Greens: Extending Life of Forth Road Bridge Makes Economic Common Sense
Thu., January 26, 2006. 10:54.
Buliding second bridge would "waste £600 million"
Prolonging the life of the existing Forth road bridge makes the best economic and environmental sense Green MSPs said today in a parliamentary debate. Taking the decision to build a second bridge before reports on cabling would be reckless use of £600 million of taxpayers' money, would generate higher traffic levels with more congestion and pollution, and would hinder Scotland in the future low-carbon global economy, Mid Scotland & Fife Green MSP Mark Ruskell argued.
Mr Ruskell said, "Greens are the only party brave enough to deal with the economic need to reduce congestion - which currently costs the UK economy £20 billion each year - and the fact that building more roads generates more traffic and pollution. Another new road bridge would reach capacity by 2031 - what do we do then? Keep building new bridges at enormous cost to the taxpayer and the environment? Rushing to build another one now is not a long-term or cost-effective solution. (1)
"FETA are in a complete mess over this whole issue. (2) They claim the bridge is going to fall into the sea in 2019 and that work on a replacement must start immediately - yet in the same breath say the bridge will operate for many years to come. They do not want a replacement bridge, they want a second Forth road bridge without regard for what is truly in the public interest."
Greens argue that current pressures on the Executive to fund a another Forth road bridge to alleviate present congestion problems must be resisted, as any decision to spend £600 million on a new bridge would simply compound the mistakes of the past. They claim that there is good evidence that a new road bridge would fuel further rises in road traffic levels, leading to even greater congestion problems in 20 years time.
The high cost of building a new Forth crossing would, the Greens argue, starve other key transport projects (such as building railway stations at Leven and St Andrews) of the funds needed to allow them to go ahead. Many of these projects, such as increasing rail network capacity, reopening and upgrading rail stations, and proper integration of public transport services offer much better value for money, and the prospect of achieving genuinely sustainable improvements to the whole of Scotland's transport infrastructure.
Notes
1. "Providing additional unrestricted road space through a new crossing (is) . . . likely to lead to increasing growth in Cross Forth car trips; within just 10 years of opening the three bridges were predicted to be coping with person trips almost 55% greater than those in 2001. More tellingly, by 2026 southbound peak period traffic would have reached about 190% of 2001 levels; if this growth continued unchecked, by 2031 all the additional capacity would have been exhausted.” -- Sestran (Queensferry Cross-Forth Corridor Report)
2. FETA has said that "if action is not taken, or if actions are not successful, the bridge might close to heavy goods vehicles in 2013" (Scotsman report, 11 November 2005)
Tom Aitchison, Chief Executive of FETA, said on 20 November 2005: "The most important point to get across is that the bridge is capable of carrying traffic now and for many years to come. We are taking action now to prolong the life of the bridge as long as possible." (FETA press release, 17 November 2005)
Contact the Scottish Greens' press team on 07909 933 074.