<<< back to 1984 menu

New Drive In Train Campaign

May 5th 1984, Barrhead News

Mr John McKay gave a full report of the meeting which the five representatives from Neilston Community Council had with the councillors M. Waugh and J. Cannell of Strathclyde Regions’ Highways and Transportation Committee to discuss the threat to Neilston’s rail link.
The resume of the meeting was recorded by community council secretary Mrs A. Garscadden. Mr Jim Gallacher pointed to the arbitrary nature of the decision to sever at Whitecraigs, as Neilston is by no means a minor contributor to revenue on this line. The division seems to have been based purely on economic considerations. Little or no account appears to have been taken of the nature of the Neilston community.

CHALLENGE

It is by no means a wealthy suburb. Fifty percent of the houses are owned by the local authority. Only 40 percent of households owns a car. A high proportion of the population is elderly and unemployment is currently 17 percent. The regional council appear to have allowed financial considerations , based on figures which the community council would challenge, to outweigh the social importance of the train service in an area which is poorly served by other forms of public transport.
Councillor Waugh explained the cost to Strathclyde Regional Council of subsiding rail services had risen to 53p in the pound. His committee is convinced that places like Neilston can be served by a bus service more cheaply than by existing train services. This conclusion had been based on the examination of the costs of providing rail services and their revenue return. Mr John McKay explained to Councillor Waugh that the community council was highly sceptical that any proposed bus alternative could be practically acceptable or economically more viable.
A recent publication of ‘Strathclyde Transport’ quotes Councillor Waugh as saying: “There has to be continued investment to upgrade and improve the rail network. In terms of the most effective use of resources and power, electrification is the way forward. Services which use diesel units are much costlier to maintain”. It is very difficult reconcile this view with the logic of axing an already electrified service. Mr Jim Sword highlighted the 25 percent of passengers who travelled to intermediate stations. Whilst it would be possible to provide a bus service to Glasgow, albeit taking longer, it would be almost impossible to provide a viable bus service which served the intermediate destinations, as the existing road network made this totally impractical. The transport of children to Eastwood school is a case in point. The rail journey time is six minutes. The proposed alternative would involved double deck buses undertaking an estimated 26 minute journey.

ASSURED

It would also deprive pupils from participating in extra-curricular activities and would present great problems in the event of sickness or accident at school where the family has no car. Councillor Waugh assured the community council that Secretary of State for Scotland would not sanction closure of the rail link unless the regional council satisfies him that suitable alternatives would be provided. The community council hopes that the matter can be resolved without going to the Scottish Office but it would appear that the bureaucratic machinery will have to run its course. Neilston is being asked to bear a disproportionate part of the regional council’s economies. Less drastic measures could be tried, such as reduction of off peak frequencies; single tracking the line; taking effective methods of ensuring that all passengers fares are collected. The regional council has requested funding through the Scottish Office to upgrade the Barrhead and East Kilbride lines. A decision is expected in June, whereupon Strathclyde Regional Council will honour its statutory obligation to consult local communities regarding alternative services, in the first instance through community councils.

BOLTED

However, the refusal of an EEC grant would not necessarily mean that the Neilston line is safe. The community council delegation made the point that consultation after the decision to stop the section 20 subsidy is akin to closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. It is very difficult to have such a decision reversed and is not a very democratic way of doing things. Councillor Waugh intimated that SRC had only approved in principal the recommendations of the report. If the community council raised points which had been overlooked by the regional council in making its decision then the matter would be reviewed. The regional council placed a high emphasis on consultation with local communities and had, in the past, reconsidered decisions in the light of such consultation.
The councillor continued that SRC is presently under the severe financial restraint as a result of central government policy and transport is one of the major areas under pressure, although every effort is being made to retain existing services where possible. According to British Rail figures, Neilston is not well enough patronised to justify keeping it open. Mr Gallacher challenged the validity of using absolute numbers to gauge rail patronage. In fact Neilston has a proportionally very high number of rail users approximately out of an economically active population of 2,500. On this basis, rail patronage of Neilston is better than at Whitecraigs for instance.
Mr Sword asked Councillor Waugh the best way, in practical terms, of fighting the closure. Councillor Waugh’s reply was a glib: “Use the Train”. He also advised that the community council should respond positively to the regional council’s proposals for alternative services at the consultative stage. The regional councillors were informed that the transport sub-committee of Neilston Community Council is preparing a counter report to challenge the validity of the SRC Working Party decision.

CAMPAIGN

Councillor Waugh said he would be happy to receive this report and also to meet with community council representatives to discuss it. The community council representatives assured the regional councillors that the recent demonstration was only the beginning of a concerted campaign to retain Neilston’s Rail Link and that the people of Neilston and surrounding areas deserve better than to be a political football which Strathclyde Regional Council and Central Government kick around in their arguments over rates support grants and other forms of financial aid. Afterwards, Mr John Sword pointed out that Councillor Waugh appeared to be saying something very different from what has been reported and what was said in a television interview. He was at pains to point out that this television interview took place before Councillor Waugh met community council representatives. I their continuing fight, the community council will man a stall at the cattle show organised by the Neilston Agricultural Society and which takes place this Saturday, May 5.

RESPONSE

Much sought after ‘Save the Neilston Line’ stickers will be available at this stall and letter writing facilities for any visitors who have yet to send a personal letter of protest. A personal letter has much more impact, than an elected representative or an organised petition. Public response so far has been magnificent but it must be sustained for this may be a long campaign. The community council would like to see a tickers in every car in the village.