Official Report 1136KB pdf
I remind members of the Covid-related measures that are in place. Face coverings should be worn when moving around the chamber and across the Holyrood campus.
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-03044, in the name of Neil Bibby, on a people’s ScotRail.
15:54
After 25 years in the private sector, ScotRail will finally return to public hands on 31 March. Scottish Labour welcomes the return of ScotRail to public ownership. We called for that. We supported that in the Parliament and we long campaigned for it alongside passengers, trade unions and the Scottish Co-operative Party. I remind members why: it was to strengthen accountability, to reinvest profits back into services and to make public transport a true public service again.
The Scottish National Party had no choice but to bring ScotRail back into public ownership after the abject failure of the Abellio deal. The deal that the SNP heralded as “world leading” was a flop, and years of delays, cancellations and overcrowding were simply unacceptable. However, the SNP and Greens now have a choice. We have a new transport minister in Jenny Gilruth, and with a new minister comes the chance to adopt a new approach—a clean break with the past year, in which Scottish Government actions were running counter to its rhetoric. We saw unprecedented industrial unrest, a 3.8 per cent fare hike and proposals to shut ticket office desks, and there was no commitment from the Scottish Government to restore services to pre-pandemic levels this year.
Would the member accept that, before Covid, 77 per cent of the seats on trains were empty? Does he not think that that needs to be addressed?
We need more seats on trains, particularly given the potential need for social distancing.
While ministers make grand statements about the importance of tackling climate change, bringing about modal shift and reducing car use, they are failing to build back our railways. Today, the Government can vote with Scottish Labour and set out a new path to give the workforce assurances and certainty; to reject the cuts agenda; and to aspire to better for Scotland’s passengers. Disappointingly, however, it appears from the Government amendment that there will be no change in approach from the failures of the past few months. If anything, the Government is doubling down; its lengthy amendment is notable as much for what it does not say as for what it does.
Members have already heard today about the soaring cost of living. This is the wrong time to impose the biggest fare hike in a decade. A 3.8 per cent increase is hard to justify at any time, but it cannot possibly be justified now, especially when services are being diminished.
Last year, ScotRail opened a consultation on its May 2022 timetable, in which it intended to cut 300 rail services per day in comparison with pre-pandemic levels. Today, the Government amendment welcomes the restoration of 25 services,
“following the recent consultation on timetable changes”.
That would have been news to the Parliament, until ScotRail emailed us at 2.37 this afternoon with details of its new timetable. Far from increasing services, the timetable represents a cut to one in 10 services in comparison with pre-pandemic levels. It proposes 2,150 daily services in comparison with 2,400 before, which is a cut of 250; and 590,000 seats per day in comparison with 640,000 before, which is a cut of 50,000. I have no doubt that we will hear a lot of spin from the Government, but those are the facts and the inconvenient truth that it will want to ignore. The Government is confirming today that the new ScotRail will start with a vastly diminished timetable. That is wrong for passengers and for the climate, and it is wrong for SNP and Green MSPs to endorse those cuts today.
Scottish Labour is also calling for a new approach to industrial relations. Rail workers literally kept Scotland moving during the pandemic and they deserve our thanks, yet the Government amendment would delete our call for compulsory redundancies to be ruled out. That is in stark contrast to the current franchise agreement, which includes a guarantee of no compulsory redundancies throughout the lifetime of the franchise contract.
As the minister will know, there is no agreement from the workforce that the general public sector pay policy should apply to the rail sector at all. Forcing it on the workforce is regarded as an attempt to enforce pay restraint, and as an attack on free collective bargaining. Not even the Conservatives did away with free collective bargaining between unions and the operator of last resort when the east coast franchise came back in-house. To do it now makes a mockery of the SNP’s claim that the culture of ScotRail Trains Ltd will be founded on fair work. I hope that the minister will think again and reset industrial relations on our railways, because her amendment is a recipe for industrial unrest and avoidable disruption to passengers.
Scotland’s railway must be modern, but modernisation must not be used as an excuse for cuts and closures. Staff who work in booking offices do much more than sell tickets: they give advice to passengers, assist disabled passengers and make our railway more accessible. Often, station toilets and lifts are in operation only when staff are at the station. Staff grit station platforms on cold mornings, deter antisocial behaviour and are a presence that makes the railway safe, which is a concern for many, especially women who travel alone. From helping one of my constituents deal with a diabetic shock to recently saving someone’s life at Dalmuir station, staff go above and beyond. We should never underestimate the importance of our front-line staff.
ScotRail’s rush to close ticket offices, reduce their hours or close buildings entirely cannot go unchallenged. The Parliament should reject those cuts and closures.
Will Neil Bibby give way?
The member is about to conclude.
I would gladly have given way.
Our railways need new leadership. The decisions that the Government makes now will have an enormous bearing on ScotRail’s future. We are asking the Government and the Parliament as a whole for clarity on the way forward. Members should reject the agenda of service cuts, condemn rising fares, rule out compulsory redundancies and back collective bargaining. Let us work together to achieve a fully staffed, world-class ScotRail under public control.
I move,
That the Parliament welcomes the return of ScotRail to the public sector; considers the new public sector operator to be critical in securing modal shift and affordable, accessible and reliable rail services for Scotland’s passengers; condemns, therefore, the current plans for ticket office cuts and closures, service reductions, and the recent 3.8% increase in fares, which undermine progress towards net zero, modal shift and service improvement; considers that the new ScotRail, which will be under public ownership, must provide well-staffed, world-class services, and calls on the Scottish Government to rule out compulsory redundancies or any dilution of collective bargaining under the new operator, and further calls on the Scottish Government to reject tickets office cuts and closures and set out a timetable for restoring overall ScotRail services to pre-pandemic levels.
16:01
I welcome the opportunity to debate the future of Scotland’s railway. That future will have a new beginning on 1 April when ScotRail passenger services come into Scottish Government control. The debate is Labour Party business, but I am really keen to listen to the views of members across the chamber. Next week, I will update Parliament with further detail and I look forward to meeting our rail unions.
The mobilisation of ScotRail Trains Ltd gives us a real opportunity to rebuild following the pandemic. I know that we all value the importance of reliable and efficient rail services that connect the communities that we represent, give access to jobs, training and education and drive tourism. Rail is vital not only to our economic recovery, but to meeting our net zero commitments.
The current budget cuts nearly £80 million from rail maintenance and renewal. What impact will that have on the efficiency of the rail service?
I believe that Mr Kerr’s party voted against the budget. Setting that aside, I do not accept the point that he made. The Government has made record investment in our railways and intends to take them into public ownership, something that the Conservatives have consistently voted against.
I will take some time to talk about our rail workers, who are absolutely essential in the transition into public ownership. The contribution that they made during the pandemic was invaluable: they made sure that our essential workers could get to where they needed to be and kept our country going. I extend my sincere thanks to them.
Does the minister recognise that many ScotRail workers are concerned that the protections that they currently have against compulsory redundancy might be under jeopardy with the move towards the public ownership of ScotRail? What reassurances can she give on that?
The Government has always respected collective bargaining. However, I am sure that members will respect the fact that the chamber is not the place where such negotiations should take place. As I said, I will meet the rail unions next week and I look forward to those discussions.
It was clear even before the pandemic that some ScotRail services were significantly underused. Some off-peak services ran virtually empty. That is not an effective use of our finances and it has a negative impact on our environment. At the height of Covid, revenue dropped to less than 10 per cent of pre-pandemic levels. Nearly half of rail passengers have now returned to ScotRail services, which is good. However, travel patterns and purchasing habits are changing.
Will the minister give way?
I would like to make progress.
With more people working from home, weekends are now the busiest times for rail travel, so returning to pre-pandemic timetables makes little sense. Nonetheless, it is worth noting that ScotRail announced this afternoon that, from May this year, 150 more services will be added, compared with December last year. That equates to around 2,150 daily services, a move that I hope members will welcome.
Throughout the pandemic, to ensure that services continued to run, to give employment security for staff and to cover operating costs, the Government provided more than £500 million of additional funding to our franchises via emergency measures agreements. Those measures were extended and are now in place until the end of February. Overall, funding for our franchises has been, on average, over three times more than would have been expected had revenues not been so severely impacted.
I recognise the role that the minister played in the Levenmouth rail campaign to reopen that part of the railway. I recognise and welcome what she said about rail recovery being absolutely key, but I am concerned that we are hearing very much the same lines that we heard from the previous transport minister about digging in on those cuts. Will the minister please take another look at those cuts? They will really affect passengers and our rail services across Scotland.
I am not digging in on anything—I am setting out the Government’s view. However, when I meet ScotRail next Tuesday, I will raise some of the concerns around timetable changes and ticket office closures, and I hope that that gives Neil Bibby some reassurance on that point.
The recent fares increase is an example of where the Government has had to make difficult decisions. We know that any fare increase is unwelcome for passengers, but the changes that are being implemented this year are absolutely essential to our wider recovery plans.
I give members an undertaking that I am in listening mode as we move forward with our ambitious plans to bring ScotRail into public ownership. Our trade unions will be pivotal in that endeavour and I very much look forward to working with them and meeting them next week.
Delivering Scotland’s railways back into public ownership will not be without challenge, but I am absolutely determined to ensure a seamless transition that delivers for passengers and our railway workers.
I move amendment S6M-03044.3, to leave out from “condemns” to end and insert:
“notes the vital role that ScotRail staff and workers will play in delivering these new services and thanks them for all that they have done to keep rail services running throughout the COVID-19 pandemic; welcomes that staff will transfer with their current terms and conditions, will benefit from public sector pay policy, and that any pay deals already agreed for 2022-23 will be honoured; further welcomes the investment by the Scottish Government to decarbonise and expand Scotland’s railways, including £1 billion to electrify 441 kilometres of track and improve infrastructure, benefiting more than 35 million passenger journeys across Scotland each year, a record £4.85 billion allocated, including ongoing electrification and decarbonisation, over £9 billion of investment by the Scottish Government since 2007 helping to reconnect 14 communities to the rail network, with five more to be reconnected in the next three years, and over £555 million to sustain services and jobs throughout the pandemic; laments that the Scottish Labour Party joined with the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party to vote against a draft Scottish budget for 2022-23, which increased expenditure and investment in Scotland’s rail services; welcomes that rail fares in Scotland are still on average 20% lower than across the rest of Great Britain, and that, from May, there will be 150 more rail services than have been running since December 2021, with 25 services being reintroduced following the recent consultation on timetable changes; recognises that there has been widespread public and stakeholder interest in the ScotRail consultation on ticket office availability, but notes that the consultation only closed on 2 February 2022 and responses are therefore still to be reviewed; further notes that the fair fares review will explore what more can be done to ensure that fares across all modes of public transport are equitable and sustainable; agrees that the culture of ScotRail Trains Ltd will be founded on fair work; recognises the key role that a publicly owned and controlled rail service will play in the future to help transform Scotland’s economy, to cut emissions from transport, deliver on the climate change targets and create a fairer, greener Scotland, and calls for the full devolution of rail from the UK Parliament, including Network Rail, in order to operate a wholly publicly owned, fully integrated rail network in Scotland.”
16:06
I will start by doing something that I should have done previously, which is to welcome Jenny Gilruth to her new role. I had thought that she had made a promising start by giving some very straight answers to questions in the chamber but, today, she has hunkered down somewhat. However, she says that she is in listening mode, so I will take her at her word.
I thank Labour for bringing this important debate to the chamber. We are at an important junction for the rail industry. It is a fork in the line where we can either do better or have more of the same. The problem is that we do not know where we are heading, because we have had no vision from the Scottish Government. Whether members would like a nationalised rail industry or not, we do not know what that is going to mean. We do know that there will be cuts in services and ticket offices and that Abellio has been doing the SNP’s dirty work by preparing the ground for all that.
On the subject of ticket offices, in my region alone, East Kilbride station will lose up to five hours a day; Airdrie, which is a busy station, will have five hours cut from Monday to Saturday; and the office in Cumbernauld, another big town, will be open for only 90 minutes a day, Monday to Thursday, and not at all on Friday.
Does Mr Simpson accept that the way in which people buy their train tickets in 2022 has changed compared with 30 years ago? The last time a consultation was undertaken on that was 30 years ago. Surely things have changed since 1992.
Things have changed a lot since 1992, but, as was outlined earlier, the need for personal service has not changed; we require that in some stations.
We need to get back to some sort of normality and end the emergency timetable. We say no to the 300 service cuts that are coming down the line, although it would seem that there will now be a mere 250 cuts. We have to get rid of the temporary timetables.
Fares have been going up, but services are being cut. If we want to get people back on the train, we need fares to go down, not up. Stephen Kerr will talk about that.
Mr Kerr is actually on the same page as Mick Lynch of the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers. Mr Lynch says the following, and Mr Kerr would no doubt agree:
“We already have a cost-of-living crisis and now there is a climate cost to latest Scottish rail fare hikes which will deter people from using rail, especially when we know the price of using rail has risen ... four times more quickly than the cost of petrol in the last decade.”
He is right.
In the Scottish Government’s most recent budget, it has cut almost £100 million from vital rail infrastructure. I mentioned East Kilbride earlier; that line is bearing the brunt of those costs.
We need to increase the number of staff in stations and ticket offices. We need to expand the ticket office network. Those two things were contained in the vision, the only vision that we have had so far—and that was prepared by the rail unions. I am pleased to hear that the minister will be talking to the unions next week, because we need to repair industrial relations on our railways. They have been shattered, and they need to be fixed in order for us to move on.
16:14
Had the amendment in my name been chosen this afternoon, it would have called on the Scottish Government to expand eligibility for railcards, so that everyone is eligible to get the benefit of rail discounts and is encouraged to take climate-friendly transport. That would be based on the model that already exists throughout London and the south-east, and would mean that everyone would be eligible to get one third off the price of rail travel. Scottish Liberal Democrats also propose a 50 per cent concession for those who already qualify for railcards. That would slash the cost of rail travel for passengers and encourage people to ditch their cars, which would reduce emissions and tip the balance in favour of climate-friendly transport. I will say more about reducing emissions in rural, remote and island areas, which do not have that option, a little later.
With Abellio’s ScotRail contract coming to an end this March, we have the opportunity to revisit the approach that is taken on rail fares and discounts. Of course, we also await the Scottish Government’s fair fares review, but it is clear from the recent news headlines and the debate that was held earlier today that we must do all that we can to tackle the cost-of-living crisis.
Families and businesses are being hit from every angle by rising prices, so it is hard to take the SNP-Green Government’s commitment to decarbonisation seriously when the cost of the most environmentally friendly form of mass transportation increases every year. Indeed, an eye-watering fare increase of 3.8 per cent last month was the biggest hike in the past 10 years. There seems to be a clear lack of vision on the climate emergency.
Scotland’s transport emissions are stubbornly high and are unchanged since the 1990s. One way that we can tackle that is by getting people out of cars and on to our railways and public transport, but that will not happen if costs to passengers add up. It is not just costs to passengers that will be an obstacle to reducing emissions; a reduction in services will be, too. How can we expect passengers to seriously consider rail travel if it is unlikely that there will be a consistent service on their usual routes? As we begin to resume some form of normal life, we need to ensure that commuters do not find it easier to use their cars than travel by rail.
I turn to rural, remote and island areas, such as my constituency, Shetland. Hopping on a train is not an option in an islander’s day-to-day life. If you ask a Shetlander where their nearest train station is, do not be surprised to hear them answer “Bergen”. Extending programmes such as the under-22s bus concession to include free ferry travel, however, would not only be equitable but would encourage young people into the habit of ditching cars in favour of public transport—if that transport is properly connected—which would further reduce emissions.
Scottish Liberal Democrats want to give people new hope for the climate emergency. We all know that we must act fast before it is too late. We want to see an efficient and green rail network that gives everyone railcard discounts instead of ever-increasing prices. We need to make sure that rural bus services are more accessible and that they tie in with rail timetables.
I urge the Scottish Government to up its efforts to open or reopen rail connections to the communities that are crying out for them, such as Newburgh, while upgrades to the far north line and dualling of the Highland mainline would benefit rural communities in the north of Scotland. That is a serious, ambitious and credible proposal for boosting rail travel. It would be good for our environment and good for our economy, too.
We move to the open debate.
16:14
I remind members of my entry in the register of interests.
I welcome the minister to her new post and ask her, as she takes it up, to take a fresh look at the glaring inconsistencies in the Government’s transport policy. It is no good going to the 26th United Nations climate change conference of the parties—COP26—in Glasgow, boasting of a
“world-leading commitment to cut greenhouse gas emissions”—[Official Report, 13 January 2022; c 57.]
while savaging the greenest form of public transport that we have. It is no good coming to Parliament to unveil route maps that are aimed at “driving down car use” if, at the same time, public transport alternatives are being decimated.
On the very same day that the SNP and Greens announced their co-operation agreement for a “fairer” and “greener” Scotland, ScotRail announced a plan to axe 300 train services a day—not temporarily but permanently. On the very same day that the previous transport minister stood up in Parliament to defend those public transport cuts, the rest of the world was marking world car free day. You couldn’t make it up!
Our message to the new Minister for Transport is simple: it is that there is still time. There is still time to listen to the RMT, the Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen, the Transport Salaried Staffs Association and Unite the union, who tell us that our railways, in public ownership and run for passengers not profit, are part of the solution to the climate crisis, not part of the problem. There is still time for the minister to understand that there is something profoundly unethical about Abellio conducting a consultation for a service that in less than 60 days’ time it will no longer run. No wonder people think that it is being paid to do the Scottish Government’s dirty work for it.
Last month, the First Minister came to Parliament to defend the plans to cut ticket offices and jobs at 117 stations across Scotland. She declared that
“the ticket process is now automated”—[Official Report, 20 January 2022; c 24.]
and that that was “modernisation”. In the region that I represent, that “modernisation” means that there is a 30 per cent cut in cover at Airdrie, Falkirk Grahamston and Polmont, a 50 per cent cut at Coatbridge, a 60 per cent cut at Shotts and a 78 per cent cut at Cumbernauld.
On the question of automation, the RMT has just surveyed its members. This is what one of them wrote:
“Station staff are first responders. We are the safety net for vulnerable people. We are first aiders. We are there for disabled assists. We are there for disruptions. We are there for young girls who get harassed on our platforms. We are there for cleaning and ensuring that the station is a safe environment. We do not just sell tickets.”
The removal of staff from our railway stations will not only deter passengers; it will also deny them. So, has the plan been equality-proofed? What about elderly passengers, women passengers travelling alone at night and people with learning disabilities? Do they not deserve a good-quality public transport service that is accessible to them?
I close by quoting the minister herself on the subject of the Levenmouth rail link. We were told that
“it will bring jobs; it will bring investment; and it will widen the horizons of the next generation.”—[Official Report, 27 September 2017; c 77.]
The cuts to Scotland’s rail services that are being defended by a Government that she is now part of will cost jobs, drive out investment and narrow the horizons of the next generation. In that same speech to Parliament, the minister quoted Jimmy Reid, who said:
“whoever takes the important economic decisions in society ipso facto determines the social priorities of that society.”
He was right, so now that the minister is in power she should take that advice, reverse the cuts, change the Government’s priorities, save those jobs and invest in Scotland’s railways.
16:19
I welcome Jenny Gilruth to what I think is her first debate as the transport minister and offer her my congratulations.
The motion opens by welcoming the return of ScotRail to the public sector. I hope that speakers from the Labour Party will recognise that it is the SNP Government that has brought what we can of the rail system back into public ownership before they reel off criticisms of the Scottish Government for running a railway that we do not yet have full charge of.
There are major challenges facing the railways as we come out of the pandemic: the impact of Covid on public transport has been massive. It will take time for usage to return to pre-pandemic levels. Throughout the pandemic, the Scottish Government has supported rail franchises with more than £1 billion, including £450 million of additional funding through the emergency measures agreements. However, that level of funding is not sustainable in the longer term. I think that everyone would accept that.
The motion talks of fare increases, but does not mention that, on average, ScotRail fares are 20 per cent cheaper than those across the rest of the UK. The motion talks about jobs, but it does not acknowledge that employment in Scotland’s railways is the highest it has been since devolution. Despite some failings by the private companies running our trains in the past, the Scottish Government’s track record of directing improvements and investment in the railway network stands up to scrutiny.
Could the member tell us what improvements he wants to see under a nationalised ScotRail?
I do not work in railways, so I will leave the improvements to the railway sector and the people who actually know what that they are talking about. I am quite sure that the minister just said that she is meeting the unions next week. Is that not so, minister?
Since 2007, under the SNP, the Scottish Government has invested more than £9 billion in rail infrastructure in Scotland. The last decade has seen an investment of around £1 billion in some 441km of track electrification and associated infrastructure improvements, directly benefiting more than 35 million passenger journeys across Scotland each year.
Communities across Scotland have been reconnected to the railway network and in the next three years, more will follow. I would like to see the names of some of the places in my constituency added to that list. I represent one of the largest constituencies by geographic size and yet we have only one station: Gleneagles.
In my constituency, the old station buildings at Blackford have given way to a new freight terminal, taking Highland Spring’s bottled water distribution off the road. I congratulate Highland Spring on taking the action in the face of the climate emergency.
Perth station is in the Deputy First Minister’s constituency but is very important to my constituents. The Tay cities deal has committed £50 million towards a Perth bus and rail interchange, which will help to make those vital transport links and create a much more streamlined experience for customers with ongoing connections.
Having mentioned the Tay cities deal, I cannot really let the Tory members off the hook by failing to remind the chamber of the missing millions—
Will the member take an intervention?
Yes, I will.
A few short months ago, the previous transport minister inadvertently misled Parliament by suggesting that the number of trains to Stranraer was going up when in fact it was going down. Can the member explain how we get more people on to trains when they are cutting services and putting up fares, even above the price of petrol? How can we get more people on the trains?
Mr Fairlie, you have 30 seconds left.
The initial understanding and expectation was for equal funding from both the Scottish and Westminster Governments—£200 million each—[Laughter.] If Mr Carson’s intervention had been on the fact that the Conservative Government was £50 million short, I would have taken his intervention seriously.
In city region deals across Scotland, the Scottish Government has committed more than the UK Government. Across the five city region deals, the UK Government has come up short by £410 million—that is another cost of the union right there.
Stations were not always so scarce in my constituency. As in many parts of the country, there are station roads in towns and villages that have not seen a train in my lifetime, near enough. Apparently, there was even a station in Muirton, which was set up to serve Muirton park, St Johnstone’s old football ground. It was only used on match days.
Mr Fairlie, you need to bring your remarks to a close.
Yes, I can do that.
The task of renewing and improving Scotland’s railways would be an awful lot easier if the whole rail network infrastructure, including signals, tunnels and bridges, were still in the hands of the UK Government. I want to see Network Rail becoming fully accountable in Scotland. Do the Labour members agree?
Thank you, Mr Fairlie. I call Stephen Kerr to be followed by Audrey Nicoll. We have no time in hand and any interventions must be absorbed in the member’s time.
16:24
I am delighted to be able to speak in this debate as a friend of the RMT union—a new guise, in which I rejoice.
Discussion about improving the accessibility of trains is of critical importance for Scotland if we are to meet our net zero commitments. Last week, during First Minister’s questions, I highlighted the outrageous cost that the people of Falkirk face in using Scotland’s trains. I remind the chamber of those figures: for someone who travels from Falkirk to Edinburgh and back every day of the working week, it costs £72.50, while for someone travelling from Falkirk to Glasgow and back every day of the working week, it costs £85.50.
In the First Minister’s answer to my question, she made a pledge to the people of Scotland that her Government would make rail fares as affordable as possible. The following day, the First Minister’s answer became a pledge that was splashed across the front page of the Metro newspaper, which was no doubt the handiwork of the dozens of media spin types that the First Minister has at her disposal. I look forward in the weeks and months ahead to hearing the Government’s plans to make rail fares as affordable as possible. By the way, in plain English, that means, in many instances, cutting the fares, so we look forward to hearing about the Government’s plan to cut fares and get more people to use the trains.
We must make it easier for people to buy tickets. We must improve parking facilities at train stations, as well as integrating bus services. We must increase the number of train services that are provided. We must reopen closed railway stations, which is a commitment that was in the Scottish Conservative manifesto in 2021. In short, we have many steps to take until we can say that Scotland’s trains are fully accessible.
There is not one solution to address all those problems. There are many strands to the solution and I will highlight one of them, which would be the introduction of an Oyster card scheme in Scotland. Plans to do so with the introduction of a Saltire card were previously announced by the SNP, but recycling and reheating announcements is what the SNP does so well with its dozens of media types in the ministerial towers.
In 2012, the then Deputy First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, said:
“The Saltire Card will be a hugely exciting development for transport in Scotland and will help us achieve a truly world-class public transport network. It will make it easier, more attractive and possibly cheaper for people to get around using public transport and will help further connect our cities.”
That was in 2012. The Oyster card has been used in London since 2003. It is hardly unproven technology, yet here we are in 2022—10 years later—and the SNP has failed to introduce it. It is another occasion on which eyes have been taken off the ball.
What is stopping the Government? It can be done. We know that because, at COP26, delegates were given Oyster-like cards to enable free access to travel around Glasgow on trains, subway and buses. COP26 delegates were privileged enough to get those cards. Perhaps the minister will explain why the people of Scotland do not merit the same privilege to such a service. There is no excuse.
The SNP and Labour portray bringing the rail operator back into public ownership as the answer to solve all the problems of the rail network, but it is not. Problems of cost, investment and ticketing will remain no matter who operates the railway. There are many problems to solve that require innovation, creativity and accountability. We need more services, we need better connectivity between different forms of public transport and we need to reopen lines. The railway being back in full public ownership, it is now the SNP Government’s responsibility to ensure that all of that and more is delivered. It has taken the responsibility to be the train operator and it must now deliver on its commitments.
No doubt, true to form, the SNP will seek to deflect blame and attention as it has done in almost every other area of public policy. Scotland’s railways are now the Government’s responsibility and taking the railways back into public ownership has simply reinforced—
Mr Kerr, will you please conclude?
The buck stops with the minister.
16:28
Like other colleagues, I welcome Jenny Gilruth to her new role.
Rail connectivity is a lifeline for the north-east, ensuring travel to and from education, employment, leisure activities, specialist medical treatment and so on. Members know that the north-east hosts an energy sector that has contributed more than £330 billion and counting to UK tax coffers. Railways have been pivotal in that achievement.
The causal factors impacting our railways over the years are complex. The pandemic hit services hard and made the financial climate extremely difficult.
The return of rail services to public ownership is welcome and an opportunity to get serious about addressing many of the challenges.
The SNP amendment outlines the record £4.85 billion investment by the Scottish Government to decarbonise and expand Scotland’s railways, including on-going electrification and decarbonisation.
I am hearing Audrey Nicoll describing the rail issues in her north-east constituency. Does she agree that we need to focus on rural areas, including those south of the central belt and in my South Scotland region?
I absolutely agree. Coming from a provincial and rural area, I think that it is absolutely vital that the investment in and plans for rolling stock and infrastructure and the route to net zero extend to rural areas, in particular.
Will the member take an intervention?
I will move on, if the member does not mind.
That investment is also vital to getting people back on trains and making rail a travel option of choice.
Circling back to the north-east, progress is already being made at Aberdeen railway station where an £8 million refurbishment is under way. Last year, Kintore railway station reopened, and the North East of Scotland Transport Partnership is scoping the reopening of two small stations in my constituency. The Aberdeen hydrogen hub is an innovative opportunity that could, in time, expand production to connect to larger volume use of hydrogen for rail transport.
Recent Friends of the Earth research on nitrogen dioxide levels put Wellington Road in my constituency as the 11th most polluted road in Scotland, so the need to decarbonise our railways and get folk out of cars is pressing.
Will the member give way?
I will not; thank you.
Last September, in a debate on ScotRail led by Neil Bibby, the transport minister stated that our rail plans included rail becoming a go-to for freight. I would be interested to hear from the minister more detail about that, and the prominence that it will be given going forward.
Turning to the workforce, in preparing for today, I asked a very good friend, a train driver, for his thoughts. He highlighted the absolute professionalism of staff who, at the height of the pandemic, dealt with challenging members of the public unwilling to wear face masks. They went above and beyond. He described how ScotRail adapted well in providing greater areas for staff and was excellent at updating Government messaging through emails and social media. Staff remaining on full pay was also of huge importance. Hearing that, I urge the unions to get around the table with the management team to negotiate arrangements that will bring reassurance and stability for staff during a period of change.
On the long-term role of rail in our transport infrastructure, my friend welcomed the progress on electrification, and the potential role of hydrogen in rail travel.
The principle that publicly-run organisations, free from the motivation of profit, can deliver exceptional services, was exemplified during the pandemic by the NHS and emergency services. The Scottish Government’s commitments to our transport network demonstrate that there is much planned to ensure that ScotRail will provide a quality service to Scotland’s passengers, and I will be closely monitoring progress.
16:33
I welcome the focus of this afternoon’s debate, because it is clear that we need a reset and relaunch of all public transport if we are to meet climate targets. This has been a great week for the bus, with the launch of free travel for under-22s at last and the promise of increased funding to protect bus services as they come through the pandemic. I also look forward to the launch of the community bus fund to take more bus services under municipal public ownership.
However, we need to take that same transformative approach to rail as we recover from the pandemic. A people’s ScotRail must respond to the needs of current and future passengers while retaining, valuing and investing in its workforce. The concerns that rail unions, passengers and other have expressed about timetable changes, ticket office closures and the fear of redundancy underline the fact that the Government and the new minister have work to do to build confidence that a genuine people’s ScotRail will emerge in the months to come.
Let me be clear that I share many of those concerns. However, although there is much in Labour’s motion that I agree with, it looks backwards to the pre-Covid world when we should be looking forwards to the services and timetables that will be needed to get more people out of private cars and on to the railway.
Our vision is for better services, electrified routes, new lines, accessible stations, better pay and conditions for workers, improved ticketing and fair fares. That does not mean that there should be no changes to the way in which rail services are run, but it does mean that any financial savings must be reinvested back into rail services and the workforce that is needed to run them, rather than being stripped out of the rail system.
Will the member give way?
I do not have time.
Planning for that transformation means listening to passengers and workers, and ensuring that their voices are heard, including at board level. It is clear that ScotRail and previous operators have not run meaningful consultations on service delivery for many years. The most recent ticket office assessment was in 1991, and I do not think that there has been a national timetable review in living memory. The consultations that have taken place over the past months have been badly managed. The decision to conduct a massive consultation on timetabling during a pandemic, when passenger trends were deeply uncertain, was clearly flawed.
Last September, I ran an online town hall event on the timetable review for my constituents. Their concerns were very clear. Passengers were angry about the removal of direct services from Kirkcaldy to Perth and the increased waiting time for connections at Ladybank, which was a particular concern for old and vulnerable people and women. Passengers were also angry about the proposed dramatic increase in journey times from Perth to Edinburgh, especially when ScotRail representatives suggested at the meeting that rail could never compete against cars using the Queensferry crossing.
I welcome the fact that ScotRail has backed down on those damaging changes. I also congratulate the hundreds of my constituents who joined our campaigning action to help to make the case and force change. Let us see that as an early win for people power that can set the tone for a people’s ScotRail that listens to the needs of passengers and to the workers on our railway.
However, there is still more to do, including retaining customer-facing staff in stations and ensuring that the commitment that the minister has given that there will be no compulsory redundancies is carried over in full to the new contracts.
The issues with ScotRail will not disappear overnight. There is serious work to be done to make a people’s railway a reality, and that means recognising the challenges that we face and working hard to resolve them.
16:37
I congratulate Jenny Gilruth on her appointment—I hope that she brings fresh eyes to this crucial debate—and I declare an interest as a member of the RMT parliamentary group.
At last, we have public ownership of our rail services in sight—it will happen in the very near future. We should grasp the opportunity to reverse poor services and high fares, to modernise our ticketing system and to renew the relationships with the workforce. It would be a real test for any Government, but it is a particular test for the current Scottish Government to show that it has the energy and the ambition to bring about a better rail service.
In no way is Labour looking back. We are highlighting the realities of the present situation. We must have a confident and satisfied workforce on which we can rely, and we must address the present realities and talk about the future.
Why does it matter who runs our railway? I believe that it matters because public ownership is the best way to ensure the strongest accountability and to have a train service that is run in the interests of ordinary travellers who need the reliable and affordable service that many members have talked about. After all, it is a public service.
To address John Mason’s question about why there are empty seats on trains, which he seems to raise at every opportunity, maybe that is because some people cannot afford to get on a train in the first place. There are many people with whom I have common cause when it comes to the affordability of train travel. It is a central issue for a publicly run service that ordinary workers should be able to afford to get on the train in the first place. Why is the importance of that to a thriving economy not understood?
Glasgow, which John Mason and I represent, has the largest urban rail network outwith London, which was created to serve commuters going to work. However, it is now time for Glasgow, as the driver of the west of Scotland economy, to have more investment.
I must put on record my disappointment with the proposal for the Clyde metro, which appears to be extremely vague. It is up to 35 years away, and there is not even a commitment to the first phase of it: the airport link, which would form a vital component of the commuter link to Paisley. It is disappointing for Glaswegians that there are no concrete plans on the table. I say to the minister that the people of Glasgow will not be fooled by the pretence that the Clyde metro is something real. If the metro really exists, I want to see the Government put its money where its mouth is.
I agree with Stephen Kerr that it is not enough to say that services should be run under public control; we must show that we can run a better service. I have discussed that with ASLEF. I support the union’s view that staff should be paid for working unsociable hours. Many trips are made by car on Sundays. That is because people often do not have the choice of using a rail service on Sundays. If we are serious about getting people out of cars, we must think about improving the service.
Since 2009, the cost of a ticket has risen faster than wages. The cost of a UK train journey is now so high that we pay five times more, as a proportion of our salaries, than our European neighbours. I had a look today at the ScotRail website and found that a day ticket from Glasgow to Edinburgh costs £31.50. For someone on the living wage, that represents half of their daily wage. That is totally unacceptable. Jim Fairlie said that Scotland has cheaper fares than the rest of the UK. That may be true for some comparisons, but not for the biggest service. That is an absolute outrage. A part-time worker who wants to work in Edinburgh has absolutely no chance of survival, because they would not be able to afford those fares.
We need a publicly run service that is invested in with public money. We need to get the public behind that and we need to deliver it in the lifetime of this Parliament.
16:41
To connect our communities, and because of our commitment to a net zero future, rail travel must become an ever more important mode of transport. We have heard many laudable commitments from Labour and SNP members. My concern is that there is little detail about how that will be paid for. The SNP amendment paints a picture of a rail network so perfect that it would not look out of place in an episode of “Thomas the Tank Engine”.
Let us not sugar coat this. The Scottish Government is taking over a rail network at an extremely challenging time. I am sure that the SNP will return to that point when it inevitably follows its usual path and fails to meet the commitments that it is making today. That said, there is no reason why Scotland’s rail network should not recover and thrive, with the right approach. However, the SNP’s track record on taking private businesses into public ownership is less than stellar. One only has to consider ferries and airports to understand that point.
The Scottish Government is taking over the rail network at a time when passenger numbers have crashed because of Covid, costs are rising and the network is showing its age. I listened to the minister’s contribution. I apologise if I picked her up wrongly, and she can take me up on this, but she seemed to indicate that rail routes and services had been cut because they were not full. If that is the criterion for putting on services, many rural areas will end up without a rail link. If that is the case, it does not align well with the Scottish Government’s aim to reduce road miles. That is hardly a net zero policy.
I highlight the route from Ayr to Stranraer as an example. It is an unelectrified single-track rail link that does not even stop at Scotland’s busiest port, Cairnryan. Investment in that route would provide a great opportunity to take freight off the dangerous A77 road link, which is a point that has been made time and again for many years and amid many promises from the SNP. The latest iteration of the strategic transport projects review 2 document makes it obvious that the can is still being kicked well down the road. Once again, that hardly helps us to meet our net zero targets.
Several years ago, the Ayr Station hotel, which sits on that route, started collapsing into Ayr station, temporarily closing the route south of Ayr. That situation remains unresolved. Millions of pounds continue to be drained from the public purse to keep the building wrapped up while no decision is made on its future. That issue was already in the Scottish Government’s inbox, and will become a problem that the Government must solve following nationalisation. The SNP has allowed our railways to fall into a poor state. The Scottish Government is taking on a big task.
We are being sold a vision of a world-leading modern rail network with high wages, increased passenger numbers and increased investment in rail links and trains, along with lower rail fares. We would whole-heartedly applaud all of that if it was ever to come to fruition. As ever with this Government, we hear world-leading targets and ambitions, but there is no route to get to those goals and no indication of how they will be paid for.
Forgive me, Presiding Officer, if I do not get overexcited about the impending nationalisation of ScotRail, which we are told will solve our significant rail issues. Regrettably, having heard so many ambitious plans from the SNP Government that have sunk without a trace, I see little to give me confidence that this latest takeover will result in anything different.
The SNP Government has control of a ferry company that is all at sea, unlike its boats, and an airport that it will not allow to take off. It is surely only a matter of time before our new nationalised train operator goes off the rails. How on earth will Scotland ever get anywhere under the SNP Government?
Clare Adamson is joining us remotely.
16:45
I come to this debate agreeing with much of the thrust of the Labour motion. I too, welcome the return of ScotRail to the public sector. Our public transport system should be just that—public. The current franchising system is not fit for purpose. Passengers across the UK have suffered from unreliable services and an infamously confusing pricing system. That has been caused by a diffuse network of private operators who are motivated by profit and devoid of real accountability or transparency. The return of ScotRail to public ownership is therefore a significant step. I note that, despite the tone of Labour members’ contributions thus far, it is one that successive Labour Governments at both the UK and Scottish levels failed to take.
Any country that is serious about meeting the challenges of the climate emergency must be serious about public transport. The notorious Beeching report in the 1960s—[Interruption.]
Ms Adamson, will you stop for a second, please? There is far too much chattering going on. Let us have the courtesy of listening to Ms Adamson. Thank you.
Please resume, Ms Adamson.
Thank you, Presiding Officer.
The notorious Beeching report in the 1960s—which was commissioned by the Tories, with many proposals being implemented by subsequent Labour Governments—underestimated the social value of rail services. Decades on, we are faced with the environmental fall-out of those sweeping closures. The urgency of reinvesting in low-carbon transport has never been more apparent, so I question why those on the Labour benches continue to oppose Scotland having full control over rail services.
In government, Labour kept ScotRail in private hands. In opposition, it refuses to call for full powers over rail services including Network Rail—powers that would give us a truly integrated public rail service that was accountable to this Parliament and the people of Scotland. Furthermore, Labour offers no serious proposals for how we would pay for its demands without those powers while operating within our fixed budget.
Meanwhile, the SNP Government has demonstrated that it is serious about public transport and low-carbon travel. Our party’s record in Government is noted in our amendment for posterity, but it bears repeating for my colleagues on the Opposition benches. The amendment mentions
“£1 billion to electrify 441 kilometres of track and improve infrastructure, benefiting more than 35 million passenger journeys across Scotland each year, a record £4.85 billion allocated, including ongoing electrification and decarbonisation, over £9 billion of investment by the Scottish Government since 2007 helping to reconnect 14 communities to the rail network, with five more to be reconnected in the next three years, and over £555 million to sustain services and jobs throughout the pandemic”.
Those things are supporting the heroic efforts of our rail workers in these unprecedented times.
My Motherwell and Wishaw constituency is benefiting from Government funding. Significant Scottish Government investment has gone into upgrading Motherwell train station. The redevelopment will see a transport hub created in the town, which will be a huge boon to the local economy and will attract wider investment. I also welcome the development of Cleland station in the previous session of Parliament and the introduction of disability access there.
Investment goes wider than rail. The SNP Government has been a champion of active travel, with investment going into active travel projects across North Lanarkshire, including in Craigneuk, in my area. In conjunction with the Scottish Government, we have our own active travel strategy and prioritisation with the aid of Government capital funding, working with North Lanarkshire Council to deliver. There have been fantastic initiatives such as socialtrack, which has reclaimed a derelict site in Wishaw, turned it into a pump track and encouraged active travel across the area.
Ms Adamson, will you please conclude?
I look forward to the Scottish Government implementing its strategy for the railways.
We move to closing speeches.
16:50
There is much in the Labour motion with which we can agree—not least, as Brian Whittle pointed out, the pivotal role that rail must play in the drive towards modal shift and net zero. The motion is right to demand the swift return to full services, because, as Richard Leonard said, it is simply not credible to talk about encouraging people back on to the railway—not only in pre-pandemic numbers, but in volumes that signal modal shift—in the context of ticket office cuts and closures, service reductions and the increase in fares.
That is where the folly of the SNP amendment is laid bare. As Stephen Kerr said, change of ownership does not of itself drive improvement. The SNP has spent years berating the current workforce, the management and, latterly, the unions on their stewardship of Scotland’s railway, yet even it acknowledges, in its amendment, that the transfer to a new company means that pretty much the same people whom they have spent years unfairly traducing will be running it thereafter. The key difference now, as has been pointed out, is that it will be under the ownership of a Government that, as a trepidatious Scottish public is well aware, also owns the ferries and Prestwick airport.
However, I think that something far more sinister is going on. As Graham Simpson pointed out, we have never seen a coherent plan for investment and improvement. Brian Whittle asked how we will pay for it. The SNP has maintained a Delphic silence on that.
Presiding Officer, as I have pointed out many times in this chamber, it boils down to three choices. First, taxes could be increased and any higher take could be hypothecated to the railway. That is not going to happen.
Secondly, other portfolio budgets, such as health and education, could be cannibalised. Thankfully, that is not going to happen—in fact, the reverse is already happening, with cuts in this year’s budget of nearly £100 million to funding that supports the costs of maintenance, safe operation and renewal. Strangely, Clare Adamson omitted that from her self-congratulation.
Thirdly, the railway budget could be cannibalised from within, and that is exactly what the Government is doing. As we heard yesterday from the Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero, Energy and Transport, we can forget about reducing journey times between Aberdeen and the central belt by 20 minutes; we can forget the promise to dual at Usan; and we can forget any new lines in the north-east. Instead, the Government will reprofile railway funds—by cutting ticket office hours to reduce the overhead; cutting staffing to reduce the wage bill; cutting services to reduce the running and engineering costs; ramping up fares to squeeze more from a smaller passenger base; and, as I discovered last week, winding back from the inter7city service provision and class 43 sets—which I am surprised and disappointed that Audrey Nicoll forgot to mention in her speech.
Presiding Officer, that is classic SNP. The public wanted a publicly owned railway. “Right,” said Nicola. “Make it happen. Get the votes in the bag and worry about paying for it later. Oh, and get Abellio to do all the dirty work on its way out.” That hammering of services, staff and the public is the result. The Government is a shameless shower of charlatans, shunting ScotRail into the sidings. The Scottish Conservatives will never get on board with that.
16:54
Since taking on the transport portfolio nine days ago, I have discovered that there are strong emotions when it comes to rail. That is as it should be. As Neil Bibby and others alluded to during the debate, given my involvement in the Levenmouth rail campaign I know just how important our railways are to our communities. They are important to our economy, our social interactions and, increasingly, the future of our environment.
Beatrice Wishart spoke about the importance of modal change. She was absolutely correct on that point, with regard to our ambitious targets on climate change. She also made a point about the under-22s free bus travel scheme and how we might look to pivot that towards ferries, too. I mentioned in response to her parliamentary question yesterday that I am taking that up with officials.
I will respond to some other points that were raised in the debate. Graham Simpson spoke of the need for a personal service at train stations; I agree with him. ScotRail has considered antisocial behaviour and access, for example, and it made changes to its consultation as a result. I will meet ScotRail next Tuesday; I undertake to raise that matter with it.
However, I have to say, as the first female transport minister in 20 years, that I do not need lessons from Graham Simpson or Richard Leonard about the need to protect women’s safety on public transport. It is a serious issue in itself and it should not be hemmed on the edge of this afternoon’s debate.
It is worth reminding Parliament that it is solely because of actions that have been taken by this Government that ScotRail’s services will be in the public sector. As Pauline McNeill said, it is vital that we run a public service that meets the needs of the travelling public.
Will decreasing services and increasing rail fares increase or decrease the number of people accessing the train service?
Finlay Carson has heard today that ScotRail is increasing services back to the level that they were at in December 2021, so what he said is completely incorrect. [Interruption.] I want to make some progress.
Compulsory redundancies have been raised by a number of members today. I want to put on the record that this Government has always respected collective bargaining. However, I am sure, as I have mentioned to members, that the chamber is not the place for those negotiations to take place. I look forward very much to meeting the unions next week.
The Parliament chamber is, however, the place where we should hear what Government policy is. Is it the Government’s policy that there should be no compulsory redundancies in the new ScotRail operation?
I recognise that the new body, ScotRail Trains Ltd, will not have in place an existing agreement on there being no compulsory redundancies, but I expect negotiations on that as part of the public sector pay policy discussions. It is right, of course, that rail unions express their views on public sector pay policy. I look forward very much to meeting them next week, as I have said.
We cannot return to the past, as some people here might wish. We must face the new reality of the future and embrace the challenges in a measured, responsible, affordable and inclusive manner. That is our focus. Together with a railway that responds positively to change, that approach will ensure a successful future for our railway services, which is what we all—passengers, staff and supporters—want.
Before closing, I will take a moment to remember someone. Colin Reed was the stationmaster at Markinch station. Sadly, he passed away last March. During the pandemic, he put up a note in the station offering to phone elderly or isolated passengers, and leaving them his number. He was always available with a joke or a handy tip: the code is “Eskbank”, for those who know. Colin is fondly remembered in Markinch, and his public service is a lesson to us all about just how important the coming months will be for Scotland’s railways. For the ticket conductors, train drivers, and folks who work in stations the length and breadth of the country, and for the people whom we in Parliament all serve, on 1 April, this Government will deliver a publicly owned railway for the benefit of all the people of Scotland.
I call Colin Smyth to wind up the debate.
16:58
I add my welcome to Jenny Gilruth in her new role as transport minister and pass on my best wishes to her predecessor, Graeme Dey. When I was Labour’s transport spokesperson, a trade union official once said to me, “Transport’s a great portfolio. It makes you in Opposition, but it breaks you in Government. No one ever wrote to the transport minister to thank them for their train running on time.” He went on to say, “Don’t worry—you’re probably not going to be transport minister.” [Laughter.] I genuinely hope that the role does not break the minister, because fixing Scotland’s broken transport is too important to our communities. I wish Jenny Gilruth well.
Although we have a new minister, the amendment in her name is, sadly, the same old tired lines that we have heard before. I genuinely hope that Jenny Gilruth will lead a break from the lack of ambition for Scotland’s railways that has plagued this Government for 15 years.
We need to put rail at the heart of our fight back against climate change, and we need to deliver modal shift, as Richard Leonard rightly said, and not just continue to manage rail’s decline. It beggars belief that, just months after COP26, the Scottish Government’s last act for its failed ScotRail franchise is to herald the biggest hike in rail fares for a decade, the biggest cut in ticket offices, and the biggest cut in rail services since devolution. Let us be in no doubt that we are, despite the minister’s spin, talking about a massive cut in services.
It is amazing that although the SNP’s amendment was lodged before ScotRail published the outcome of its timetable review, it managed to quote the review. However, that means that we have confirmation in the amendment that the SNP and the Greens support there being 250 fewer services a day than there were before the pandemic. If that is “an early win”, as Mark Ruskell described it, God help us if we had lost that particular consultation. Is 90,000 fewer trains per year really the height of the Greens’ ambition? Is that what they mean by “building back better”? With car travel returning to above pre-pandemic levels, the Greens have thrown in the towel when it comes to getting back to pre-pandemic levels of train services—never mind growing them.
We need to use every power that we have to increase passenger numbers, and we will not do that and get people back on our trains by taking trains away. We do not yet know what demand will be when we emerge from the pandemic, but we know that, if we drive down the frequency of services, we will drive down passenger numbers even further.
As Pauline McNeill highlighted, there has been no effort from the Government to make rail more attractive after the pandemic. Fares have rocketed by more than 50 per cent under the SNP; passengers were hit by another hike in ticket prices just a few weeks ago.
If Colin Smyth wants lower fares and more services, how does the money add up? Where will the finances come from?
I do not want to break the news to Mr Mason, but there will not be any income or passengers when the train is taken away.
The hike is coming at a time when passengers face a cost of living crisis. If only the Government was as quick to carry out its long-promised rail fares review as it was to back a review of cuts in services. There is now also another damaging cut to our ticket offices. Richard Leonard spoke passionately about that.
The minister was right to say that women’s safety at railway stations is important. Therefore, let us debate that issue and ticket offices, in Government time. The Government never calls a debate on the future of our railways.
It is little wonder that our trade unions have come together to launch the biggest-ever campaign against the SNP-Green coalition’s cuts. It will not have escaped their attention that the minister would not only remove from Labour’s motion a commitment to there being no compulsory redundancies, but has refused to rule them out three times today.
In contrast, Labour stands with our trade unions. Rail workers are key workers who deserve our thanks for keeping Scotland moving during the pandemic—not threats of job losses or threats to cut pay and conditions. We also stand with Scotland’s rail passengers, who have suffered enough.
One SNP MSP after another has highlighted that ScotRail will come under public ownership under the Government. I support public ownership. I lodged not one, but two motions in Parliament that would have brought our trains back under public control long before now, but SNP MSPs voted both down.
Let us be clear. As Neil Bibby said, the only reason why the SNP is now backing Labour’s long-standing calls for public ownership is that its Abellio franchise was such a failure. We should remember when the SNP handed the keys of Scotland’s trains to the Dutch firm Abellio. It said that the service would be world leading. It was. There were world-leading delays, world-leading cancellations and world-leading fare hikes.
If the SNP and the Greens are so much in favour of public ownership, why do they still refuse to end the private Caledonian Sleeper franchise? When will that come under public ownership? Green voters and members must be really proud that their sell-out MSPs would rather stand shoulder to shoulder with Serco than shoulder to shoulder with the RMT, ASLEF or the Transport Salaried Staffs Association.
Please conclude, Mr Smyth.
Today, the Parliament can stand shoulder to shoulder with our trade unions. We can say no to the SNP cuts to rail services, no to the SNP-Green fare hikes, no to the SNP-Green ticket office cuts, but yes to Labour’s motion and a people’s ScotRail that delivers for Scotland’s passengers.
Air ais
Cost of LivingAir adhart
Decision Time