The UK's three largest rail unions have joined forces with Labour in a renewed bid to stop the merger between the British Transport Police (BTP) and Scotland's national police force.
The RMT, TSSA and Aslef unions have all spoken out against the move, urging Transport Secretary Michael Matheson to speak to workers about their concerns.
Mick Cash, the general secretary of the RMT, warned the merger would "jeopardise" the specialist policing delivered by the BTP, and could leave taxpayer with a "ballooning bill".
He accused the Scottish Government of "press ganging BTP officers into Police Scotland for political purposes", while TSSA leader Manuel Cortes said SNP ministers were "putting nationalist dogma ahead of the safety and well-being of Scotland's rail passengers".
Mr Matheson, in his previous role as justice secretary, had spearheaded the legislation merging the BTP and Police Scotland through Holyrood - with the Railway Policing (Scotland) Bill passed by MSPs despite criticism from opposition parties, the unions and others.
The merger was due to take place in April 2019 but the timetable has been delayed, with a report setting out recommendations for a new date expected by August.
But now Labour is calling on the Transport Secretary to use the Scottish Parliament's summer break to rethink the policy.
Colin Smyth, the party's spokesman for connectivity, said: "The summer recess gives Mr Matheson the opportunity to chart a different course for Scotland's railways once he returns to Holyrood in his new role.
"Labour hopes that he listens to British Transport Police officers, and the rest of the industry, and bins this divisive policy."
"Labour has consistently opposed this merger as it is unwanted, unnecessary and uncosted.
"The gravity of the situation is underlined by this coming together of three separate transport unions, all pleading with the new SNP Transport Minister Michael Matheson to pause and re-think this plan."
Mr Cash backed that, arguing: "The integrity and operation of an integrated national UK rail network should be mirrored by specialist railway policing.
"The Scottish Government's plans to merge the BTP in Scotland with Police Scotland would jeopardise specialist policing standards, not to mention presenting the Scottish taxpayer, passengers, staff and operators with a ballooning bill for a sub-standard service.
"We repeat our call on the Scottish Government to see sense and to re-start the consultation process on a more inclusive footing which seeks to maintain and improve specialist railway policing in Scotland, rather than press ganging BTP officers into Police Scotland for political purposes."
Mr Cortes said: "Our members have been campaigning against this wholly unnecessary merger from the off.
"Academics, the police watchdog, police officers, passengers and our members all agree that bringing together the British Transport Police (BTP) and Police Scotland is unnecessary, unwise and downright dangerous.
"Sadly, it's clear that so far, the SNP is putting nationalist dogma ahead of the safety and well-being of Scotland's rail passengers."
Meanwhile ASLEF Scotland organiser Kevin Lindsay said: "ASLEF and the other rail trade unions have been opposed to the BTP and Police Scotland merger since the idea was first floated.
"We believe that this merger will bring an unnecessary risk to rail passengers and staff alike. We therefore support the calls for this proposed merger to be scrapped."
A Scottish Government spokesman said: "We are committed to the safe and seamless integration of BTP into Police Scotland following Parliament's vote to pass the Railway Policing Act. This will deliver continuity of service for rail users and staff and a single command structure, with seamless access to wider support facilities and specialist resources."
"Devolution of BTP was recommended by the Smith Commission, reached through cross-party agreement and integration will also ensure railway policing is fully accountable to the Scottish Parliament.
"We have confirmed that our triple lock guarantee will protect jobs, pay and pensions for BTP officers transferring to Police Scotland. We meet regularly with all partners in the integration and will continue to work closely with them on addressing issues that emerge."
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