Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Friday, 5th December 2008

Haggis Hunt is now on!

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Dualling A9 would bring £1.3bn benefit



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: 05 June 2008
DUALLING the A9 between Perth and Inverness would inject almost £1.3 billion into the economy, according to a report examining possible upgrades to one of Scotland's most notorious roads.


Widening one 13-mile section alone, between Kingussie and Aviemore, could bring national economic benefits of almost £400 million if it were upgraded at an estimated cost of £100 million.

The figures were revealed yesterday in a study commis
sioned by Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE) and HITRANS, the region's transport partnership.

In a separate report, they predicted 30 minutes could be shaved off the two-hour-plus A96 journey from Inverness to Aberdeen if bypasses were built at Nairn, Elgin and Keith, estimated to cost a total of nearly £40 million.

Such a scheme would also boost the North-east economy by £107 million a year and create up to 6,600 jobs.

The A9 runs for 108 miles between Inverness and Perth and accounts for 96 per cent of all road journeys between Inverness and the Central Belt and almost all freight movements.

But campaigners say its current condition makes it unsafe and stifles economic development in the north of Scotland.

At present, just 28 miles of it are dualled.

The Scottish Government says it is committed to planning for dualling the A9 in the long term, but last year the cost was put at £600 million.

Duncan MacIntyre, the chairman of HITRANS, said: "

This is the second report that clearly demonstrates the large economic benefits that would arise from improvements.

"Clearly, our preferred option would be to dual the entire length from Perth to Inverness, but we appreciate this will have to be carried out in sections and will take time."

He called on the government to make the Kingussie-Aviemore section a priority for dualling in the short term.

The new report measured the impact of dualling different sections of the A9 and the overall route in terms of journey times, vehicle operating costs and carbon emissions. Within the Highlands, the Kingussie to Aviemore section emerged as a clear favourite, providing 44 per cent of the overall economic benefit.

Meanwhile, a report on the A96 said bypasses would potentially release much-needed land for development and could generate about £38 million from developers to help fund the road improvements. The reduction in congestion would also lead to savings of over £21 million each year for users of the A96 as a result of shorter journey times.

A spokesman for Transport Scotland said: "HITRANS have provided Transport Scotland with a copy of the reports they have commissioned for the A9 and A96, both of which form an important part of Scotland's national strategic transport corridors, and the content of these reports is being considered as part of the Strategic Transport Projects Review."





The full article contains 471 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 04 June 2008 10:07 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Angus Ogg,

04/06/2008 23:01:12

Not just the economic benefit.

Anyone travelling, what is probably the most beautiful arterial road in Britain, cannot help but be struck by the frequency of floral tributes and wreaths that appear on the sides of the A9 in memory of friends and relatives that have died on the road.

So there is a huge human benefit as well.
2

,

05/06/2008 00:13:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
3

Resolutions,

05/06/2008 00:15:47
Aye, and today there appeared to be 3 separate accidents along the length of this road, reported on the Radio about teatime. And it was bonny day!

This road is a disgrace to a nation.

(And the A96 is no advert either)
4

Highland Silly,

05/06/2008 00:27:43
This is one of the major black spots for road deaths in Scotland and it was Highland time the A9 was upgraded to duel carriageway status. Labour had years to sort this out but sat and watched the death toll rise year after year.
5

Maisie from Morningside,

05/06/2008 00:44:09
Could anyone explain what these £1.3bn economic benefits are? Since the figure is so precise someone somewhere has worked them out-perhaps they can be shared.
Otherwise it's just more sloganeering nonsense.
6

truthsleuth,

05/06/2008 00:58:48
All road schemes end up costing far more than estimated.
As for road accidents it is drivers that are to blame not the road.
savings in time would acrue mainly to Road hauliers their 44t vehicles are restricted to 40mph on single carriageways - let them pay for their savings.

Other time savings are aggregated and do not achieve the savings claimed

Benefits to local economies are questionable as local industries usually suffer because manufacturers etc will 'import' into the area and close down local factories.
Finally we have rises in fuel costs/polltion/CO2 etc far better the parallel rail lines are dualled/electrified and able to provide a faster more frequent service.

Over reliance on road transport has been shown to be a gross mistake now is the time to rectify it not compound it.

7

truthsleuth,

05/06/2008 01:12:09
Road schemes are jusfied using Cost Benefit Analysis.

This uses savings in time/accidents/fuel etc weighed against the capital cost/maintenance cost of the road.

However The Costs are just those of the ROAD and do not take into account the cost of the vehicles or the supporting infrastructure for those vehicles.
Time savings assume minutes saved by each activity on the road are aggregated together ie if one second is saved and 3600 persons are involved then a saving of 1 hour is made.
Savings for business are given a higher value than leisure.
If 10 accidents are saved the deaths are given higher values than serious injuries.
With fuel improved fuel consumption is oresumed though I suspect does not achieve the savings claimed as increased speed increases consumption.

Environmental and other none money items are vasly underestimated.
Other gains are the claims for 'attracting jobs etc
Studies in the 1980s/90s showed that NEW roads did not attract investment but still these claims are made.
Similar claims for rail were shown to have far superior results but get little coverage by the D(a)fT and its counterparts.

Studies in t
8

mobocaster,

Aberdeen 05/06/2008 01:19:10
#6

Idiots on the road notwithstanding (& there are certainly plenty of those), I would have to point out that some of the junctions on the A9 are appalingly badly designed/laid-out & truly do contribute to increasing the risk of accidents. They at least need some serious adjustment & probably proper grade separation. The periodic tinkering by the road agency has so far been little more than a sticking plaster excercise each time.

Even as (I hope!) a reasonably sensible/careful/considerate/observant driver/rider, I have had a few heart-stopping moments/close shaves at various places along that road over the years.

Take your point about public transport, however can we get that all over the Highlands please. IME it can be pretty usless away from the main arteries.
9

Hmm ...,

05/06/2008 01:25:55
... Independent Future (2) said "What ever happened to our trains?"

I can tell you - they chuntered up and down the single track line to Inverness and beyond. So much for Scotland having an economy!

I am coming to the conclusion that it is time ...
10

Willie,

05/06/2008 03:02:21
What about the A82??
Its a national disgrace!
The A9 has some dual carriageway and some nice long straight bits but the A82 belongs in the dark ages.
Even General Wade built better roads!!
The bit from Corran to Fort William is a death trap, and Fort william to Inverness is ridiculous and Pulpit Rock between Crianlarich and Tarbert belongs in the wild west.
When are we lochaber going to see a return for our taxes.
Oh I forgot the A86 is closed at night this week whilst they patch it widening it to 2 lanes would be better!!
11

W Smith,

Middle East 05/06/2008 04:03:50
Considering the amount of money that has been wasted on the Scottish parliament building, MSPs salaries and their .. er 'benefits', methadone for druggies, incapacity benefit for work shy spongers, gold-palted public sector benefits then upgradinng the A9 is a no-brainer.

Get it done.

BTW
As manufacturing jobs are being lost this year in East Kilbride, Dundee, and Fife why has Salmond spent most of his precious time PRATTLING ON AND ON ABOUT TRIDENT, JAMES MCFADDENS GOAL AGAINST FRANCE, MUSLIM SCHOOLS, BERWICK UPON TWEED, ACTS OF SETTLEMENT, ETC??

He claims to be an economist and yet totally unconcerned about job losses.
12

Navvy,

singapore 05/06/2008 04:32:23
#2, #9

The railway used to be dual track all the way to Inverness

Now there are convoys og LPG tankers just begging for an accident, which shouuld be on the train
13

calum,

05/06/2008 06:32:38
Just remember that our politicians in Holyrood would rather spend £1/2 billion (and rising) on a single tramLINE to supplement an award-winning council owned bus service than to create and encourage investment in the rest of Scotland by safe and viable transport alternatives. Just remember that.
14

Euan,

Edinburgh 05/06/2008 07:23:17
Edinburgh's disgraceful money-gulping tram project should be halted with immediate effect and the funds re-directed towards the far, far, far more worthy cause of upgrading the A9 to dual carriageway.

Just too sensible though, isn't it?
15

SouthernSkye,

05/06/2008 07:33:53
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/scotland/Two-dead-and-two-hurt.4153596.jp

I think the above story, also in todays Scotsman, highlights the issue.
The A9 is one of the main tourist routes and haulage routes. To dual it would bring many benefits. I cannot think of a downside to dualling it.
The numbers of foreign drivers (in LHD vehicles and not 100% sure of where they are going) is a major factor as is the number of carvans being towed and lorries.Shifting the freight onto rain by upgrading the rail network would be a very useful addition to the plan of dualling the A9. But tourism will remain.
There are many other roads that need "sorting out" as well. The top road from Kyle to Inverness or the main Loch Ness route both have some single track.
16

,

05/06/2008 07:38:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
17

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 05/06/2008 07:42:09
ROADS DO NOT CAUSE ACCIDENTS. Bad driving and bad luck do. The old A9 was slow, tortuous and tricky. Drivers used it with care. Result? You've guessed it.

A road just sits there, inert, still, passive, harmless; a tool waiting to be properly used. Only a bad craftsman blames his tools if he cuts off a thumb.

If everyone drove along the A9 at fifty max. serious accidents would almost vanish.

Any spare cash should be spent instead on dualling and electrifying the railway north.
18

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 05/06/2008 07:48:01
#17 "If everyone drove along the A9 at fifty max. serious accidents would almost vanish."

Indeed they would, because the road would be entirely empty if you could only go at 50 max. I'm sure you're having a good time in the 19th century, but don't try to drag everyone else back there.

Of course bad drivers are to blame for accidents - what pearl of wisdom should we expect from you next? Sea "full of water"? - but bad roads make it worse. That's why the A9 has far more accidents than roads with more traffic going at higher speeds.

The A9 should and would have been dualled, had the Unionist parties not forced the money to be spent on Edinburgh's vanity tram. I'm sure it will be once the SNP achieve a majority government in 2011.
19

donald,

glasgow 05/06/2008 07:56:59
Don't the Onionists hate to see any improvements and benefits to Scotland.
20

Slioch,

Scottish Highlands 05/06/2008 07:59:29
It was Highlands and Islands Enterprise who were responsible for pushing through the deeply indebted and loss-making Cairn Gorm funicular railway, with promises of huge financial benefits.

The Scotsman (15th Sept. 2006) reported a European Commission inquiry into HIE's mishandling of various projects in the Highlands under the headline, "EU demands a £20m refund for 'botched' Highland projects", stating, "The Highlands and Islands area received about £100 million from the European Regional Development Fund between 1994 and 1999. After two long-running investigations, the European Commission claims that there were "weaknesses in the management" of some projects and a "high rate of ineligible expenditure"."

HIE's financial forecasts are not worth a hill of beans and as Truthsleugh has pointed out the environmental and social disadvantages of such schemes are always underplayed. The senior staff in HIE are hand in glove with the construction companies that benefit from their contracts.

Rather than take heed of such HIE reports we should be demanding a full public inquiry into their operations.
21

lachlan,

05/06/2008 08:16:49
what about daulling and electrifying the railway to inverness.
22

Micropacer,

Inverness 05/06/2008 08:22:08
The A9 definatley needs more Dual Carraigway sooner rather than later. You get stuck behind buses and caravans forever. This must increase your CO2 emmissions greatly as your in 3rd gear most of the journey ready to try and overtake restricted vehicals....

The A82 is shocking and should be a priority probably above the A9 just to bring it up to a decent standard of Single Carraigway.

The A96 is the worst IMO. Until Elgin its not too bad (ignoring you have to pass through every town and village) but after that its like a 60s road until you get to Inverurie. Frankly I can see huge economic benifits of this road was brought up to the current standards of the A9 atleast. Inverness to Nairn should be dualled aswell as a priority which seems so obvious yet it hardly gets a mention. Narins a superb place with great potential buts become a dive.

People suggesting the trains - it all sounds great having better trains but the Highlands are huge and the train covers a tiny area. Tourists and frieght use the A9 as part of their journey but most dont stop at Inverness.

23

Alistair Macintosh,

05/06/2008 08:23:12
The A9 is a disgrace, it becomes even worse in the summer when frustration with convoys of slow moving caravans leads to crazy overtaking. I would have caravans restricted to travelling only between 8pm and 8am on the A9.
The Edinburgh Tram fiasco will leave us with lots of empty trams to go with the empty buses. There are two hours in the morning and two hours in the evening when they are full, then the rest of the day they just clog up the streets. Now the trams will make it even worse.
24

Farmernot,

05/06/2008 08:48:32
I blame Tesco myself........lorrys trundle along at 40mph with long queues behind where people get irritated and try to pass long lines of traffic.
If Tesco were truly green as they try and make out they would transport supplies by train north of the Central belt.
The A9 should be dualled without doubt
25

Manila,

Makati 05/06/2008 08:48:41
#23 Caravans only to travel between 8:00pm and 8:00am? Yes, that will be really popular and practical for families with young kids and do wonders for attracting tourists. No, not a good idea at all.

The Executive just needs to get on and do this. It needs to be done. The A92 upgrade between Dundee and Arbroath proves it makes sense in safety statistics alone.
26

Slioch,

Scottish Highlands 05/06/2008 08:55:49
It is a myth that the A9 is a particularly dangerous road: it is not. The European Roads Assessment Programme provides information on this subject.

See the link below for a road map of Britain showing the relative safety of roads. The map provides five categories, from low risk to high risk, calculated by the number of deaths or serious injuries relative to the amount of traffic the road experiences.

The A9 comes out in the second safest category (low-medium risk).

http://www.eurorap.org/risk_maps?search=y&country=Great+Britain&format=Thumbnail
27

JayJay,

Right here 05/06/2008 08:56:30
This is the one single issue where you can look to every government over the past 50 years and ask them to justify their expenditure on Scotlands roads. In my driving lifetime - over the last 25 years - I have never understood why people in Scotland put up with such chronic under-investment.
And its not just the obvious ones, like the A82, A9 and A96. How many years of one-hour tailbacks did people have to endure before the A8000, or the Auchenkills roundabout was dealt with? Our side roads and b-routes are about as roadworthy as the Martian landscape.
This sort of piffle would just not be tolerated in the South East. It is of course supremely ironic that the very region that lands the oil, gets 19th century roads! Why on earth do we tolerate this?
28

Jambo-ree,

05/06/2008 09:20:54
There are no dangerous roads, just dangerous drivers.
29

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 05/06/2008 09:33:02
How can a road be dangerous? It is inert. To blame roads is like blaming guns. Why confuse cause with effect?
30

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 05/06/2008 09:33:43
By 2010, the National Roads Authority of Ireland will have completed the Republic's motorway and trunk road network! It will connect with Northern Ireland and all the ferry ports to Great Britain.

The Celtic Tiger has even been looking to the future and discussing the feasibility of building a sub-sea tunnel between Ireland and Britain!

In the meantime, the Central Scotland Motorway network
which was commenced 48 years ago, and vital trunk roads like the A9 are still unfit for the 21st Century!

31

Palermo,

05/06/2008 09:44:14
It seems a long time ago now, though it was only 1 year ago, that the Unionist parties all collaborated to insist that Edinburgh's trams (which no-one in Edinburgh seems to want) would get the money instead of the A9 upgrade (that everyone in Scotland, barring some of the more committed environmentalists, recognises as a necessity).

Perhaps now the more business-savvy Unionists (there must be some, even if only on a law-of-averages basis) will begin to see sense and back the SNP's policy of A9 upgrade.

If not, then the Unionists deserve to go, and I hope they get what they deserve
32

Joe,

Livingston 05/06/2008 09:45:55
The money being spent on the totally unnecessary M74 extension should have been diverted to both the A1 and A9 dualling. SNP are allowing the west coast to rule both their hearts and heads..
33

,

05/06/2008 09:52:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
34

Slioch,

Scottish Highlands 05/06/2008 09:52:37
#24 Farmernot

Your prayers have been answered.

Tesco has recently announced that from the Autumn [2008] deliveries will be made to Inverness by train and then distributed from the Highland capital to stores in the region including Aviemore.
35

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 05/06/2008 09:52:52
#29 "How can a road be dangerous? It is inert."

Good lord, how are you allowed out by yourself?

A gun is inert. A grenade is inert. A landmine is inert. Are they not, then, dangerous?
36

stmonan,

London 05/06/2008 09:53:21
The A9 should be dualled because it's a key infrastructure route AND central to tourism. It shouldn't take half-assed studies like this plucking £1.3bn out of thin air to make the case. The M74 and A82 should take equal priority.

Some, if not all of the cash for this could come from closing down the traffic management/ street furniture cabals who spend a fortune pointlessly re-engineering urban roads.
37

geekpie,

forfar 05/06/2008 09:54:31
HITRANS, like NESTRANS and the rest, want roadbuilding in their area (check the backgrounds of the people leading it), and would only commission a report from someone likely to find in favour of dualling.

What we can be sure of is that there will be a massive increase in long-distance commuting if the whole thing is dualled, with knock-on effects on communities nearby, because journies don't start and finish on the A9.

It's a bad idea. As with more or less every road scheme, it'll cost far more than the estimates.
38

Proud2Be,

Perth 05/06/2008 09:56:25
The upgrading of the A9 is imperative to save lives!! But for anyone who is more concerned about cash than lives, or anyone who is just intrigued the below address is the Economic Appraisal Report from HITRANS

http://www.hitrans.org.uk/Documents/documents/A9EconomicAppraisalStudyReportFinal23Oct07.pdf

Or this one is the response to a detailed survey of business on their needs of the A9

http://www.hitrans.org.uk/Documents/documents/A9BusinessSurveysReportFinal31Oct07.pdf

Happy reading!!
39

Slioch,

Scottish Highlands 05/06/2008 10:03:49
Could Highlands and islands Enterprise reveal upon which global oil price their unbelievable prediction of a "£1.3bn benefit" was made.

Was it $30 a barrel or $100 a barrel, or $135 or $200 ???

Or is this a cloud-cuckoo-land prediction, where the cost of fuel isn't taken into account? Indeed, to give ONE figure (however unbelievable) for a long term transport related infrastructure development at a time of rapidly and unpredictably fluctuating fuel costs shows either that HIE are living in cloud-cuckoo-land, or that they believe the rest of us have the wool pulled firmly down over our eyes.
40

11+failed,

the pans 05/06/2008 10:04:13
6 truthsleuth,
"savings in time would acrue mainly to Road hauliers their 44t vehicles are restricted to 40mph on single carriageways - let them pay for their savings"
I quote above only one piece from what is one your usual nonsense posts. Your naivety knows no bounds, we all pay for costs incurred by hauliers.
41

Buttweld,

05/06/2008 10:40:56
You could solve the accident problem quite cheaply. Put a 50mph limit on the single carridgeway sections and put in average speed cameras.
42

Neil,

Glasgow 05/06/2008 10:51:29
Ah but its a ROAD & roads are nasty politically incoorect things not like those nice railways we throw billions at. That is why rail gets 70% of Scotland's transport budget with only 3% of journeys.
43

shawfield,

Glasgow 05/06/2008 11:06:47
Aye and toilets would be good too.
44

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 05/06/2008 11:23:12
I'd be sorry to see it dualled. It's one of the few challenging main arteries in Scotland.
45

GrahamH,

Edinburgh 05/06/2008 11:31:28
#45. How many families of the many dead will agree with you? Even making a joke is disrespectful.

SNP should have stuck to pledge, abolished trams and spent the money on at least sections of this road and also A1, Scotlands other national road disgrace.

46

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 05/06/2008 12:03:37
#25 Rev Campbell.

No need to be rude (unless your argument is weak, and yours is).

A gun, a knife, poison, etc. are NOT dangerous. I have all three and they have never harmed anyone.

A road is NOT dangerous. No one would die on the A9 if people drove well. Do what you like to that road and people will still die on it if it used badly. Accidents are nearly always caused by human failure.

Let's try upgrading drivers.

Meantime, dual and electrify the rail instead.
47

LyonHearts,

le teil 05/06/2008 12:10:50
I can't believe this hasn't been done yet! It just goes to show what a third world country Scotland is in many respects!

48

Angus Ogg,

05/06/2008 12:15:11
#17,

Rulesbutnotrulers, I usually agree with what you post, but sorry to say you are off the mark saying that roads do not cause deaths.

It is a fact from police and FAI studies that most road accidents are caused by a combination of factors.

High on that list are the driver/human error part you refer to, and in many parts the luck you mention too.

But the condition of the motor vehicle and causal links such as defective brakes or shock absorbers or other mechanical failure loom large.

Also it is a proven fact that road design also has a contributory factor. This is one of the reasons the aptly named "black spot" comes about. From investigative experience this is usually an historic issue. The majority of "black spot" roads were laid down on old road lines where originally carriage ways for horse and cart cut a path through the land to the destination. Then in the 1920's to 1950's many of these were directly tarmacadamed over with little attention being given to the increased speed capabilities of the vehicles. Many road layouts still lend themselves to the day Rulesbutnotrulers and myself will remember, when a wee man waving a red flag was required to walk ahead of you clearing the way and warning pedestrians about your car.

So my friend, roads can be a contributory factor - majorly so - to road injuries and deaths.
49

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 05/06/2008 12:26:19
#50 Meths

Being killed by a vehicle crossing the central barrier happens on all such roads. Dualling the A9 won't stop that.

I have never known a road to cause an accident. It's its abuse that is the real problem.

The dog is fine, thanks. I keep her off the roads, though. You never know when the tarmac may rise up and bite.
50

Big T,

05/06/2008 12:27:21
How about dualling the AI south from Edinburgh!!

It is a farce that there is no decent road direct from the CAPITAL south!!!
51

David Harrington,

Edinburgh 05/06/2008 12:40:58
As truthsleuth has already pointed out, the benefits of roads are exaggerated (particularly the economic benefits of time reductions - which don't last long as more traffic is generated) and the full costs are played down - even assuming that they keep to budget; many road schemes have gone vastly over budget.
People are just using the "dangerous roads" argument as a trojan horse; fewer crashes could be gained by much cheaper works than dualling - for example, redesign of junctions where most crashes occur, reductions in speed etc.
52

Slioch,

Scottish Highlands 05/06/2008 12:42:53
#49 Angus Ogg

I agree with you, but have a look at the link given in #26.

The A9 is classified in the second safest category (low-medium risk) out of five.

The number of deaths and serious injuries on a road is the product of the number of vehicles using the road and the inherent danger of the road itself. If the A9 were duelled then one factor - the number of vehicles - would likely increase whilst the other factor - the inherent danger - would likely decrease. Predicting quite what is then likely to happen to the numbers of accidents is a non-trivial problem, but it would be informed by knowing the relative risk of the parts of the A9 currently duelled compared with those that are not. Does anyone have such figures? And if not, why not??

If safety is the paramount concern then the pressure should be to upgrade the railway system and make the fares cheaper so as to get as many people and freight off the roads as possible, since rail is much safer than road. This is particularly the case with a road like the A9 which will be promoted as the arterial link between a rapidly expanding population around Inverness and the rest of the country.
53

kennyy,

ireland 05/06/2008 13:16:57
My understanding was that the SNP wanted to use the money labeled for edinburgh tram to do this work. Unfortunately the unionist parties (lab/con/LD) stuck together on the tram to prove a point against the SNP So rather than doing the best thing for the country they forced through an expensive tram that nobody wants.

Why does this report not discuss this? If it were the other way round the story would be dominated by it!
54

The Ghost of Sir William Arrol,

The Forthy Bridge 05/06/2008 13:31:53
Rising oil, tar-mac, steel and construction costs will see such a project doubling in cost easily. Rising oil prices are seeing a decline in road use and this trend will accelerate once oil supplies start declining after peak oil. After this point the price really will start to hurt.

By all means fix accident black-spots, but major transport investment should be made in electrified railways and not roads. If we're not mindful of future fuel supply issues we'll all be walking when petrol and diesel are outwith our budget.

55

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 05/06/2008 13:46:29
#59 - There is not enough money in the world for rail to replace road. It is a hugely inefficient means of moving people about in thinly populated areas. Fuel cell and full electric cars are coming and will ultimately be the solution.

Also, I see that another two people were killed yesterday in a crash on the A9. Wonder if it, like so many other deaths on this road, would have been prevented if it was a two lane dual carriageway.

Still, who cares about the deaths when Edinburgh gets its stupid little train set.
56

Annoyingboi,

Edinburgh 05/06/2008 13:50:08
#14 You put it perfectly! Here in Edinburgh NOBODY wants the enormously expensive trams and we're getting them anyway. The A9, A96 and A82 are much more deserving of the cash!
57

Alan B,

05/06/2008 14:25:52
I never know how they come to these economic benefits. Would be good if the papers could actually explain where they are meant to be coming from.

As for accidents. Yes they should dual but in the meantime, most accidents probably happen due to overtaking. Ban overtaking and most of the accidents would disappear. Having an enforsed minimum speed would help. On an "A" road (non dual carriage) max speed should probably be 60mph in decent conditions anyway.



58

Luke Skywalker,

Edinburgh 05/06/2008 15:13:07
61 I want the trams. Clean efficient and safe. Dual the A9 by all means but then budget for a huge rise in greenhouse pollution and a hospital beside the A9 to cope with the massive increase in road injuries and deaths. New roads generate traffic which kills ever an increasing number os people. That will wipe out the benefits.
59

Neil,

Glasgow 05/06/2008 15:22:13
It isn't roads its people that are dangerous. Nobody would ever be killed on one if only people were never allowed to use them.

This statement is true but may not be useful.
60

,

05/06/2008 15:28:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
61

dido-bendigo,

Scotland 05/06/2008 15:47:19
#10 Willie

You are so right! Sure, the North deserves better roads, but the West equally so! Stirling to Callander was jammed solid last Saturday. Saving fuel, put up taxes! What a travesty of pretending to do something! Get the sodding roads in good order SNP, then you might get voted in again! And stop blaming the UK government, you are responsible for making a case for funds! Get down to Westminster Alex and convince the parliament that we need the funds if the country is to be developed!
62

morris,

Edinburgh 05/06/2008 15:50:52
19
Thats the problem.They see enormous benefit to Scotland but theres an SNP government who will presumably get the credit for anything tangible at this time ,and it would be an improvement on New Labour Same Old Tory ,who successfully managed to account for eight years by filling in their expenses claims and precious little else!
These quislings see the Scottish parliament as a branch of Westminster since thats what they are!
Scotland has to stop this excuse for democracy,when in fact we are a colony subservient to the wishes of a neighbouring nation.The best part is Maggie Broon and his party are on their way out for decades at least, and the scale of their demise would suggest that they will never ever form a UK government again.Labour will then make independence noises but not because thats whats best for Scotland and her people,but because thats whats best for the cupid stunt quislings in the Labour Party.
Having squandered and lied about the oil they still ask you to vote for them! I can see more justification after Independence for arresting them and trying them for treason. Thats what they have done.
The only doubt is whether they were aware of the Mc Crone Report or not.
If they were then they are guilty of treason as charged.
If they were not,then they are guilty of a lesser crime
of being numpties,claiming they knew what they were talking about when in fact they knew Jack!
Stupidity is not a crime,just a reason to get them out of office ASAP.
63

dido-bendigo,

Scotland 05/06/2008 15:55:11
#67

Incidentally, how many miles of dual carriage-way would the cost of building, staffing and maintaining Holyrood and it's Parliament, paid for?
64

morris,

edinburgh 05/06/2008 15:58:18
65

Right on both counts. True statement
Useless statement.
We had to suffer deaths to get the M74 built!
Carlisle was included in the Motorway network years before and we all know what a huge centre of population Carlisle is,but Glasgow was excluded and Edinburgh (the capital) still doe not have a connection of any standard unless you travel the M8 first.
We are only now upgrading parts of the A1 to dual cabbageway!
The A9 should be upgraded to Inverness to at least dual status. Any country which claims to be modernised and suffers from an infrastructure which is the laughging stock of Europe should hang its head in shame.The A9 is an accident waiting to happen again and again. Stop building stupid tram lines where a bus route already operates and stop electing stupid Unionist politicians and we might start to get somewhere.
65

dido-bendigo,

05/06/2008 15:59:37
#69

Sorry. 'have' paid for?
66

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 05/06/2008 16:05:16
#46:

"Even making a joke is disrespectful."

Who said I was joking Graham?
67

morris,

edinburgh 05/06/2008 16:06:30
69
Academic question best answered by independence.Then we have the resources to build our infrastructure.Westminster will never allocate the funds irrespective of whether devolved government exists or not.Thats why we need independence.

You get what you ask for and "Please Sir, can I have some more" results in a predictable response.
Go away! Well the SNP is asking and its NOT GOING AWAY !Somethings gotta give and it looks like Labour are washed up,but dont tell Glasgow Shhhhhhhhhh!They still think LABOUR can win !
68

morris,

edinburgh 05/06/2008 16:24:51
62

Whilst what you say is true and would result in less accidents in theory,no overtaking is not a solution rather than an admission of defeat. You cannot possibly justify multiple lane M25 in the south whilst banning overtaking in the North. WE SHOULD DEMAND AN INFRASTRUCTURE and when we finally figure out we aint getting anything,maybe some of us will stop and think WHAT HAPPENED to the 250 billion (according to Ian McQuirter) or 150 billion according to our resident Unionistas which was collected in Oil Revenues. It certainly did not make it travelling North over Shap which is surprising because it went South to Westminster efficiently enough !
69

Jock MacTamson 2,

Highlands 05/06/2008 16:41:15
Both the A96 and the A9 should be dual carriageway as should the road from Aberdeen to Perth thus providing a triangular main artery route for the majority of Transport to the Highlands. The number of deaths and accidents go widely ignored by the National Press.

I drive that roads every week and regardless of how sensible you drive their is no escaping the tourists and boy racers.

So many of us have lost family and friends because the Highlands do not vote Labour and therefore never mattered when it came to provision of resources.

It would transform the accessibilty for the people of the Central belt to n1p(??unsuitable word. PC gone Mad??) up to the Highlands for the weekend without having to be part of a 100 car convoy travelling at 40 mph.

70

Jock MacTamson 2,

Highlands 05/06/2008 16:44:45
Morris great posts. Especially the bit about Labour in Glasgow.LOL

That great City never ceases to amaze me with its tribal politics and religion.
71

dido-bendigo,

Scotland 05/06/2008 16:50:31
#62 Morris

If none came back to Scotland, who has paid the half a billion for Holyrood? If it came from direct taxation on the individual (Scottish) citizen, I demand a refund as the whole sheebang is not fit for purpose (and even makes excruciating television)!

72

calum,

05/06/2008 17:32:19
#54 - David Harrington, you are one of the most vociferous supporters of the Edinburgh tramLINE and it must break your heart that some people would rather the money spent in the rest of Scotland than on your local toy TRAMset. You cannot possibly be serious to believe that a small tramLINE is more important to the development of Scotland's overall economy than carefully directed diverse transport options throughout Scotland to encourage investment in areas which actually need it. That cannot be said to be true of the Edinburgh project.
73

Murdoch,

Fort William 05/06/2008 18:14:28
Recent figures stated that one quarter of all accidents on the A9 happened on dual sections. One quarter is dualled. So how will dualling it all help - indeed as has been pointed out it would encourage more traffic and that traffic would be travelling faster - so any accident would be more likely to be serious.

Hundreds of millions of pounds have already been spent on the A9 and this (and the location and relocation of thousands of public sector jobs) has led to a great increase in the size of Inverness. The A9 is not, however, anywhere near busy enough to justify dualling. There are plenty of other roads that could do with that level of investment - the West Highlands are served by roads that have seen no real investment since they were built in the 30s - that is where the priority should lie. Incidentally, those EuroRAP figures relating to accident statistics show that while the A9 is grade 2 (second safest) the A82 is grade 5 (most dangerous).
74

Joe,

Livingston 05/06/2008 19:12:18
#78.. Money earmarked for the M74 extension should be
spread over Scotland.. The SNP have - like their predecessors - fallen for the west coast card trick.
Take the Glasgow demand for improved infrastructure for the forthcoming Commonwealth Games. Edinburgh's Fringe festival will sell more tickets in 2014 and Edinburgh won't get any infrastructure upgrading.. SNP...... (Scottish National Patsies?)
75

Albawolf,

St Andrews 05/06/2008 20:35:29
Good point #14

Margo (the ind from Lothian) is concerned that the A9 runs thru SNP only districts
Maybe they are SNP for a reason.

The Glasgow party and their LD pals where in (with maj) for 8 years and dualled not an INCH.

Indeed one LD was willing to bring down the Gov over getting the tolls on the Skye Bridge removed....

Both the Glasgow party and their pals
removed the tolls on all bridges on the west of the country.

It is time the Government of Scotland acted for ALL OF SCOTLAND.

Now the M8 is too be up-graded, Glasgow gets a by-pass at £2,000 an INCH
A SECOND forth crossing is pushed

Margo is pretty silent on all this this.

These are the same people that claim to give racism the RED card.......

76

MikeyG,

Newcastle 05/06/2008 21:41:28
#65...too true, the road's not dangerous, it's the idiots that can't drive that are...try to overtake on blind brows, corners, "quick, before the end of the dual cariageway bit" etc. If everyone drove legally, respected the machine they're in and it's limits, the raods would be "safer" places to drive. No-one in UK has any manners, the driving behaviour in the UN is about the worst in the world. Spend the money on public transport; dual line the train track, put goods onto trains, put catering cars back into trains..me, if they did that I'd train it to Inverness any day rather than drive with some of the idiots that somehow have a driving licence
77

MikeyG,

Newcastle 05/06/2008 21:43:08
oops 83, typo, UK, not UN
78

Upbeat,

05/06/2008 21:50:13
81 Joe.

You are entitled to your view and have expressed it well.

Unfortunately for you there are other parts of Scotland that are ill served by the present mess of roadways around and into Glasgow, the roads that are lifelines to the rest of Europe. Sitting pretty in Livingston you are far too well served by infrastructure investment, unlike many hundreds of thousands of your fellow Scots.

The people of the West of Scotland have every right t the same quality of infrastructure, you enjoy. They should not be compelled to usde lifeline routes through small city centre roads, or follow the convoluted, ill designed, poorly signposted collection of alternatives now considered( but never intended as) a southern bypass.

The M74 extension is one issue...but confusing the money that has to be spent on this, (which should have been spent decades ago), with the money that is needed to address the third world standard of the A 82, A 85, A 84 and many other lifeline routes connecting Western Scotland, or the A 9 North is not helpful.
79

Saoghal Beag,

05/06/2008 22:07:40
Slioch, you are right, if HIE had not blown massive money on the funicular and SE had not wasted money on an factory in fife that stands empty yet (should let Ikea in!) and if the ridiculous dead end line to tweedbank was abandonned then there would be cash for a road improvement scheme on the A9 that would save lifes, improve infrastructure and transport links in Scotland.
80

Robbierunciman,

Romney Marsh 05/06/2008 23:06:51
there is a solution to the problem taxpayer subsidy - one to pleas the 'right whingers' and 'petty scots' above The Brimingham bypass is built and maintained by a private company. The same apporach could be used for a new road.

That way, we would know what each journey cost and so would the drivers - it would allow an informed debate and reliable evidence.

I hope the study also examined this option and an alternative one of increasing rail capacity - in a comparable way.

Imagine a TGV service to Inverness...
81

jenny,

inveresk village 05/06/2008 23:11:40
I travel on the A9 frequently and I just do not recognise all the criticisms of it. Most of the time, you can travel at 60 mph on the single track, occasionally having to sit behind a caravan or lorry for a wee while, but even then, they are probably travelling at 50 mph. I think the accidents are caused by the idiots who feel they have to overtake and usually choose to do so in inappropriate places. What's the big hurry? I agree with the comments at 17 above. Your car uses less petrol when you travel slower too.
82

MikeyG,

Newcastle 06/06/2008 10:45:49
#88..nice one Jenny. Well said. A "dangerous road"?! Placid enough if you stop and admire the view lol. Nope, dangerous driving....would any of these people drive like they had done if there'd been a police car behind them? NO....why? 'cos they'd be breaking the law...so don't do it when there's no police about...you are trusted to drive responsibly..(that's the problem...trusted and responsible being the key words)

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In