DETAILS of ongoing discussions over a possible tram-train link at Glasgow Airport cannot be made public because it would deter those involved from putting forward "contentious and challenging ideas", according to a freedom of information ruling.
All documents, memos, emails and correspondence relating to the multi-million pound transport scheme will remain under wraps after Network Rail concluded that it was "not in the public interest" to reveal the content of exchanges relating to the Glasgow Airport Access Project (GAAP), spearheaded by Glasgow and Renfrewshire councils and Glasgow Airport.
While the infrastructure body acknowledged that "disclosure would give an insight into a transport project that might one day affect the daily lives of a great many people", it concluded that this was outweighed by the need for privacy.
In a statement to the Herald, rejecting an FoI request, Network Rail said: "We think it likely that the ongoing discussions around the Glasgow Airport Access Project would be adversely affected by disclosure.
"It would make those involved in these discussions less willing and less able to present contentious or challenging ideas since doing so would open them up to unwarranted public intrusion and ultimately undermine the integrity of the policy development process."
The statement contradicts guidelines from the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), which make it clear that it "would not be reasonable" to withhold information on the basis that its disclosure would "affect the frankness of unspecified and unrelated discussions in the future".
However, while Network Rail acknowledges the ICO's stance, it adds that the "significant and prominence" of the airport project sets it apart.
The refusal comes amid scepticism over the feasibility of a £144m tram-train hybrid, which would see trams join the main rail network at Paisley Gilmour Street en route to Glasgow Central.
A Scottish Government-commissioned feasibility study in 2014 warned that there was "very little spare capacity" at Central to accommodate the trams and that running them during peak times would require "significant timetable alterations and extended journey times for other passengers".
Solving both problems is a matter for Network Rail, which owns Glasgow Central and manages the nation's railways.
Meanwhile, the UK's first ever tram-train pilot between Sheffield and Rotherham was delayed for a second time in May after Network Rail encountered "significant" technical issues.
Jim Beckett, a former Channel Tunnel engineer behind alternative monorail proposals said there should be clarity over whether the tram-train was "a no-go" or not.
He added: "It smacks of [there being] so much contention around this project that it's as if they don't want to let it out into the cold light of day."
Bill Forbes, a rail lobbyist who backs a heavy rail link to the airport said the tram-train was "a folly in waiting".
He said: "The tram-train is already showing all the hallmarks of a badly thought out plan and it may be a wise move for the railway infrastructure provider to keep some distance from the promoters given that there are bound to be repercussions when it eventually comes to grief."
A spokesman for the Campaign for Freedom of Information in Scotland said the non-disclosure decision was open to challenge.
He said: “It is hugely disappointing that, on a subject of major public concern, which is liable to involve large amounts of public money, Network Rail think that the public interest is best served by keeping papers secret.”
Network Rail said it advocated a "comprehensive and transparent" public consultation based on the completed business case.
A spokesman for GAAP said "discussions continue to evolve and no firm decisions have yet been taken".
He added: "There will, of course, be full public consultations on firm plans once sufficient information has been developed on taking forward any of the options currently under consideration. "This is the right time for a comprehensive and transparent consultation with the public on concrete proposals rather than discussion of work which is still under development."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel