Emergency services have been called after a car was hit by a train on tracks near Johnstone.
The alarm was raised at around 6.15am on Saturday with police and fire crews racing to the scene.
Fire crews safely removed the driver of the car from the wreck and passed him into the care of waiting paramedics.
ScotRail is warning of delays and diversions (Image: Twitter)
None of the nine passengers who were travelling on-board the train were hurt but were escorted to safety by firefighters.
There do not appear to be any life-threatening injuries but the track has been closed between Milliken Park and Johnstone.
ScotRail is warning passengers to expect delays and diversions on services from Glasgow Central.
Trains to Ayr, Largs and Ardrossan Harbour services have all been affected with replacement buses in place.
They tweeted: “Due to emergency services dealing with an incident between Milliken Park and Johnstone, the line is currently closed.”
A Police Scotland spokesperson said: “A report was received around 6.15am on Saturday, 15 August 2020 that a train had collided with a car near Johnstone, Renfrew.
“Emergency services are in attendance and there does not appear to be any life threatening injuries.”
A spokesperson for the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service said: “We were alerted at 6.26am on Saturday August 15 to reports of a collision between a car and a train.
“Operations control sent nine appliances in total to Janefield Avenue, Johnstone. Firefighters removed the driver from the car before transferring them into the care of paramedics.
Top news stories today
“There were no other casualties. Crews thereafter escorted nine passengers on-board the train to safety and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service remains at the scene.”
The widow of PC Andrew Harper has spoken of her grief a year on from his death (Picture: PA)
The widow of PC Andrew Harper has revealed how she feels she has been left with a ‘life sentence’ on the anniversary of his death.
His family and fellow Thames Valley Police officers gathered yesterday for a memorial service and minute of silence ahead of the anniversary today.
The 28-year-old was dragged to his death one year ago today after he was caught in a crane strap as he tried to stop three thieves fleeing after they stole a quad bike in Stanford Dingley, Berkshire.
Lissie Harper told the Daily Mail how she was asleep in the early hours when she heard a knock on the door – and thought it was because she had locked her husband out.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
But then an officer told her that PC Harper, her husband of four weeks, had died and that 10 people had been taken into custody.
‘I was very confused because, until then, I’d just assumed Andrew had been involved in a car accident on his way home,’ she said.
‘I said, “What do you mean? It’s not murder though is it?” And he said, “Yes, we think it was”.’
She also shared the last photo the couple took together just four days before his death’s at a friend’s wedding.
The 28-year-old was dragged to his death one year ago today (Picture: PA)
The couple married just four weeks before his death (Picture: Northcliffe Collection)
The childhood sweethearts had only been married for a month before his death.
‘In killing Andrew, a good, hardworking, honest, loving man, they have taken a life that was so precious and subjected me to a life sentence without him,’ she added.
Long, of College Piece in Mortimer, was sentenced to 16 years in prison, while Cole, from Paices Hill, Aldermaston, Reading, and Bowers, of Windmill Corner, Mortimer Common, Reading, were each handed 13-year terms.
PC Harper’s family have criticised the sentences and the reductions given due to the defendants’ ages.
Speaking to Good Morning Britain earlier this month, Deborah argued ‘Andrew’s Law’ would make sure sentences ‘define the crime’ of killing officers, although she accepted no punishment will help her family get over losing her son.
The government will cover the cost of schools in England appealing against exam grades after 280,000 A-level students had their marks downgraded.
Ministers are also expected to set up a taskforce, led by Schools Minister Nick Gibb, to oversee the appeals process.
The government previously said it wants the process to conclude by 7 September.
But letting schools appeal for free is "cold comfort" for pupils, the Liberal Democrats said, adding the move "should never have been needed".
Education Secretary Gavin Williamson told The Times the government would cover the fees in a bid to ensure that head teachers were not deterred from making appeals.
There had been fears that the costs - which can reach £150 - could stop schools from taking on harder to prove cases.
The regulator, Ofqual, will give more details next week.
The Liberal Democrats welcomed the announcement over appeals costs, but called on Mr Williamson to resign.
The party's education spokeswoman, Layla Moran, said: "For the young people who have worked so hard to not get the results they deserve, through no fault of their own, this announcement alone will be cold comfort."
"While this should never have been needed, it is right the government has listened to the Liberal Democrats and others and U-turned."
Ms Moran added: "Ultimately, after Gavin Williamson's botched handling of the process thus far, pupils will have no confidence in him to fix the broken glass. Before he causes any more hurt, he must go."
Earlier, Labour called on ministers to act immediately to sort out an "exams fiasco" in England and stop thousands of A-level students being "betrayed".
And some Tory MPs have challenged the fairness of how grades have been decided.
BBC News political correspondent Helen Catt said having "an efficient and effective" appeals process "is going to be really important in making sure more Tories don't join them".
'You have ruined my life'
Schools Minister Mr Gibb promised earlier that the appeals system will be "robust" after facing a call from a student who said she had been rejected by her chosen university.
During BBC Radio 4's Any Questions, Nina, from Peterborough, said her grades fell three grades lower than what she had been predicted. "You have ruined my life," she told him.
"It won't ruin your life, it will be sorted, I can assure you," Mr Gibb said.
He added: "There will be these mistakes… we do know there are imperfections somewhere in the system as a result of this model. There are no models that can improve on that, this is the problem."
After exams were cancelled due to the coronavirus pandemic, grades were awarded using a controversial modelling system, with the key factors being the ranking order of pupils and the previous exam results of schools and colleges.
This produced more top grades than have ever been seen before in A-levels, with almost 28% getting A* and As, but head teachers have been angry about "unfathomable" individual injustices in the downgrading of some results.
In England, 36% of entries had grades lower than their teachers predicted and 3% were down two grades.
There has since been calls to switch away from this system and to use teachers' predictions, in the way that the government U-turned in Scotland.
But England's exam watchdog Ofqual has warned that using teachers' predictions would have artificially inflated results - and would have seen about 38% of entries getting A*s and As.
Labour said the lack of consistency in individual results was "heartbreaking" for those affected and the government was squarely to blame for sticking with a "fatally flawed results system".
Prime Minister Boris Johnson has previously defended what he said were a "robust set" of grades and said that pupils who believed they were treated unfairly would be able to appeal or, if they wanted, sit exams in the autumn.
Schools can appeal for an upgrade if their pupils' mock grades were higher than their estimated results.
But the exam regulator Ofqual has still to say how a mock exam result can be validated - and head teachers have warned that mocks are not standardised or taken by all pupils, and could not be used as a fair way of deciding final exam results.
Left-wing activists affixed an arresting decoration to Sir Keir Starmer’s constituency office in Camden, north London, last Wednesday.
They came uninvited to put the Labour leader on macabre notice. “65,000 DEAD,” their homemade banner read. “DO SOMETHING!”
Enraged by what some supporters of Jeremy Corbyn have called an unnecessarily timid approach to Boris Johnson’s handling of the pandemic, the protesters sent the fruits of their day out to Skwawkbox, the excitable left-wing blog fiercely critical of the opposition’s new management.
They argue that Sir Keir, elected on a promise to unite the party and preserve Mr Corbyn’s radicalism on economic policy, has failed to attack the Conservatives with sufficient ferocity on coronavirus and the Black Lives Matter protests. The scene encapsulated the intense frustration of
The government will cover the cost of schools in England appealing against exam grades after 280,000 A-level students had their marks downgraded.
Ministers are also expected to set up a taskforce, led by Schools Minister Nick Gibb, to oversee the appeals process.
The government previously said it wants the process to conclude by 7 September.
But letting schools appeal for free is "cold comfort" for pupils, the Liberal Democrats said, adding the move "should never have been needed".
Education Secretary Gavin Williamson told The Times the government would cover the fees in a bid to ensure that head teachers were not deterred from making appeals.
There had been fears that the costs - which can reach £150 - could stop schools from taking on harder to prove cases.
The regulator, Ofqual, will give more details next week.
The Liberal Democrats welcomed the announcement over appeals costs, but called on Mr Williamson to resign.
The party's education spokeswoman, Layla Moran, said: "For the young people who have worked so hard to not get the results they deserve, through no fault of their own, this announcement alone will be cold comfort."
"While this should never have been needed, it is right the government has listened to the Liberal Democrats and others and U-turned."
Ms Moran added: "Ultimately, after Gavin Williamson's botched handling of the process thus far, pupils will have no confidence in him to fix the broken glass. Before he causes any more hurt, he must go."
Earlier, Labour called on ministers to act immediately to sort out an "exams fiasco" in England and stop thousands of A-level students being "betrayed".
And some Tory MPs have challenged the fairness of how grades have been decided.
BBC News political correspondent Helen Catt said having "an efficient and effective" appeals process "is going to be really important in making sure more Tories don't join them".
'You have ruined my life'
Schools Minister Mr Gibb promised earlier that the appeals system will be "robust" after facing a call from a student who said she had been rejected by her chosen university.
During BBC Radio 4's Any Questions, Nina, from Peterborough, said her grades fell three grades lower than what she had been predicted. "You have ruined my life," she told him.
"It won't ruin your life, it will be sorted, I can assure you," Mr Gibb said.
He added: "There will be these mistakes… we do know there are imperfections somewhere in the system as a result of this model. There are no models that can improve on that, this is the problem."
After exams were cancelled due to the coronavirus pandemic, grades were awarded using a controversial modelling system, with the key factors being the ranking order of pupils and the previous exam results of schools and colleges.
This produced more top grades than have ever been seen before in A-levels, with almost 28% getting A* and As, but head teachers have been angry about "unfathomable" individual injustices in the downgrading of some results.
In England, 36% of entries had grades lower than their teachers predicted and 3% were down two grades.
There has since been calls to switch away from this system and to use teachers' predictions, in the way that the government U-turned in Scotland.
But England's exam watchdog Ofqual has warned that using teachers' predictions would have artificially inflated results - and would have seen about 38% of entries getting A*s and As.
Labour said the lack of consistency in individual results was "heartbreaking" for those affected and the government was squarely to blame for sticking with a "fatally flawed results system".
Prime Minister Boris Johnson has previously defended what he said were a "robust set" of grades and said that pupils who believed they were treated unfairly would be able to appeal or, if they wanted, sit exams in the autumn.
Schools can appeal for an upgrade if their pupils' mock grades were higher than their estimated results.
But the exam regulator Ofqual has still to say how a mock exam result can be validated - and head teachers have warned that mocks are not standardised or taken by all pupils, and could not be used as a fair way of deciding final exam results.
The Scottish Labour leader claimed he has been the subject of a series of attacks briefed anonymously by figures in the party that oppose his leadership. In his email to Scottish Labour members, he said he was telling them because they would be “as angry” as he was.
Related articles
Mr Leonard fumed that the latest briefing to “sow division” between him and Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer came on Thursday as he was about to open the debate of no confidence in Scottish Education Secretary John Swinney.
He insisted that the focus should have been on the failings of the SNP amid the backlash over exam results.
The Scottish Labour leader said: “When I was elected Scottish Labour leader, I promised to be honest and straightforward with party members.
“So what I will say next, I am telling you because I know you will be as angry as I am.
Scottish Labour leader Richard Leonard has sent a furious email to members about party divisions (Image: GETTY)
The Scottish Labour leader claimed he has been the subject of a series of attacks briefed anonymously by figures in the party that oppose his leadership (Image: GETTY)
“At the very moment I was standing up to open the debate of no confidence in John Swinney, a journalist from the Murdoch press contacted Scottish Labour’s press office, having received a briefing attempting to sow division between me and UK Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer.
“This was a complete fabrication, which Keir’s office immediately told the journalist was ‘nonsense’. Nonetheless, the story was printed.
“Unfortunately, this was the latest episode in a coordinated series of attacks briefed anonymously by figures in Scottish Labour who opposed my leadership, and sought to undermine it, from the moment I was elected by the membership.
“The fact that they have chosen to attack my leadership at the very point when our focus should have been uniting on the failings of the SNP Government goes to show how damaging and misplaced their priorities are.”
In his email to Scottish Labour members, he said he was telling them because they would be “as angry” as he was (Image: GETTY)
Related articles
Mr Swinney survived the vote of no confidence by 67 to 58 after he was backed by the SNP and the Scottish Greens.
The motion was tabled after the Scottish Qualification Authority (SQA) revised down more than 124,000 pupils' results, disproportionately downgrading students from poorer backgrounds.
The exam board said it was following Mr Swinney's instructions to suppress grade inflation in an attempt to make results "credible".
But the under-fire Education Secretary ordered the SQA to reverse the downgrading and award affected pupils the results estimated by their teachers in a major u-turn following student protests.
Mr Leonard fumed that the latest briefing to “sow division” between him and Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer came on Thursday as he was about to open the debate of no confidence in Scottish Education Secretary John Swinney (Image: GETTY)
Opening the debate, Mr Leonard said the backlash was "just the latest catastrophe in Mr Swinney's tenure in education".
The Scottish Labour leader said the motion was "not about retribution for what happened last week with the SQA shambles" but was instead "a time of reckoning for a long line of failures".
He said the Scottish Government's u-turn was "a victory for all those young people who refused to take this injustice lying down" and accused Mr Swinney of only reversing his decision when the motion of no confidence put his job at risk.
Demanding his resignation, Mr Leonard added: "John Swinney showed us that he had no confidence in Scotland's school students and teachers.
Mr Swinney survived the vote of no confidence by 67 to 58 after he was backed by the SNP and the Scottish Greens (Image: PA)
"It is this Parliament's duty to those school students and teachers to say that we have no confidence in him to sort out this mess which he has created."
But First Minister Nicola Sturgeon described Mr Swinney as "one of the most decent and dedicated people in Scottish politics”, adding: "The Deputy First Minister is probably the most honourable individual I have ever known in my life."
Responding for the Scottish Government, Ms Sturgeon insisted the "opportunistic" no-confidence motion was "not about principle, this is simply about politics".
She said: "The last few days have been more difficult than they should ever have been for many young people in Scotland. I know that, and I am sorry, and so is John Swinney.
"I readily acknowledge that we focused too much on the system and not enough on individuals.
"A desire to avoid something that would look like grade inflation meant students lost out on grades that their teachers believed they deserved.
"The statistical model used meant many more students were downgraded in poorer areas than in other parts of Scotland.
"That was wrong, which is why the Deputy First Minister set out a solution on Tuesday and restored the grades of young people across the country."
Ministers are also expected to set up a "gold command" taskforce, led by Schools Minister Nick Gibb, to oversee the appeals process.
The government previously said it wants the process to conclude by 7 September.
Education Secretary Gavin Williamson told The Times the government would cover the fees in a bid to ensure that head teachers were not deterred from making appeals.
There had been fears that the costs - which can reach £150 - could stop schools from taking on harder to prove cases.
The regulator, Ofqual, will give more details next week.
Earlier, Labour called on ministers to act immediately to sort out an "exams fiasco" in England and stop thousands of A-level students being "betrayed".
And some Tory MPs have challenged the fairness of how grades have been decided.
BBC News political correspondent Helen Catt said having "an efficient and effective" appeals process "is going to be really important in making sure more Tories don't join them".
After exams were cancelled due to the coronavirus pandemic, grades were awarded using a controversial modelling system, with the key factors being the ranking order of pupils and the previous exam results of schools and colleges.
This produced more top grades than have ever been seen before in A-levels, with almost 28% getting A* and As, but head teachers have been angry about "unfathomable" individual injustices in the downgrading of some results.
In England, 36% of entries had grades lower than their teachers predicted and 3% were down two grades.
There has since been calls to switch away from this system and to use teachers' predictions, in the way that the government U-turned in Scotland.
But England's exam watchdog Ofqual has warned that using teachers' predictions would have artificially inflated results - and would have seen about 38% of entries getting A*s and As.
Labour said the lack of consistency in individual results was "heartbreaking" for those affected and the government was squarely to blame for sticking with a "fatally flawed results system".
Prime Minister Boris Johnson has previously defended what he said were a "robust set" of grades and said that pupils who believed they were treated unfairly would be able to appeal or, if they wanted, sit exams in the autumn.
Schools can appeal for an upgrade if their pupils' mock grades were higher than their estimated results.
But the exam regulator Ofqual has still to say how a mock exam result can be validated - and head teachers have warned that mocks are not standardised or taken by all pupils, and could not be used as a fair way of deciding final exam results.
