The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-14125, in the name of Sue Webber, on a new Winchburgh train station. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes the view that there is a need for a new train station at Winchburgh; further notes the belief that a new station is essential because Winchburgh people need a sustainable, low-carbon alternative to the car to access jobs and services in Edinburgh, especially in light of 4,000 extra homes reportedly being built as part of the Edinburgh and South East Scotland City Region Deal; understands that a study from transport consultants, Systra, estimates that a station would remove just short of 420,000 car journeys a year, which will help the Scottish Government and local authorities to achieve their net zero goals; further understands that passengers would save £2.4 million per year, and that there will be £3.5 million of decongestion benefits per year; notes that Winchburgh Developments has already spent over £50 million on transport improvements for the town, including a new junction on the M9, and welcomes its ambition and work towards bringing what is considered to be this vital transport link to Winchburgh.
17:34
I thank everyone who has stayed behind this evening and is contributing to the debate. Most people will know that its subject has been close to my heart since I was elected as an MSP.
Last year, I launched an online campaign to call for the Scottish Government and Transport Scotland to come together to fund and build a new train station at Winchburgh. In April, campaigners and residents from Winchburgh came to the Scottish Parliament to deliver to the Scottish National Party Government a petition with more than 2,000 signatures that asked for a train station to be built at Winchburgh. Along with many other members, I was pleased to meet those people that day and show my support for that vital campaign. I am therefore glad to have the chance to raise the issue in Parliament on our first day back.
On one of the rare dry days in the summer, I managed to get out and have another insightful tour around what is a rapidly growing village. Some SNP ministers may criticise me for being late to the campaign for the station. However, in August 2020, prior to my election in 2021, my sister bought her home in Winchburgh. I knew then how desperately the community needed—as it still needs—such a station. On my election day, I vowed to do all that I could to deliver a station for the people of Winchburgh.
Winchburgh is a vibrant and growing community in West Lothian that finds itself isolated from the national rail network. The lack of direct access severely restricts the ability of residents to reach essential medical services, pursue educational opportunities and connect with employment across the region. The establishment of a new railway station would dramatically enhance connectivity and ease congestion in West Lothian and the west end of Edinburgh. Given the absolute chaos that is on the A8 right now, it would have been quite mindful to have had a station there—if a little time travel could have been involved.
All those elements would support our ambitions to provide sustainable transport solutions. After all, the region anticipates 4,000 new families as a direct result of the investment that will be leveraged from the Edinburgh and south-east Scotland city region deal. Demand for more robust public transport options has never been more urgent and will continue to grow.
Winchburgh Developments Ltd is the principal landowner and has worked in partnership with Winchburgh community council and Winchburgh Community Development Trust. The local authority and the Scottish Government specified that integrated travel must be a key part of the overall development. Already, we have lots of shops, a pharmacy—soon to be two pharmacies—and new schools and motorway junctions. Winchburgh Developments paid £20 million towards making all of that possible.
Winchburgh Developments has clearly shown considerable commitment to the expanding community. The motorway junction has certainly helped the already busy bus service and made it much easier for the average two-car household to literally get out of the fast lane and into the capital. However, improving the roads so that cars can move around more easily does not do much for integrating travel or our net zero ambitions. The main railway line west from Edinburgh runs through the middle of the development site. A space around the track is set aside for a new station, and plenty of car parking space is already there. A station would keep thousands of people currently in cars off the roads virtually every day of the year—they would go by the train tracks.
That is what integrated travel means. We hear again and again about the importance of getting people out of their cars and on to mass public transport solutions. There is no point in getting on a bus to sit in a traffic jam on the A8, St John’s Road and Corstorphine Road all the way into town; that defeats the purpose. We are talking about an 11-minute train journey versus a 47 or 48-minute commute by road on a good day.
A study from transport consultant Systra estimates that a station would remove 420,000 car journeys a year, help passengers to save £2.4 million a year and offer £3.5 million in decongestion benefits. However, despite a commitment from the developers of several million pounds, which has been ring fenced from the outset, and despite the offer of as much professional help as is required to physically plan and build a station, the Scottish Government continues to refuse to meet a penny of the shortfall, although that would guarantee integrated travel for potentially tens of thousands of people.
I do not at all understand the logic in that. I appreciate that finding £10 million, especially in the current climate, will not be easy, but that is a fraction of the cost of the Scottish Government-approved tram project in Edinburgh, which was so badly mishandled. Let us not even start to do the maths on what proportion of a properly organised ferry contract—we heard about that earlier—that sum might be.
The developers have faced so many barriers, not least of which are the sluggish Labour-controlled councils in West Lothian and Edinburgh, and the reluctance of Transport Scotland. When I visited, I saw extraordinary progress, and the quality of the homes that are being built there is notably high. It is no wonder that people want to move there. It is not a dreary estate but an exciting new place to live, with affordable homes built to mirror the old miners’ cottages, so that there is a real sense of place and continuity. Everywhere we look, there are new homes. It is quite a transformation, and the pace of change continues at an accelerated speed.
Until recently, there was nothing but excuse after excuse from Transport Scotland. In fairness, the new SNP connectivity minister, Mr Jim Fairlie, responded positively to WDL’s determination and community pressure. I thank him for that. Blockages might be dissolving and money might be found. I see no viable reason why the new main line halt cannot be built by the end of 2026 to give new residents vital links to their workplaces and the extended services that are available from all the various neighbouring areas.
There is, of course, another very good reason for building a new station at Winchburgh. The physical station, tracks, rolling stock and everything else would be built by members of the Railway Industry Association. The RIA has been the trade body for the supply chain part of the industry for more than 150 years and it already brings 56,000 jobs of all levels to Scotland. Just think how many more would be created in a part of West Lothian that badly needs the good-quality jobs that the rail industry would bring for men and women.
I have quite a bit left to say, Presiding Officer. Is it okay for me to carry on?
For a short time, yes.
I promise that I will not go on all night.
RIA Scotland supports the campaign for a new station at Winchburgh. I was not there—funnily enough—but I have heard that, at an SNP conference fringe meeting, the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, in whose constituency the development lies, said that the station is a rather good idea. With her support and that of every other party in Parliament, who else do we need to persuade to make it happen?
We do not have the luxury of time in West Lothian. If we do not start to make a new station in the next 24 months, we will lose the space that has been ring fenced for the station and car park, as the demand to build more houses will mean that the land is needed for homes. We will find a few more property owners who have zero transport integration beyond an increasingly busy new road junction.
I commend Winchburgh Developments for its commitment and substantial contribution to making the vision a reality. Its involvement is testament to the power of community and corporate collaboration in driving forward public projects. It is now time for the Scottish Government to match that. A new station at Winchburgh is essential. It is not only a necessity to alleviate mounting congestion in our capital but a critical factor in meeting the Scottish Government’s failing net zero ambitions.
17:42
I thank Sue Webber for lodging the motion for debate. Before I speak about the proposal for a railway station at Winchburgh, I bring it to members’ attention that my wife, Janet Campbell, has been the local councillor for Winchburgh since 2007. Both my wife and my friend and colleague Fiona Hyslop have been at the forefront of the community campaign to bring a station to the area. There have been plans for a railway station going all the way back to the original Edinburgh to Glasgow improvement plan, but unfortunately they had to be dropped because of the financial crash in 2008, which saw a reduction in the capital funding that was available at the time. However, we should always remember that this is and has always been a developer-led initiative, and it was used to support the case for building the new town at Winchburgh.
The development of the village into a new town has been taking shape over many years since planning permission was granted in April 2012. Since then, there have been new high schools, feeder primary schools, a new retail centre, a new public park at Auldcathie and nearly 3,800 new homes, which brings the old village of Winchburgh up to the size of Linlithgow, but there is still no station.
Given the growth of the surrounding area, it came as no surprise that, in the autumn of 2019, Transport Scotland and Network Rail announced that they were going to examine again the proposal for a chord to the Dalmeny to Winchburgh junction line. That would be considered as part of the Edinburgh Waverley western approaches project. The constituency MSP, Fiona Hyslop, hosted a visit by the then Cabinet Secretary for Transport, Infrastructure and Connectivity, Mike Matheson, and representatives of numerous transport groups including ScotRail and Network Rail.
The obstacle is funding, as it always was. The development company, West Coast Capital, had budgeted £10 million for the Winchburgh railway station, but that was pre-Brexit and pre-Covid. The impact has been that construction inflation has increased by nearly a quarter in recent years, and it is expected to increase by a further 15 per cent over the coming five years. The result is that the developer is seeking funding from the public sector, but at a time when the Scottish Government has had its capital budget cut in real terms by Westminster.
There is no doubt that there is a need for a station at Winchburgh, given that a new station could serve more than 13,000 people within walking distance of it—and double that number could travel to the station to use the facility. Given the reduced 15-minute journey time by train, which is substantially quicker than the current 50 minutes by car or 60 minutes to Waverley by bus, I believe that a substantial number of people would become regular rail commuters. We have the passengers and the trains; we just need a station.
We need to find a way forward, and Winchburgh rail steering group is considering one possible solution—to progress the preparation of the business case for the railway station as an essential element of the application for city region deal strategic site funding. That fund is worth at least £50 million, and it is to be shared across seven key areas, including Winchburgh. A substantial contribution would still be needed from the developer, but a partnership with the Scottish Government would help to remove tens of thousands of car journeys per year from our roads, resulting in improved air quality and a reduction in greenhouse gases.
The steering group is supported by the local MSP, Fiona Hyslop, and local councillors. They have agreed a set of actions and they are moving the project forward together. I wish them every success in their endeavours.
17:47
I congratulate Sue Webber on securing this debate. For as long as I have known Sue, she has been championing this issue. It is not really about who has been campaigning the hardest, however—it is about bad planning. If a development of such a size has been planned and there is a railway going through it, there should be a station. That should have been planned and agreed at the start because, as Winchburgh has grown, the need for the station has become ever greater.
I was outside the Parliament for the handing in of the petition in April, together with Sue Webber and others—I see Foysol Choudhury across the chamber; he was there, too. I have been lucky enough to visit Winchburgh and I was shown round by representatives of Winchburgh Developments in May. I cycled along the canal that goes through Winchburgh over the summer. It is quite well connected by road and canal, but not rail—yet there is a railway line going through it. This is not difficult—it can be done.
The cabinet secretary, who is sat there on the front bench, knows that I live in East Kilbride. Money is now being spent on the East Kilbride line, and the town is getting a new station at Hairmyres, which will be fantastic, with a big new park and ride. That station will become the main station in East Kilbride, I suspect. That has been done with Scottish Government money.
Gordon MacDonald mentioned city deal money. I agree with him that that could be used—but that decision should have been taken years and years ago.
If we have an ambition to get cars off the road—the Scottish Government certainly has that ambition, and we would agree with it—train travel is the way forward. A 15-minute journey from Winchburgh into Edinburgh would take hundreds of thousands of cars off the road every year. Surely we can all agree that that should happen.
There is hope. Jim Fairlie has possibly provided some hope with the steering group, which met at the end of July. I hope that we can get beyond just having a business case and get an agreement to do something. Building a station is not all that complex—there just needs to be agreement to do it. Let us stop fighting about who will take the plaudits and who needs to spend the money.
17:50
I congratulate Sue Webber on bringing this important issue to the chamber. I am grateful to see members from across the parties who feel strongly about the issue. I hope that we can continue to campaign and deliver for the people of Winchburgh.
Since I first raised the issue of Winchburgh in the chamber in 2022, some progress has been made. I have engaged with the council and developers and I have questioned three successive transport ministers, highlighting the need for improved transport links for Winchburgh. However, my requests to meet the ministers have been denied, and the Scottish Government, until recently, has failed to meaningfully engage. The reformation of the Winchburgh railway station steering group is welcome, but it must be met with clear action. Above all, stakeholders, including MSPs, must work together to achieve that.
Winchburgh is a fast-growing town and it needs improved public transport options. Since 2012, 1,000 houses have been built, with 4,000 more planned. By 2031, its population is predicted to rise to more than 13,000—similar to Linlithgow, which has its own train station. It is estimated that the catchment area of a train station in Winchburgh would benefit 26,000 people, and the proposal is popular.
Earlier this year, I joined Winchburgh residents in delivering a petition, signed by more than 2,000 people, to the Scottish Government, calling for a date to be set for the opening of the station. It is not only those in Winchburgh who would benefit—more than 400,000 cars would be taken off the road every year, there would be millions of pounds of savings for passengers and in transport costs, and millions would be saved in decongestion benefits. It makes economic and environmental sense.
Sue Webber is right to mention the £50 million that has already been invested by Winchburgh Development in infrastructure, including a new primary school. We should be encouraging and rewarding developers that proactively create well-connected communities.
A key issue that must be addressed is the lack of a promoter for the project. The Scottish Government insists that it is a developer-led project. Winchburgh Developments has committed to partially funding the station, and then there is the possibility of funding from the city region deal. We need clarity on the funding and business case for the station. I will be meeting Winchburgh Developments later this month and hope to hear that further progress is being made.
If we are to see a station in the coming years, we must see collaboration between stakeholders, including MSPs. The Scottish Government should look at the enthusiasm that is evident today, and in Winchburgh, and step up to deliver on this incredible opportunity.
17:54
I thank Sue Webber for securing the debate. Winchburgh was promised a train station, it needs a train station and it deserves a train station. That needs to be delivered.
It is disappointing and frustrating to hear that there is still confusion and misunderstanding over who is to lead and fund the project. Constituents tell me that the developer has not been forthcoming and helpful with others, which has led to delays, and that it has implied or made promises that it has not delivered. Development of infrastructure to support communities must go hand in hand with building those communities. I understand that West Lothian Council, Transport Scotland, Network Rail and Winchburgh Developments are all to get together again soon. They all need to get around the table to deliver the station. Jobs and mobility depend on it.
The Scottish Greens believe that a high-quality and well-connected public transport system plays a crucial role in delivering on our climate ambitions, reducing congestion and helping to deliver a just transition to net zero. It boosts our economy by allowing people to get to work, study and keep connected with family and friends. After decades of underinvestment and austerity imposed by Labour and Tory Governments in Westminster, the need for investments in building a green economy and in our public services is urgent.
I gently challenge Sue Webber on buses, as buses reduce both congestion and emissions by moving more people in a single vehicle, and on the success of the Edinburgh trams, which not only are popular and convenient for people such as me who live in Leith but, in my experience, have reduced congestion and improved air quality along Leith Walk.
Transport emissions continue to increase, though, driven by a long-term and systematic failure to invest in public transport and infrastructure for walking, cycling and wheeling. Building stations so that more communities can be served by our rail network will encourage more people on to public transport. Improving rail connections across Scotland should be a national priority.
Therefore, I strongly support the calls for the construction of a new station at Winchburgh. Further information and clarification on responsibilities from the key agencies would provide assurance to the many constituents who have inquired, and continue to inquire, about the possibility of a new rail station. The new station at Winchburgh would be a crucial component of the region’s infrastructure. It would help to reduce traffic congestion, play a significant role in reaching net zero and provide accessible and affordable transport. I look forward to seeing the business case as it is developed, and I would welcome the announcement of a date for the construction of Winchburgh train station as soon as possible.
17:57
I thank all the members who have taken part in today’s debate. I will make one point before I move on. My friend Graham Simpson said that building a station is not that difficult. I assure him that a load of my officials would tell me quite the opposite.
The proposal for a new station at Winchburgh can be traced back two decades to the West Lothian local plan in 2004 and the Edinburgh and Lothian structural plan in 2005. As soon as I got involved after my appointment as a minister, I made it a priority to get a good understanding of the issues and, more important, of how to progress the building of the station, which had been promised by the developers in their vision for a new community around the old village of Winchburgh.
I want to use the opportunity of this debate to set out what progress is being made. Creating a new station as part of a large-scale housing development was an ambitious and far-sighted plan, for which I commend the developers and West Lothian Council. I have visited the area with the developers and the council, so I have seen at first hand the excellent work that they have done, and I can clearly see the vision taking shape.
However, what was never clear to me was how the narrative has developed that, somehow, the failure of a station being built over the past two decades is either Transport Scotland’s or the Scottish ministers’ fault or responsibility. It was absolutely clear—I want to ensure that this fact is understood—that the commitment was, and is, developer led. Any political posturing to say otherwise serves absolutely no one, least of all the people of Winchburgh, whom members in the chamber are here to represent.
Perhaps a wee bit of history behind the saga might help to provide some context to the situation. The ambitious plan and application for Winchburgh was submitted by Winchburgh Developments back in 2005. The application included provision for a new trunk road junction on the M9, a railway station and two park-and-ride facilities on the site. Currently, neither the railway station nor the park-and-ride facilities have reached the point of delivery.
A planning condition that was added to the consent by the planning authority allowed for a further assessment to demonstrate the need for a station at a later date. That allowed the application for the site to be granted and discussions to take place about accommodating the station later in the process, but it was still clearly a developer-led ambition.
Following discussions with Winchburgh Developments Ltd, West Lothian Council, Transport Scotland and Network Rail, and further assessments in line with those discussions, it was agreed in February 2015 that the case for the rail station had been demonstrated. Planning permission in principle was granted for the station in 2015, and it was expected that an application for detailed planning consent would follow from the developer in around December 2017. However, that did not happen.
Throughout the period in which a railway station at Winchburgh has been under consideration, the Scottish Government’s policy has been clear that developers are required to provide any mitigation on infrastructure to support their development. At various points in that period, the developer confirmed its intent to fund the station—I have documentation to confirm that fact. However, it has now become apparent that the developer no longer has the available funds to independently provide the required railway station at Winchburgh. Consequently, my officials are supporting the developer and the council in seeking alternative sources of funding to support the delivery of the proposed station.
The historical consideration and approvals in place for the station place no legal obligation on the developer or West Lothian Council to construct Winchburgh station, which is unfortunate, because the local authority had it within its power to put such an obligation in place when granting the final permissions, but it failed to do so. That, added to the progressively worsening financial restrictions across all sectors, has contributed to stagnation in respect of progress on the station over the past several years.
In the meantime, the developer has continued to develop the community at Winchburgh and has successfully funded and delivered, with financial support from the Scottish Government, the new four-way junction on the M9, which opened in February 2023. However, it should be pointed out that that was a requirement of the developer’s planning consent, which was supported—I emphasise this—by my colleague and local constituency MSP Fiona Hyslop only as an addition to the requirement to build a railway station, not as a get-out or an alternative. That was a legal requirement on the developer and should be seen as such and as a direct result of the hard work that was put in by Fiona Hyslop, as the local constituency MSP, along with regional MSPs, in bringing people together in their campaign to raise awareness of the matter.
It is a matter of fact that the station proposal originated as a developer-led proposal that added to the value of the overall saleability of the master plan. I have to say that I agree with that, but it has never been the duty of, or a requirement on, Transport Scotland or the Scottish Government to be the lead promoter on the project. Transport Scotland’s only role in the process was to act on behalf of the Scottish Government as a statutory consultee in the planning process that was led by the planning authority.
Overall, I can confidently say that we have made significant progress in bringing together a collegiate and productive group whose members have all shared the goal of helping the local authority and Winchburgh Developments Ltd make progress on a station that is clearly demanded by local residents and businesses and, of course, to meet the needs of the environment. All the interested parties whom I have met are clear that they share the objective of continuing that progress.
To aid that process, I believe that it was vital to push support for the reformation of the Winchburgh railway station steering group, which Fiona Hyslop had previously successfully done. The group now comprises the developer, West Coast Capital, West Lothian Council, Transport Scotland, Network Rail, the city region deal and the South East of Scotland Transport Partnership—SEStran. They are currently meeting on a four-weekly basis to progress the immediate next steps that are required for delivery of the station. One of the immediate requirements of the steering group is to investigate potential sources of funding to plug the gap that requires to be filled in lieu of the infrastructure elements that the developer has already delivered to support the station or has agreed by way of existing financial contributions.
Work has also been undertaken to review and, where required, to update the business case to support the station proposal. I understand that the developer and the council plan to meet soon to finalise who will perform the lead promoter role and to identify an appropriate project sponsor to lead with the delivery of the station. In my view, it would seem appropriate for the council and the developer to share that vital lead promoter role but, clearly, that will be something that they will decide for themselves.
My officials have reported to me on the productive nature of the first two meetings. I commend all parties for the positive and constructive nature in which they have engaged, and I urge them to continue in the spirit of co-operation and solution finding. I emphasise the need to allow that group the time and space to do the work that is needed and I encourage others, particularly across the chamber, to remove the political opportunism that has become all too apparent in order to let the constructive nature of the developments—
Will the minister take an intervention?
Not at the moment.
To be clear, the Scottish Government supports the provision of a station at Winchburgh, and officials at Transport Scotland will remain proactively involved with the proposal.
I will give way to Graham Simpson.
I thank the minister for taking the intervention. I actually want to congratulate him for facilitating the steering group meetings. The message sounds quite positive. Is there now more confidence than there has been for some time? Is he confident that the station will happen? I am not pinning him down to any dates, but does he think that, as a result of the work that he appears to have led, we might actually see some progress?
All I can say to the member is, “Thank you very much.” We absolutely support the provision of a station in Winchburgh. As I have said, my Transport Scotland officials will be proactively involved in that proposal. The cross-stakeholder structure will progress only if all the parties involved continue to work in the constructive and collaborative way that has been witnessed in recent months. The message is to please continue, be positive, engage and make sure that we get the station built for the people of Winchburgh.
That concludes the debate, and I close this meeting.
Meeting closed at 18:06.Air ais
Decision TimeAir adhart
Correction