in the west.
A preliminary study by the Railway Development Society on the feasibility of reopening the line stated that the proposal was practical. The only apparent problem is the relocation of the cycle route. The RDS estimate of the capital cost is about £19 million although, as we have heard, Railtrack says that it could possibly cost up to £30 million. Even if the cost were to reach £30 million, that would be a modest amount, as Mary Mulligan said, compared with the cost of many motorway projects. We should remember that motorised transport is the single greatest contributor to air pollution in urban areas.
Traffic growth, and the resulting increase in pollution, cannot continue. Too much traffic damages the environment, people's health and the quality of their lives. Problems of congestion and high levels of pollution are especially bad at certain peak times during the day. Ways of cutting down road traffic should be examined. We should encourage employers to adopt flexitime regimes, staggered hours and working from home via the use of new technology.
In considering the challenge of getting traffic off the roads, we must examine the re-establishment of former rail links and even consider constructing new ones. The reopening of the Bathgate to Airdrie line would provide a cost-effective, speedy and environmentally friendly mode of transport, which would be welcomed and used by many people in my constituency.
My well-known support for the Edinburgh to Galashiels, and I hope Carlisle, line does not preclude me from giving my whole-hearted support to the Airdrie to Bathgate line.
I express my congratulations to Lewis Macdonald on his appointment and also the hope that he is allowed the budget, in the fullness of time, to preside over a rejuvenation of the Scottish railway network. I back what Murray Tosh, Bristow Muldoon and Karen Whitefield have said about the economic and environmental benefits of that.
We should link this into a multimodal study, including the M8. A considerable amount of money might be saved by constructing this line, as we might have to do other work to the M8 were we not to build it.
I congratulate Karen Whitefield on securing this debate. This issue is clearly important not only to the communities of Airdrie and Bathgate, but more widely to communities in the Lothians and Lanarkshire. As the economic structure of our communities changes and business evolves, freedom of mobility is of the utmost importance. Plainly we must look towards an efficient integrated transport system that does not threaten our environment and that is accessible and commercially feasible. Such a system must be geared towards not only local communities but wider society.
I am sure that we all value the importance of the future of railways in such a strategy, because if we are serious about encouraging people to use public transport and the railway network, we must provide a safe, reliable and effective service. A new link between the east and west of Scotland is crucial for the manufacturers, producers and consumers involved in Scotland's industrial diversity. As a result, I commend the work that the local authorities in North Lanarkshire and West Lothian are undertaking, as it highlights the benefits of reopening the Airdrie to Bathgate line and the commercial sense that that would make.
The present stalemate of congested and overburdened roads such as the M8 through Lanarkshire and beyond not only affects Karen Whitefield's Airdrie and Shotts constituency but leads to the disruption of business and means sluggish mobility for commuters from many areas in the central belt. As a result, we must aim to develop a modern, fast and efficient transport infrastructure instead of restricting it.
Furthermore, we must encourage the use of public transport to help reduce congestion in major corridors such as the M8 in my Hamilton North and Bellshill constituency. Not only is that area at a standstill for much of the day, it is also a location of dangerous traffic situations and accidents.
It has been suggested that congestion increases carbon dioxide emissions by 10 per cent on urban roads, which is obviously a matter of great concern to major towns and surrounding areas such as my constituency. As a result, any effort to reduce road traffic growth and congestion, especially in urban areas such as mine, can make an important contribution to the improvement of air quality and the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions.
As colleagues will be aware, projects such as the reopening of this line have considerable benefits for labour market accessibility and potentially advantageous effects on employment levels and economic growth. A more effective transport infrastructure between the east and west of the country would benefit people who wish to find employment further afield or who need such a transport system for employment purposes.
We must show our commitment to a coherent transport strategy for our nation and to reducing the impact of traffic congestion on our roads and its harmful environmental effects while providing attractive affordable alternatives. The reopening of the Airdrie to Bathgate rail link would adhere to the Executive's commitment to a strategy founded on integrated transport and the multimodal ethos. It would also expand on the existing user network and would help the local authorities, employers and enterprise networks to promote inclusion for the people of Airdrie, Bathgate, Lanarkshire, West Lothian and Scotland in general.
Although this debate has greatly helped to raise the transport problems in the constituencies of Karen Whitefield and Mary Mulligan, their campaign will help to alleviate problems in my area and many others. I wish the campaign well and fully support the initiative. I hope the minister will do so as well.
I too congratulate Karen Whitefield on securing this debate. I was getting worried that she might forget the surrounding villages in her speech, but I noticed that she managed to include them towards the end. I want also to pay tribute to my colleague Gil Paterson, who cannot be here tonight but who has been campaigning with Karen Whitefield for the railway line.
As I am the last member to speak before the minister—who I hope is the minister who likes to say yes—I want to summarise the five major benefits of reopening the Airdrie to Bathgate rail link.
First, there is a major benefit for Edinburgh itself. The city faces major developmental pressures in the years ahead; it is estimated that in the next five years something like 25,000 new jobs will be created in the Edinburgh area. That will put enormous pressure both on the labour market, with the prospect of skill shortages, and on the property market in the city. We must address the problem without ending up with an overheated Edinburgh and an underheated rest of the central belt, as far as economic performance is concerned.
Secondly, the reopening of the line will have major economic benefits for West Lothian and Lanarkshire in particular. Lanarkshire faces the problem of continuing high levels of grinding unemployment in various pockets of deprivation. The line will help the unemployed people of Lanarkshire to reach job vacancies in Edinburgh, without the worry of having to find a house in Edinburgh that they cannot afford.
There is a third benefit that has not yet been mentioned. Reopening the line will result in the connectivity—that is the in word these days—of Edinburgh, West Lothian, Lanarkshire and Glasgow, and south to Ayr and Stranraer. If people could travel from West Lothian or Lanarkshire down to Ayr, Bristow Muldoon could go to watch a team that is at the top of the league, at Somerset Park. I am sure that that would be of benefit to everybody.
The fourth major benefit that has been mentioned is access and the social inclusion aspect. As Mary Mulligan said, there are many family connections between the east and the west. The reinstatement of the line would facilitate such connections, improve social inclusion and provide people with access to jobs and other opportunities.
The fifth and final major benefit is that which Michael McMahon and Robin Harper focused on—the environmental improvements. The line would help to get traffic on the railway that would otherwise be on the roads, which would be good news for everybody.
The sum of £30 million—if it is as much as that—is a modest investment for a very high return in terms of job opportunities, social access, economic improvement and development. I hope that, as this is Lewis Macdonald's first speech as a minister, he will make it memorable, so that we can look back and say, "There he is—that is the man who was responsible for reinstating the Bathgate to Airdrie railway line."
It is not my business to comment on the quality of speeches, but it gives me particular pleasure to welcome Lewis Macdonald to make his maiden ministerial speech.
Thank you, Presiding Officer. I congratulate Karen Whitefield on securing today's debate and on the clear and constructive way in which she, among other members, has made the case for the line. I am especially pleased to make my maiden speech as a minister in response to a motion on rail, as I—along with many members who are here this evening—have been, for the past two years, a member of the cross-party group on strategic rail services.
Rail is a key part of Scotland's transport infrastructure and we must build on what has been achieved through partnership with industry and the local authorities. The job of the Executive will be to set the priorities to ensure that our most pressing transport challenges are addressed first.
As Karen Whitefield said, the A8/M8 corridor is recognised as being of great importance to the economy of central Scotland and to the country as a whole. Multimodal studies, which have been mentioned, are currently under way to find solutions to the transport challenges in the A8/M8 corridor and in central Scotland around the A80 and M74 northern extension. The consultants were appointed last December and their studies will be completed by April 2002. The significance of the Glasgow to Edinburgh corridor for transport and economic development was highlighted from the beginning, in the first scoping study.
As Murray Tosh said, rail capacity is recognised as a problem on the main Edinburgh to Glasgow route, as is capacity on the roads. Mary Mulligan suggested that travel to work would be a key consideration and I assure her that that is being taken into account in the multimodal studies that are being carried out.
We must address rail capacity, encourage a switch from road to rail and achieve social justice through the creation of job opportunities. One of the options that the studies will consider is the reopening of the route between Bathgate and Airdrie. However, the assessment that will be carried out as part of the transport corridor studies will inevitably be fairly broad, at least in the first instance. It will contribute to the possibility of further, more detailed work if the scheme can meet the necessary appraisal criteria, either by itself or as part of a package of complementary measures. No doubt all members who are present this evening will await the results of those studies with interest.
Members know that both the Parliament and ministers have new competencies and powers in respect of railways, one of which is to issue directions and guidance to the Strategic Rail Authority on the Scottish passenger rail franchise.
Will those appraisal criteria be available to members in advance?
Some of the appraisal criteria are already in the public domain. I imagine that those that are not will be released as the studies are completed. The process that is under way at the moment is to get the central Scotland transport model in place. The other schemes will be based on the results of that process.
Members will know that a consultation paper has been issued on strategic priorities for the Scottish passenger rail franchise. More than 200 responses have been received and the results of the exercise will inform our direction and guidance to the SRA later this year. Those strategic priorities and the direction and guidance that we issue will be the context in which we will set priorities for all proposals for enhancing the passenger rail system.
Bristow Muldoon and Mary Mulligan talked about the Edinburgh to Bathgate line. While it is impossible to prejudge the consideration of the strategic priorities, the points that have been made in relation to the line have been made by others and will be taken into account when we come to make conclusions about what the priorities should be.
I wondered whether Fiona Hyslop was going to lead us into a dispute between a Bathgate to Airdrie line and an Airdrie to Bathgate line. I thought that it would be better to avoid that. The advantages of reinstating the line are obvious. As has been said, it would open up new opportunities for people in West Lothian to access Glasgow and for people in North Lanarkshire to access Edinburgh and Livingston. It would also ease capacity problems on both road and rail in the central belt.
While I was listening to members, particularly when they mentioned the Harthill gap, it struck me that something less tangible has changed. When the line closed 40 years ago—or even when the line was lifted 20 years ago—there was a tendency for people in the west to look west and for people in the east to look east. That attitude has now gone, which is why projects of the kind that we are talking about, and others that are being dealt with in the transport studies, attract a good deal of interest.
It has to be said that ScotRail and Railtrack have examined the commercial viability of the line and have concluded that it would not be able to operate without subsidy. That is not a bar to the project; it is something that is true of most lines of the same size. The councils have approached the Executive to explore the potential for developing more detailed project proposals and have suggested that they might apply to the public transport fund.
The project would not be cheap. A figure of £30 million was mentioned today and a figure of £19 million appeared in the original report that was commissioned by West Lothian Council. Members will accept that both those figures are rough and that even the larger of them might rise substantially. We are talking about a substantial financial commitment and we need to address the possible sources of funding for such projects.
Members will know that the Scottish Executive has committed £150 million to the public transport fund between 2001 and 2004. I can announce that the arrangements for next year's round under the fund will allow authorities to make bids to a preparation pool. That means that they will be able to bid for the sums of money required to carry out the feasibility studies that will allow projects that are not yet fully worked up to be progressed. That will be particularly relevant to projects such as the one that we are discussing.
The Airdrie to Bathgate line will have to compete with other projects and, while I would dearly love to make my first ministerial speech as the minister who likes to say yes, I will instead be the minister who likes to say, "Bring forward proposals, work them up and, in the context that we have set—the growth that we seek to encourage in rail transport and the recognition of the particular needs of the central corridor—we will await with interest the proposal that is brought forward."
Supporters of the Airdrie to Bathgate line will be in competition with supporters of other projects at the feasibility stage, as well as at the full project stage. However, the creation of that preparation pool within the public transport fund offers real encouragement to everyone with projects at that stage. I remind members that there are other sources of funding, such as the integrated transport fund, the rail modernisation fund and the rail passenger partnership—the last two are, of course, UK funds.
I welcome the constructive and realistic approach of the members who have spoken in this evening's debate. We all recognise that it is not possible to meet every aspiration and expectation in transport. With a project of this kind, we need to be able to demonstrate real benefits and value for money. Projects that can do that will receive support.
The promoters of the Airdrie to Bathgate project have argued clearly for the major benefits that it would generate. It is now up to them to take the opportunity to make a bid for funds that will allow them to carry out the kind of robust appraisal that will demonstrate the potential of the line. I look forward to seeing the results of that.
That concludes the debate. I wish members a productive but enjoyable Easter recess.
Meeting closed at 17:59.