WHILE I agree with Gordon Cubie's case for a new Clyde crossing (Letters, October 30) I do not agree with more expensive road building when an alternative public transport system could be built.
The five-mile (8km) M74 Glasgow extension, completed in 2011 route, cost £692m or £865 a centimetre, and has only benefited car and other road users.
As roads are paid for out of general taxation and not "road tax", as the motoring lobby would have us believe – it is Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) – I, as a cyclist and non-car user, object to having to pay for a road system that primarily benefits car users.
This is a great opportunity to build an underground metro system which can be used by all in society, starting at Paisley Gilmour Street Station and then going via Glasgow Airport to Renfrew; from where it would pass under the River Clyde from Renfrew to Yoker, from where it could continue north or west.
It could be used by all including: pedestrians, cyclists, kids, those with disabilities, car users, and even those under the influence of alcohol.
And while this line would only serve a small area – and away from the busier parts of the Glasgow area – it would be a start to building a world-class multi-line system; and combined with transport integration, would be a viable alternative to the political parties' obsession with cars and road building.
They could always build the line and then talk about "filling the missing link" to justify more metro lines, as they did with the M74 motorway.
If the Scottish Government is serious about climate change, traffic congestion, and greater social economic integration, this is an option it should consider, instead of continually writing reports, starting consultations, talking about "state-of-the-art" systems or "excellence in transport" which is the only thing it is good at.
Dougie McKerrell,
39, Flat 6, Braid Square, Glasgow.
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