I was flattered to find parts of my letter of November 4 used in The Herald editorial to illustrate just how costly would be a new, additional, Forth Road Bridge (December 21).
So costly was Cabinet Secretary John Swinney's then estimate that it could fund the entire Scottish programme of public transport investment for years to come.
The small change could even provide every Scottish council with £20 per head of population for walking and cycling projects - a particularly galling thought at a time when investment in Scottish cycling infrastructure looks set to fall severely in the aftermath of John Swinney's recent financial statement.
Yet now, just three months after his previous bridge estimate, the cost has risen yet again - to around £4bn. Quite unbelievably, this latest cost increase alone is enough to pay the entire cost of the Edinburgh tram project twice over.
How many desperately needed transport projects throughout urban and rural Scotland will never see the light of day, thanks to this massive outlay? Yet the latest research suggests that the existing road bridge is almost certainly repairable, with techniques already used elsewhere.
How, then, can it be right to decide now to spend £800 each for every man, woman and child in Scotland for a project that will double motor traffic across the Forth?
And can this be the same government that promises to cut CO2 emissions by 80%?
Dave du Feu 2 Greenpark Cottages Edinburgh Road Linlithgow.
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 hereComments are closed on this article