Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Question marks over transport plans

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
04 December 2006
EXPERTS have questioned how a stretched budget is going to pay for a high speed rail link between Edinburgh and Glasgow as part of Scotland's most ambitious transport overhaul in a century.
The Executive has already committed to transport plans totalling £3.5 billion, including building a rail link to both Edinburgh and Glasgow airports and a Borders railway. A new crossing may also have to be built across the Forth.

Tomorrow, ministers will publish a transport strategy detailing billions of pounds worth of plans for high speed rail links between major cities, as well as plans to introduce road tolls.

But former government adviser David Begg, the publisher of Transport Times, questioned how the Executive could afford such a huge range of projects.

Ministers are expected to neutralise the cost of road tolls by cutting fuel tax, so no additional resources will be made for public transport projects.

"What we are funding is potentially the biggest transport investment programme since the Victorian era and it is going to need funding," Mr Begg said.

The National Transport Strategy to be published tomorrow will map the direction of Scotland's transport system for the next 20 years.

The strategy will not detail specific projects, as these will be decided in the strategic transport review. However, it will set out the transport priorities to keep Scotland's economy going while cutting carbon emissions. Judging from the political manifestos of all the major parties likely projects include a high speed rail link between Edinburgh and Glasgow to cut journey times from an hour to 30 minutes.

Despite warnings against "mega projects" by the government-commissioned Eddington report on transport last week, politicians are also keen on a high speed link with London modelled on hi-tech railways in France or the Far East.

Road tolls are certain to be brought in, although ministers will try to soften the blow by promising a cut in fuel duty.

Mr Begg pointed out that the strategy, that has been published six months before an election, details ambitious plans without any costings.

"There is always a danger when a major strategy is published in the run up to the election that all the pleasant things are in it and not the difficult things," he said.

Already the Executive is committed to building a Borders rail link at a cost of £130 million, the Glasgow airport rail link at a cost of £160 million, an Edinburgh rail link at £500 million and the Edinburgh tramlink at a cost of £714 million.

Overshadowing all this is the now compelling case for new Forth crossing at a cost of more than £670 million.

A bullet train between Glasgow and Edinburgh will cost at least £1.5 billion and the north-south link is likely to cost £30 billion.

Mr Begg questioned how the Executive could pay for the projects without making money from road pricing. "It is a bit like having your cake and eating it. Already transport is taking up a big slice of the Executive's budget and I do not think it can take any more, which means if they have ambitious plans they have to say how they are going to fund it," he said.

Colin Howden, the director of TRANSform Scotland, was also sceptical about the Executive completing their ambitious plans. He questioned whether there should be a high speed rail link between Edinburgh and Glasgow, rather than upgrading the current line and improving other links. And he called for a firm commitment on road charging which has been promised by politicians for more than a decade.

AMBITIOUS STRATEGY

THE National Transport Strategy will set out the future of Scotland's road and rail network for the next 20 years.

• Road tolls are to be brought in UK-wide, perhaps first in Scotland, where they have the backing of the Executive.

• A bullet train between Glasgow and Edinburgh will cut journey times from one hour to 30 minutes at a cost of at least £1.5 billion.

• A high-speed rail link from Scotland to London could cut journey times to just two and a half hours. Models under consideration include the French TGV, or the magnetic trains which are used in China. However the link, which is likely to cost £30 billion, will need the co-operation of the English.

• The Executive is not due to make a decision on a new Forth Road crossing until next year. However, the case for a new crossing at a cost of more than £670 million is gaining momentum.

• Trams are likely to make a comeback as a low-carbon answer to public transport. A network is already planned for Edinburgh at a cost of £714 million.

• Rail links will need improving across the country. Already the Executive has committed to a Borders rail link at a cost of £130 million, the Airdrie-Bathgate rail link at a cost of £300 million, the Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine £67 million link and the Waverley station upgrade at a cost of £150 million.

• Short-haul air travel should be cut by rail links to London. However, travel links to airports will still be improved.

Page 1 of 1

 
1

Androsthenes,

EDINBURGH 04/12/2006 02:13:07

"Road tolls are to be brought in UK-wide, perhaps first in Scotland, where they have the backing of the Executive."
How appropriate!-Scotland having acted as guinea pigs for the poll tax , Executive collaborators want Scotland to be the testing ground for a tax which was devised to deal with Englands traffic jams on the M25 and M6 at Birmingham.
Is there a limit to the depths these Holyrood
toadies will sink to to please their English masters??

2

Mart on Skye,

04/12/2006 02:26:31

Road Tolls - a stupid idea dreamt up by people who live in cities and don't need a car for work or other essential journeys.

We already pay a differential road toll through fuel tax ( that 70 pence out of each £1 we pay for fuel).

I drive a 1.8 litre car and average 38mpg over the whole years motoring, A friend who lives in a city and drives a similar car only gets 22mpg.
Consequently he pays more tax for using congested roads.
Unlike me he has the option of using other means of transport which he does, although I am informed that this is pretty unreliable and overcrowded.

3

allatsea,

various 04/12/2006 02:55:52

whats all the hurry? is Glasgow - Edinburgh traffic in such a rush that we need a HS rail link? its only spitting distance for goodness sake. 1.5bn pounds to cut a 1 hour journey time in half, give us a break, we spend longer queuing up to pay our grocery bills at the supermarket.

;) H

4

TerryinSpringburn,

glasgow 04/12/2006 03:40:02

A "bullet train" between Glasgow and Edinburgh? It's just an election sound-bite.

5

Pete39,

Tassy 04/12/2006 04:18:44

How about a more efficient, cheaper and tidier system that allowed for the neds throwing rocks off the bridges.

6

Navvy,

04/12/2006 04:23:53

High Speed train to London, Bullet train to Glasgow. Is there a difference? How about a little consistancy

7

Navvy,

04/12/2006 04:50:44

"What we are funding is potentially the biggest transport investment programme since the Victorian era and it is going to need funding,"

The difference between then and now is that then most people worked in wealth generating business and industry wheras now most people are civil servants of one kind or another sponging off the few who do create wealth

8

mv,

04/12/2006 07:25:52

""What we are funding is potentially the biggest transport investment programme since the Victorian era and it is going to need funding," Mr Begg said. "

I think that was the last time the transport infrastructure in this country was actually upgraded!

Its ironic that the government has masked this TAX raising scam under the cloak of "green" issues but that the people who will pay (or their expenses)anything to use the road will most likely be those driving the most highly polluting vehicles (ie you can afford 30/40/50K for a 4x4/porsche/merc etc) while those in smaller cars will be priced off the roads. So it must be a TAX to clear the roads for all those minsters cars (much like the extra government lanes in USSR!). With the current poor state of the transport we will be packed into trains like you see in India! (poorest on the roof please)..

9

June the one,

The Kingdom 04/12/2006 08:28:59

Shave 30 mins off Edinburgh to Glasgow!!!!!!
How much longer to get to the stations?????
15 minutes in the traffic at both ends>>>>>
Get real.
Get the new Forth Crossing (bridge or tunnel) into the planning stage NOW.
Cut out the nonsense and get it done without any more delay.
Foe once let our politicians pull the finger out and prove they can talk sense.

10

Jason,

Japan 04/12/2006 08:40:41

Hate to rub it in guys, but the first Bullet train began operating between Tokyo and Osaka in 1964. Now they operate at speeds up to 300km/h. So the time from where I live in the Japan Alps (hot springs, active volcano, bears, wild monkeys, wild boar) to Tokyo Station is 80 minutes. Cost, just under £50, return. With a rail service like this commuting into Tokyo is possible. You need to get yourselves some better politicians.

11

bluedog1257,

perthshire 04/12/2006 08:49:51

Scotland - we are first with lots of things these days .......

first with Housing in Multiple Occupancy legislation; the only place in ther UK where landlords have to be registered and be responsible for their tenant's behaviour; the first to implement the European Drinking Water Directive; the first to ban smoking in public places ...... it is a big list, and there is probably more.

I'm not saying it is all bad or good, but we seem to be ahead of the rest of the UK in many areas of legislation.

12

Astro Turf,

04/12/2006 09:02:52

"A new crossing may also have to be built across the Forth. "

Get your editorial act together - thats not what you have been saying all last week , crying your bloody eyes about it - not MIBBE have to build a bridge.

As for "bullet" trains between edinburgh and GLasgow - dont make me laugh !

The best journey time is currently around 48 minutes. Run an Intercity with no stops and this would come down to (at least) 38 minutes.

BULLET Trains (you ridiculous bunch of jokers) might shave 8 minutes off this for less than a thousand people a day going to work in mundane offices or study.

This is a farce, this is a joke and this aint ever going to happen. Lies and Bullshight.

13

Cant use my name anymore-Alex,

Prisoner of the machine 04/12/2006 09:34:41

Jason @ 10.

Its all right for you in Japan. You just have yourselves to look after. Here in Britain we are responsible for the whole world. Weve got Iraq/Afghanistan and pretty much anywhere that has a government we dont like to sort out. We have dties to eliminate terrorism the world over, and that all costs money. We can affort trains and drains and roads and stuff

14

stmonan,

04/12/2006 09:50:49

Many of the current Glasgow/Edinburgh connection problems are caused by running that route on the same pair of tracks as a range of commuter services and Aberdeen/Inverness connections. It's all very well running non-stop services to speed up the point-to-point journey time, but what about the people who live in between? Limited track capacity would mean that almost nothing else could use the line at the same time. The same is true of most things heading over the Forth Bridge, of course.

That may have been fine in the 19th Century when anything faster than a horse and cart was great, it's useless now. Rather than tack on stupidly overpriced branch lines to airports, this kind of fundamentally inadequate infrastructure should be fixed.

Road pricing etc. is intended to force/encourage people to travel LESS, not to simply charge them money for doing what they do now. Believe it or not the most sensible transport policy does not start from a premise that people should travel everywhere, all the time, in the mode of their choice.

15

Micropacer,

Inverness 04/12/2006 09:55:25

Its good to see the 300,000 odd people that live in the Highlands are thought of highly - still connected to the rest of Scotland by the A9,A96 & A82.

Whats the point of Independance or even the Scottish Parlament when the focus just moves from the South East of England to Central Scotland.

Surely for the development of Scotland as a country the entire Nation needs good transport links - or are the plans just to turn the Central Belt into the New SE England and leave the rest as is?

The economic development of the Highands and parts of Grampian are being held back by second rate transport links.

16

Astro Turf,

04/12/2006 10:34:25

Crawl before we walk Micropacer.

17

Jockyw,

04/12/2006 10:47:48

Edinburgh and Glasgow to cut journey times from an hour to 30 minutes.
If this goes through the fare will more than double. To be honest the journey is often 45 mins, I'm happy with that. It gives me time to relax, read or better still sleep.

18

Dave,

Western Isles 04/12/2006 10:48:33

Micropacer does have a point though. Especially for the likes of Inverness which is one of the wrolds most rapidally expanding cities and Aberdeen, the oil capital of Europe (surely something to be proud of!). However, we do acknowledge that the majority live and work in the 2 powerhouse cities of Scotland.

19

Astro Turf,

04/12/2006 10:51:58

18. Or go play with yourself in the toilets.

What ?

20

BryanUKIP1,

Ayrshire 04/12/2006 11:09:01

What nobody has pointed out in this debate is that road pricing will utilise the Galileo Satellite, a proportion of the revenue from which will go to the EU. And who put up Galileo? The European Space Agency, which the EU set up anyway, even though it was part of the rejected Constitution...

21

Astro Turf,

04/12/2006 11:11:53

And what is your point Bryan - we shouldnt use services developed in the EU ? Would you rather use Asian systems ?

Sorry Jocky , only playing around (as the commuter said to the Conductor)

22

Hugh,

Edinburgh 04/12/2006 11:20:43

Astroturf talks sense occasionally. Edinburgh - Glasgow non-stop could easily be achieved in half an hour, even with the existing diesel railcars.
However to avoid catching slower train up, all trains would have to be non-stop, which would not please the folk in the middle too much.
Bullet trains are a nonsense. Their power cars alone would take up most of Queen Street's platforms, leaving room for only a few carriages.

23

Astro Turf,

04/12/2006 11:59:02

Thanks Hugh - the introduction of "Bullet" trains (a joke in itself) could only be taken at all seriously if they didnt stop - otherwise what would be the point , as you point out the diesels could do it in the same time ? Its only 45 miles (or thereabouts) , the ICE between Köln and Frankfurt cannot get up to speed for most of its journey as it needs time to SLOW DOWN for the platforms ! A bullet train could never reach its top speed in a 45 mile journey. Its bollocks I tell you.

Bullet Trains are a nonsense, and they aint going to happen.

Who is fooled by this crap ? Not anyone I hope.

24

mv,

04/12/2006 12:21:07

Would it not be cheaper to get the existing railways to run on time direct with modern clean safe carriages? Its just a PR spin to hide the additional TAXES being imposed.

25

Echelon_10,

EVERYWHERE 04/12/2006 12:26:57

24. Astro Zenica:

Very good point. It’s the rail equivalent [not in terms of speed] of proposing a supertanker as a ferry crossing on the Forth, the Space shuttle for an Edinburgh to London hop, an F1 car for the school run, a man of superior intellect and integrity as First Minister. Totally unrealistic proposition.

That’s it agreed then, it’s a Maglev.

Bumsfeld has spoken

26

Echelon_10,

EVERYWHERE 04/12/2006 12:39:22

One key consideration would be safety. The French and Japs (hope that isn’t offensive to any…Japs) don’t have anywhere near the amount of neds as we do. You can picture the bams trying to get shopping trolleys on the track “Oohman thatsjus gownabe mentawl”

I have done a quick evaluation of the stats with regard to the number of neds per km of high speed track in France, Japan and Scotland. The figures are alarming:

Country Neds per km (within a stones throw of track)

Japan 0.00
France 0.12
Scotland 347.8

27

David Harrington,

Edinburgh 04/12/2006 13:00:42

Given the large cost and minor benefits of high speed rail, we should be looking at upgrading the existing route(s) first - sensible use of quad-tracking, better signalling, electrification, incremental speed upgrades (perhaps 110mph). Actually, slowing down for stations is a very minor issue - trains go through Linlithgow at 90mph, Edinburgh Park about the same. The biggest problems are capacity related - other services, viaducts and tunnels.

28

Rob me blind,

04/12/2006 13:11:00

Mr Begg knows how the government will raise capital he and his colleagues did it in Edinburgh and if anyone in power either at Holyrood or on the city council have the nerve to publish the true financial records for Lothian Buses then we could all see where the money would come from.
By introducing his transport strategy Mr Begg handed Lothian a blank cheque for years to come, the money they make is phenomenal and if they were more prudent in the way they spend and hide money the returns would be even greater.

So Mr Begg just because you lost your privileged place as advisor to the government now replaced by your place on the board of directors of First Group just print the truth of how they will fund all transport projects when the follow your model.

29

Gordon,

Edinburgh 04/12/2006 13:15:58

#11 - Fine when we chose what to introduce, not good when it is thrust upon us, eg Poll Tax.

30

Mark j,

soon tae be a Leither 04/12/2006 13:17:39

Could we afford to do these programs?
Could be afford not to?

Careful, the mighty rich nations & corporations create huge expensive investment and engineering programmes in other countries and then make those countries wallow in debt while these corporations and powerful nations take resources.

Are they doing this on the eve before Scotland votes
for SNP? Tie us in get us in debt, and reap our resources.In this shocking memoir, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, John Perkins tells of his own inner journey from willing servant of empire to impassioned advocate for the rights of oppressed people. Covertly recruited by the United States National Security Agency and on the payroll of an international consulting firm, he traveled the world—to Indonesia, Panama, Ecuador, Colombia, Saudi Arabia, Iran and other strategically important countries. His job was to implement policies that promoted the interests of the U.S. corporatocracy (a coalition of government, banks, and corporations) while professing to alleviate poverty—policies that alienated many nations and ultimately led to September 11 and growing anti-Americanism.

Read Confessions of an Economic hit man. http://www.economichitman.com/

31

Neil,

9% Growth Party 04/12/2006 13:19:37

Tavish Scott recently wrote in the other paper that EARL would cost £609 million not £500 & I think some of the other costings here may be equally outdated.

The problem with the transport budget is the the Executive are committed to spending 70% of it on "public transport" code for rail whereas rail is only 2% of journeys.

This means that if the purpose of the transport budget is to improve transport rather than score political brownie points, nearly 70% of it is wasted.

32

Echelon_10,

EVERYWHERE 04/12/2006 13:21:48

28 David:

How will passengers get on and off the proposed ‘Bullet’ when it’s passing at 90mph+? The point that Astro was making is that unless this proposed service is non-stop then it’s a waste of time having such trains. Likewise, if it is nonstop it would need to have its own dedicated track. You could not have anything within probably 10+ miles of a Bullet train at full speed, so it wouldn’t work on shared tracks.

On a related matter, I was amused to learn a few years back that a German train manufacturer (possibly Siemens) was building trains for the UK. They have a dedicated private test track somewhere in Germany for R&D&T, but found this did not replicate the crap quality of our rail tracks and points. So they had to out and effectively damage and deform their lovely track to make it more British. I am sure the Germans were greatly amused at this, I know a Swiss engineer friend of mine who told me the story certainly was.

33

Michael Laing,

Edinburgh 04/12/2006 13:39:03

If "bullet trains" were to run between Edinburgh and Glasgow, I doubt that it would be feasible to run them into Queen Street station, where the last couple of miles of the journey - the 20mph descent of Cowlairs Incline - take at least five minutes to cover. Nevertheless, the present journey-time is not "one hour" but 48 to 50 minutes, and has been so since as long ago as 1971. In fact, when the class 27 push & pulls were introduced thirty-five years ago, they were timetabled to cover the 47 miles in only 43 or 44 minutes. Today's longer journey-times are due to extra stops being included in the timetable.

I would suggest that the £millions that would need to be spent on new infrastructure to achieve a saving of a few minutes over such a short distance would be much better spent on increasing the capacity of the existing route, particularly on the approaches to Queen Street station.

34

Royster,

04/12/2006 13:47:55

#27. Echelon. We need to be imaginative about the neds and come up with a solution - like releasing hawks near airports to scare away flocks of birds. Perhaps they could blast classical music from the bridges or surround a cigarette vending mchine with quick sand. Any ideas?

35

Echelon_10,

EVERYWHERE 04/12/2006 14:04:21

Royster:

Good thinking. What about electrified fencing with gates at 100m intervals. Entry can only be gained on the completion of a Su Doku puzzle. Or simply signs that say “DO NOT TOUCH” which are electrified. Because they will!

We must be innovative to protect our rights to a better transport system from Ned anti-social behaviour.

36

Michael Laing,

Edinburgh 04/12/2006 16:24:49

#32 Neil: The reason only 2% of journeys are made by rail is precisely because our rail network has been butchered to half the size it was 50 years ago while £millions have been spent on roads, thus denying large sections of the population access to rail and forcing people onto the roads.

The policy of promoting and accommodating ever-increasing car-use is unsustainable for reasons of danger, wasteful use of finite fuel resources, carbon-emissions, environmental damage and social exclusion, and it's high time the balance was redressed in favour of transport-modes that benefit the environment and society as a whole, not just car-owners.

Incidentally, I think the figure of 2% is highly suspect. Where rail is available as an option for commuting into our cities, I suspect the percentage of people travelling by train is much higher.

37

Meta,

04/12/2006 18:23:24

It only makes sense to have a Maglev or Bullet train from north to south, not from east to west. These are the meaningful savings on journey times we require in the joined up Scotland which Lesley Riddoch refers to on another page.

The drain of people into the central belt caused by the twin city powerhouse theory is self defeating as the commuters in their satellite towns are the ones who are using the Edinburgh - Glasgow line and providing the statistics being used to justify the proposed lunacy.

38

William Schumm,

Virginia, U.S.A. 04/12/2006 18:51:59

#37 - I tend to disagree with your opinion that most people are "forced" onto the roadways. Practically always they are using the mode of choice. With your car the trip begins right at your house at any time of your choosing and ends at the location of your choice. It never leaves without you and you don't have to listen to other people using their cell phones.

I submit that the train service is bad because most people prefer to not use the trains for short trips. Only when the roads are clogged and in gridlock will people choose the rail, but once the traffic is moving, well......you know.

39

Jackie,

Fife 04/12/2006 19:18:40

"The Executive has already committed to transport plans totalling £3.5 billion, including building a rail link to both Edinburgh and Glasgow airports and a Borders railway. "A new crossing may also have to be built across the Forth"

Could this be the reason that a decision on a 2nd road bridge across the Forth has been so slow in coming???? our elected members of parliament now intend building SUPER bridge?????

Think of the kudos for them and of course Scotland...... this amazing feat of engineering will be fully designed and built by the Scottish Executive...... It will be hailed as the engineering achievement of the 21st century .....It will carry trains and motor vehicles. It will also have a catapult at either end so folk who own gliders can fly to work. And a moving walkway for those who feel like walking on a nice day. We should be so proud to have elected these visionaries.

40

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 04/12/2006 21:05:23

39. William Schumm. Your posting does not take into account that we are talking inter-city here.

Edinburgh has a long drawn out approach to its town centre which is still based on horse & cart technology. The most up to date contributions to motorists being the continuation of 2 lanes at any given set of traffic lights narrowing to one lane within 6 seconds of getting to the other side and painting the lines at the side of the road a different colour to the national norm. Glasgow simply bulldosed its council houses out of the way and built a motorway through the town. A motorway which is gridlocked at the most important times of the day.

The rest of the country doesn't matter which is the root of the problem.

41

Caliwag,

York 04/12/2006 22:19:45

This thread is crossing over with the bullet train thread from a couple of days ago and we are all just going round in circles with the same daft comments.
People in the UK and in Scotland do not regularly travel long distances. The stats must be out there but you just need to look at any north-south train and people pile on and off at all points for, strangely, the junction station, to where they want to go. British Rail used to understand all these patterns but I doubt if the same fragmented operations can collate such stuff.
Anyway the point is there is absolutely no need for any bullets, super-links or dedicated routes because so few would use them. I do not believe prosperity will surface as a result of a rapid rail link to somewhere else. As has been said the 70s push pull trains between E and G shuttled back and fourth in 46 -48 mins, so why is it slower? because of the commuter, in betweenie demand. Why would a bullet change that?
Forget it, improve what we have and encourage people to sort their lives out and not rely on "the authorities" everyone needs to participate in this.

We're all induividuals...well maybe I'm not, LOL Wag

42

Jackie,

Fife 04/12/2006 23:16:34

#39 William Schumm. We do not always have the choice. We live 5 miles from the nearest train halt, a mile from the nearest bus stop, and a bus only passes there twice a day. To get to a more frequent service we have just short of 2 miles to walk. Great on a nice day, not so good in Winter or if you need to go to a doctor. Hopeless if you have to be at work in the morning.

OK, we could move into a town, but we like it away from the endless traffic and people noise, and the smell.

And we have tried on 3 occasions in the past 5 years to use the train for a short trip (twice to Edinburgh and once to Dundee) on all three occasions, the trains broke down and we were stuck waiting on them sending out another engine to get us there. On one of those occasions, although we had paid for a return ticket, there was not enough carriages put on at Edinburgh for all the folk that had tickets, so we ended up getting the bus back to our nearest town then a taxi home.

As for longer journeys by train in Scotland..... they can be embarrassing. Last Spring we had friends from Mississippi over on holiday. We were staying up near Kyle of Lochalsh for part of their holiday. As "The Kyle Line" is reputed to be one of the most scenic rail journeys in the world, and is promoted as a tourist attraction, we decided to take the train from Kyle to Inverness one day. I have no doubt the scenery was nice, but train windows were so dirty you could hardly see out of them, carriages stunk. On our journey back to Kyle, the train was late in leaving Inverness because of a "technical fault". The train stopped again at Dingwall because of the same technical fault, but people were not allowed off the train. The technical fault was that none of the toilets on the train were working. So much for one of our "Tourist Attractions". To say we felt humiliated at puting our friends through that is an understatement. We have travelled by Amtra

43

Royster,

05/12/2006 06:12:58

A bullet train between Edinburgh and Scotland may be a bit of an extravagance. It's just over half the distance between Birmingham and Manchester. Paris to Lyon, yes. East and West Coast main lines, yes. If the Scottish Executive is trying to serve Scotland, it may be better to open up the Highlands with bullet trains.


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.