Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Saturday, 7th November 2009 Change Date

Salmond steers Capital towards guided buses

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Edinburgh Evening News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
01 June 2007
ALEX SALMOND has signalled the new SNP government is considering a guided busway as an alternative to part of Edinburgh’s tram scheme.
But tram backers dismissed the idea as failing to deliver the modern, integrated public transport system needed in the Capital.

The First Minister did not go into details, but it is thought any plan would involve creating guided lanes on off-road sections of the proposed tram route between Haymarket and the airport.

At his first First Minister’s Questions, Mr Salmond promised a full review of the £592 million tram scheme would be presented to parliament. But he told MSPs the SNP favoured alternatives such as “guided bus lanes on much of the planned tram route” as well as incentives for the use of hybrid fuels and improved ticketing, installation of real-time information on all bus stops and better park-and-ride sites.

“We believe these measures offer a real alternative to the current trams proposal,” he said.

But city transport leader Phil Wheeler said a guided busway was not a practical solution. He said: “Trams go faster and carry three times as many people as a bus.”
"We are being asked to spend a lot of money for a fancy bus on an ugly bit of concrete. Bin it"   <br><br />KENNY MacASKILL in 2000
"We are being asked to spend a lot of money for a fancy bus on an ugly bit of concrete. Bin it" <br>
KENNY MacASKILL in 2000


And Edinburgh Labour group leader Ewan Aitken said: “This shows the SNP does not have a clue about how you make radical change in transport provision.”

“A guided busway is a second-best retread and in no way can provide the capacity required to make the step change in public transport provision we need. All the evidence shows trams attract people who would not otherwise use public transport. A guided busway would not do that.”

Plans for a £50m guided busway between Edinburgh city centre and the airport were abandoned six years ago – and SNP frontbencher Kenny MacAskill was one of the most vocal critics of the plans, claiming it was obsolete technology which had been abandoned everywhere else.

He said at the time: “Edinburgh seems to be the only place daft enough to go down this route.
"We believe these measures offer a real alternative to the current trams proposal" <br><br /> ALEX SALMOND in 2007
"We believe these measures offer a real alternative to the current trams proposal" <br>
ALEX SALMOND in 2007


“What we are being asked to do is spend a lot of money for a fancy bus that runs on an ugly bit of concrete. Let’s bin it and concentrate on more realistic solutions such as tramways and investment in rail links.”

Today Mr MacAskill, MSP for Edinburgh East & Musselburgh, denied his past comments were an embarrassment. He said: “Things have changed. Times have moved on. It’s horses for courses.”

Edinburgh does have a 1.5km stretch of guided busway between Stenhouse and Broomhouse, opened in 2004 at a cost of £14m. The buses have specially adapted wheels which fit between rails on either side of the bus lane so they can slip on to the guided busway, avoiding traffic jams on the adjoining roads.

Guided busways along the off-road parts of the proposed tram lines were evaluated at the start of the project but were discounted in favour of trams.

Neil Renilson, chief executive of Transport Edinburgh Limited – the firm set up to run Edinburgh’s trams and buses – said: “The civil engineering work required for a guided busway is the same as that needed for a tramway.

“For example, the plan is to replace the existing west Edinburgh guided busway with trams by laying rails and erecting an overhead power supply on exactly the current alignment.

“The key question is not whether it is technically possible – clearly it is – the real question is whether it’s the right thing to do?”

Independent Lothians MSP Margo MacDonald said she would consider tabling a no-confidence motion in Mr Salmond if he ignored the will of parliament over trams. She said: “I would never take the decision lightly, but if I thought their reasons for ditching the trams were entirely political, that would be cause for a no-confidence vote.”

Meanwhile, the SNP today faced demands to explain how it plans to pay for the new Forth crossing once tolls are scrapped on the current bridge after MSPs to abolish all tolls on the Forth and Tay road bridges.

MSPs yesterday voted to abolish all tolls on the Forth and Tay road bridges. Legislation will be introduced in September and is expected to be passed by the end of the year.

But the move leaves an £11 million funding gap in the budget for repairs and maintenance and narrows the options for financing the new crossing.

The full article contains 736 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 01 June 2007 10:44 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Edinburgh transport plans
 
1

...G,

01/06/2007 12:09:03

More backwards thinking from the SNP.

How does this help with the planned growth areas at Granton and Leith?

2

Free Edinburgh,

01/06/2007 12:15:21

Time for this bunch of anti-Edinburgh, lefty loonies to go!

3

Mademe gogog,

01/06/2007 12:18:26

Phil Wheeler said a guided busway was not a practical solution. He said: “Trams go faster and carry three times as many people as a bus.”

Strange Logic, will the tram not have to stop the exact same as a bus? Buses do the speed limit, will there be a new sped limit for trams?


Ewan Aitken said: “This shows the SNP does not have a clue about how you make radical change in transport provision.”

And could he give an example of something he implemented to show us how its done?

4

Joseph Cotton,

The other side 01/06/2007 12:18:48

Hello, Hello, Hello Alex come back to earth please.

How many times has the existing guided bus lane been repaired! More than than the number of seats you have I think. Not to mention the cost of repairs or the value of the disruption suffered by the bus users.

Get real or your party will be wiped out at the next election.

5

Merouane,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 12:21:53

"Meanwhile, the SNP today faced demands to explain how it plans to pay for the new Forth crossing once tolls are scrapped on the current bridge after MSPs to abolish all tolls on the Forth and Tay road bridges."
The tolls were never going to pay for a new crossing anyway.

6

Level Headed,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 12:22:15

He said: “Things have changed. Times have moved on. It’s horses for courses.”

That is one of the most pathetic comments I have ever heard from MacAskill, and that is saying something!

We all know the real rational behind the SNP transport policy, are they going to be arrogant enough on this to push the self destruct button on co-operation for the rest of their policies? - They'll only have themselves to blame if they do!

Its time....for trams!

7

Gracieboy,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 12:23:15

The tram will never get to Granton. Phase 1a is as far as it is likely to get when the budget for it hits a billion as it undoubtedly will if the council are involved
And as for wheeler saying the trams are faster. he aint been on a 22 going up leith walk at mach 2.
It all comes down to how many trams you have. At the moment the 22's are full going up the walk most of the day on a four minute frequency. How many trams will there be and how often will they run and why does it go to the airport which is where the EARL project will serve.
Has this really been thought through.
These two schemes aren't a transport policy just another couple of ill thought through projects for which Edinburgh is famous

8

tog,

01/06/2007 12:26:07

Love the picture of Mr MacAskill. I do wish he would engage his brain before he opens his mouth as he is not a bad MSP when he does. I remember a really woeful performance on Newsnight when he either willfully pretended he did not understand or really did not understand the implications of Human rights legislation for prisoner's rights. Sadly he seems to be taking a similar line when it comes to Edinburgh transport producing plenty of hot air and little illumination.

9

Concerned of Stockbridge,

01/06/2007 12:33:23

Ewan Aitken said:

“A guided busway is a second-best retread and in no way can provide the capacity required to make the step change in public transport provision we need."

So how come Labour squandered 10 million quid on one?

"All the evidence shows trams attract people who would not otherwise use public transport." - BUT only if they need to travel along the single limited disjointed route provided.

10

Sally Fairweather,

01/06/2007 12:36:44

Usual outrageous bias from Evening News 'poll'. Two options for their loaded anti-tram position, and only one for, with the anti view pre-selected. Disgusting!

11

Super-Mario,

01/06/2007 12:36:48

The truth - we're skint and We have no money.

We have no political will to turn scotland into a country that can compete with the best.

12

alex paterson,

embra 01/06/2007 12:38:57

Broken down bus,car,Anything with a steering wheel,No probs,Broken down tram,=Big Problem.

13

Super-Mario,

01/06/2007 12:39:50

SNP solution for our ,5M capital citiy transport problems, fancy buses and LCDs ar busstops.

14

Declan,

Glasgow 01/06/2007 12:40:28

#7 - Ha ha 'its time for trams' - I've heard it all now!

Why not take a look at Melbourne in Australia. I lived there and they are removing a lot of their trams because they are clogging up the roads! Sydney has 1 single tram line (sorry, light rail) and nobody ever uses it! These cities have big wide streets and its causing problems - Edinburgh, with its old, narrow lanes will be up against it!

Also, does a city of 455,000 actually need trams? Most other cities with trams are of a much bigger population.

15

DAVID,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 12:45:06

Ewan Aitken is the one who does not have a clue. Trams will be a total waste of money, and will do nothing to make it easier for commuters to get to work faster and more effciently. I live in teh south-side and work at the Gyle - how will this help me or my colleagues in the south and east of the city get to work? Answer: they won't.

The money could also be better used for other purposes e.g. improving transport in other parts of Scotland or in reducing taxes. But Labour as usual think there is a bottomless pit of cash that can be called upon to waste on any vanity project they care to think of.

If Labour were serious about reducing congestion and improving air quality why were they not doing more to improve traffic flow and forcing Lothian Buses to adopt cleaner, less polluting buses? Answer: because they are weak and can't face up to their cronies.

16

James (1),

01/06/2007 12:47:29

"And Edinburgh Labour group leader Ewan Aitken said: “This shows the SNP does not have a clue about how you make radical change in transport provision.”
Well get yourself signed up to them Mr Aitken because you are champion of not being able to handle transport. The words you did not say were "Like us, this shows etc"
You do however have a brass neck to come out with this! Your party squandered millions and spent money like it was going out of fashion.

Try shutting up for a while and give us peace.

17

Ferry Resident,

01/06/2007 12:49:06

We already have a top class transport system within Edinburgh city centre. It is called Lothian Buses. A Tram line within the city centre is not going to do anything to improve congestion or pollution.

If we want to stop congestion and pollution we need to get a reliable transport system for those travelling into, and across, the city. We need a system that will serve the needs of all the citizens of Edinburgh and that includes people in Queensferry, Kirkliston, Ratho etc. Edinburgh / Lothian MSPs please note.

18

Colin G,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 12:51:56

Re. 11.

You make good points.

But with regard to your question. The squandered £14m on the so-called Fastlink at Saughton was a hidden cost for the tram, not included in the 'business case'.

The traffic congestion in this area was basically caused by 1 bus stop which was 20 yards past a traffic light. The 'congestion problem' could have been solved by digging in a couple of bus stops. Instead the sledgehammer was used to crack the nut and an outrageously expensive 'solution' was used and the grass concreted over in order to prepare for the tram.

19

I'm no really here,

01/06/2007 13:01:48

So Margo wants to call a vote of no-confidence?? Bring it on Margo and see what the people of Scotland think about it. This is NOT just an Edinburgh issue as ALL the Scottish tax payers is being asked to fork out what will be £1bn or more of a SINGLE TRAM LINE that will benefit only a few in Edinburgh.

What is wrong with Electric or Trolley Buses with seating layouts to maximise capacity? Have two types of routes into and out of the City. One type for frequent stopping buses and one type for faster express buses with minimal stopping points. Two separate types of passenger needs, two different types of routes. What is also needed is a new innovative way of collecting fares - i.e. NOT as the passenger gets on the bus. Collect the fares at the bus stop electronically. Multiple doors for easy entrance and exit. This is what slows the buses down.

It would be cheaper in the long-run to scrap all fares and have a free bus service than to pay for a SINGLE TRAM LINE. Add a nominal amount to a local tax, meaning motorists WILL pay for it, so they would be daft not to take advantage of it.

20

Ferry Resident,

01/06/2007 13:05:12

Phil Wheeler said “Trams go faster and carry three times as many people as a bus.”

Is he trying to tell us they are going to fit speed limiters to the buses so that they go slower that the tram or are the trams just going to go straight through traffic lights without stopping.

21

DJ29,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 13:05:26

That vote on the right hand side is rigged I voted for conventional buses and number of votes cast went up by one, votes for trams went up one percent, votes for my chosen option went down by one.

22

Leila,

01/06/2007 13:05:40

#12: I don't understand your point - the EN and the Scotsman have both been strongly PRO-tram, particularly this past week.

It's a meaningless poll though: the pro-tram option "No, a tram network is the best way forward" repeats the same error that the EN has been criticised for over and over again, namely that a tram NETWORK has never been proposed, only a tram LINE.

23

pehman,

sussex 01/06/2007 13:11:31

It seems the sharks are circling, screw the rest of the country Edinburgh wants sweets, After years of misrule and frankly blatent abuse by local, regional and latterly national Government, the SNP is to blame, why weren't the people up in arms with labour before the election, answer they were thats why they voted SNP -Scrap the trams. Alex Salmond should allocate 5-600 million to Edinburgh city council let them do the trams, and they can even keep the change

24

I'm no really here,

01/06/2007 13:12:01

YES, I'VE ALSO SEEN THE VOTE ON THE RIGHT IS RIGGED. Just like the one during the election. The Scotsman Publications do not have the technical expertise to host an on-line poll. This has been shown in the past. You can sit all day on this poll and vote as many times as you like.

This is simply a pre-loaded propaganda tool for the pro-Tram, pro-Labour and anti-SNP lobby.

25

pehman,

sussex 01/06/2007 13:15:25

PS. Buses can travel at 70 -80 mile per hour, they only crawl at choke points

26

Anonym,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 13:19:03

“Trams go faster and carry three times as many people as a bus.”

I think the frequency of the service is more important than how many folks you can cram on all at once.

Maybe a tram network would be the best way forward, as the poll question puts it, but I'm not convinced £600 mill for a loop and single line constitutes either a network or value for money.

And it definately won't be good value if the project comes in 3 years late and costs go up by a factor of 10, like the parliament building did.

27

I'm no really here,

01/06/2007 13:19:45

Well said #25. All I've heard over the past week is "other cities have a tram system so we want one". If I had a bairn like that I would skelp it.

Can anybody tell me - honestly, with web links, which of the trams systems installed over the past 10-years is making a profit. That is NOT being financed via council subsidies. Stagecoach took over a tram system in England, not because it was profitable, but because it was being sold off.

28

Beavers,

Auld Reekie 01/06/2007 13:22:06

Having looked at the plans for the trams it does not make any comment about about the land the council will have to purchase from homeowners in the Balgreen area and other areas affected by the potential routes.
Has there been any indication of how they intend to deal with this matter ie compensation relocation etc....

29

Shaun McDonald,

01/06/2007 13:23:27

I just hope they are going to use trolley buses on this new guide way.

30

Colin G,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 13:28:06

Re 31.

It appears that none of these issues matters. There has been no financial, social, economic, environmental or other case proven for the trams. Despite the legions of staff wasting their time and our money at TIE none of the solutions to these sorts of issues have been published. A hundred million pounds of our money which could have been used to save lives or make lives better in innumerable ways has been wasted so far. And the proponents want to go ahead no matter what it costs!

The only message which the 'don't trash the trams' rag-bag have come up with is 'Edinburgh needs a modern transit system, and trams can carry more people, and other cities have them.' That's it.

Lets have a proper independent inquiry into where the spending has gone so far and who has benefited - for every penny. And then an independent review - not carried out by those with vested interests - to establish the true costs and actual benefits. Then a referendum. There is no rush, the city has prospered without this tram in the past. If the scheme is proven to be value for money and sensible then who wouldn't support it? The current propaganda is useless and suspicious.

31

Skip McClendon,

On the line 01/06/2007 13:28:35

I didn't vote SNP (in fact I am about as anti-SNP as you will find) but I have to agree with Salmond on this one.

Trams are a flight of fancy. They will do nothing to reduce congestion, will serve only around 1% of Edinburgh's population, and will become an expensive white elephant propped up by massive public subsidy to save face.

The opposition parties are accusing Salmond of wanting to divert money to his alleged "pet projects". Well, if trams are not a "pet project" I don't know what is.

Imagine what other transport improvements could be delivered for the £1Billion that trams would probably eventually cost. We could replace every bus in Edniburgh with state of the art, more comfortable, more environmentally friendly versions for starters.

I am an Edinburgh resident, and I use public transport. But I do not see the need for this vast sum of money to be spent on trams that will do nothing to improve our public transport system. Other areas of the country have much worse transport problems than we do, so it is right that the new Executive should take a close look at the value of this scheme.

I do think the EARL should go ahead in some form (a cheaper version, without tunnel) but the trams are a vanity project which will serve no useful purpose.

Also had to laugh at Ewen Aitken's comments about the trams attracting "people who won't normally use public transport". I think he means rich people here. Why should be spend £1Billion of public money because a few rich people won't give up their BMWs because they think the bus is beneath then? Trams are a ridiculous waste of our money, which could be much better spent on alternative transport projects both in Edinburgh and elsewhere.

32

Masque,

01/06/2007 13:32:13

Antwerp is going to remove trams in favour of guided buses apparently .... and several cities in Europe are looking at getting shot of trams.

Why then are our politicians (not SNP obviously) so damn sure we should be going the other way??

33

Anonym,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 13:37:36

Tip:

To refresh the page (in order to read newer comments) simply cast a vote in the poll on the right... any option will do.

34

,

01/06/2007 13:41:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 673454, Article id was mapped to record!
35

Super-Mario,

01/06/2007 13:48:16

It can dance , sing and fetch your slippers.

36

S'me,

01/06/2007 13:49:44

Go to any city with trams, Melbourne especially, once you have them all else seems in the dark ages..

37

Think Tank,

01/06/2007 13:59:35

#16 Declan

"Why not take a look at Melbourne in Australia. I lived there and they are removing a lot of their trams because they are clogging up the roads! Sydney has 1 single tram line (sorry, light rail) and nobody ever uses it!"

Absolute nonsense and the worst thing is you know it. The trams are immense in Melbourne and something that virtually every visitor immediately associates with the city.

And Sydney has one of the best integrated transport networks I've ever experienced- yes one tram line, but you conveniently forgot the other light rail alternatives i.e. a massive subway system (CityRail) and a monorail system, not to mention a plethora of ferry services.

More selective nonsense from the anti tram brigade, and reading the article I think it's safe to say that Alex Salmond has officially gone loony.

I say bring on the no-confidence vote and let's get back to the ballot box. It's time the SNP returned to their usual position of "useless weegie opposition".

38

I'm no really here,

01/06/2007 14:04:26

#40 There is a big difference between being a tourist in a city for a short time and being a long-term resident. And I don't think cities like Melbourne compare to the streets of Edinburgh. Also, does Melbourne have a SINGLE TRAM LINE, or a Network.

39

Think Tank,

01/06/2007 14:04:46

And some more facts for those devoid of knowledge- trams are faster than buses- faster acceleration, shorter breaking times, multiple access points, complete flat access (i.e. roll on wheelchairs, buggys etc), dedicated line separate from cars (unlike buses).

The problem with this debate is that there's no way that I can convince those of you who base your support on gut instinct (rather than facts, business cases, other examples from across the UK/globe) that £592m isn't really a lot a money for a tram network.

I know it sounds a lot to a mere pleb, but in the grand scheme of things (from a macroeconomics point of view) it's pretty darn cheap for something that will last decades, with minimal need for renewal in the first 20 years.

40

Super-Mario,

01/06/2007 14:06:04

We've been ging over this for months now , if not years.

I dont think any of us will change our minds.

Personally I use trams every day to travel from a small city to a big one , and they are reliable. I have had one problem in 8 months.

I'd like to know the real reason some people dont want them, instead of the shabby , ill informed crap that seems to pop up here.

41

Dumyat,

Dorset 01/06/2007 14:06:20

#41 Agree wholeheartedly. The years I lived in Melbourne were enhanced by the Melbourne transport system and particularly the trams which continue to be upgraded and extended - already the third largest system in the world. So much is a matter of attitude and experience which is well reflected in these posts.

See the following link for a little enlightenment on a big subject:

http://www.answers.com/topic/trams-in-melbourne

42

Think Tank,

01/06/2007 14:08:02

#42

Melbourne has a network of tram lines, but you might be surprised to hear that they didn't build them all at once.

Really why do people not realise that every other city in the world with trams also started small and worked bigger? Same's happening in Nottingham and Dublin now.

And it's not a case of being a tourist- EVERYONE in Melbourne uses trams- it's integral to the city and indeed the culture of the city....they have a free hop-on-hop-off tourist tram which is obviously packed with tourists, but every other line is used by all.

43

Super-Mario,

01/06/2007 14:08:08

592 Million ? Ive made larger bank transactions (not my own money i must add).

Its not a lot for a transport scheme these days. Dont forget this is Phase 1. Others will follow.

We will not all be reduced to begging on the streets - your council tax will not go up . and there will be no difference to your wage packet.

There will be disruption until it is finished, true.

44

Ex Smokie,

Munich 01/06/2007 14:16:39

Most of the trams in Munich are getting on a bit. How many new ones? Not many, maybe two or three over the last few years. so, where is Munich investing in Public Transport? New buses. Big, comfortable, flexible buses. The argument that trams attract motorists is infantile. Those who to prefer to use their cars do so. I prefer to take Public transport when I can and I don't give a rats a@@ if it's bus, tram, underground or ACME rocket-propelled-rollerskates. Friends of mine almost never use Public transport even though it is widely available and reliable. If someone doesn't use the bus, they are NOT going to use the Tram.

45

GarryB,

E Lothian 01/06/2007 14:27:02

Kenny MacAskill did us all a favour by giving Norman Murray - ex-ELC leader and a total numpty - a good gubbing when he thought he could just swan into Edinburgh E and Muss. But Kenny's now showing his true colours in changing his tune to suit HMV - expedient hypocrisy it's called. The existing guided busway is overpriced concrete junk, but "times move on", and now wir Ken's all for it.

Can he give us a list of all his principles suffering a U turn over the last few years?

46

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 14:28:40

I would like to know where the Council is going to find the current £109 million shortfall, particularly as they were having problems in meeting the £45 million they had previously committed.

47

Think Tank,

01/06/2007 14:31:54

The biggest issue here is the SNP delaying any project that's been given democratic approval so they can meddle in it.

The borders rail link is the latest victim of this disgraceful party:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/south_of_scotland/671...

I think it's time the SNP got a lesson in democracy- it's no confidence vote time.

48

Lang Spoon,

Leith 01/06/2007 14:42:06

The only ones who will lose out if the trams are cancelled (as I hope) will be the army of consultants who have apparently been living at public expense for the past few years.

The gravy train has nearly finished folks; you've done rather well in charming our impressionable councillors and others; well it looks as if the new show in town is going to look at your figures really carefully, and I suspect that the result will be "Thanks, but no thanks!"

Mr Salmond has come along just in time to save the country (not just our city) from another disaster of Holyrood proportions.

49

Michael Leonard,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 14:42:43

Of all options a guided busway is by far the worst.
But you're still not going to be able to fit a tram into Leith Walk - so forget it.
It's nice to see Margo's back in her grandstanding rent-a -mouth mode.
I'd thought I was going deaf!

50

,

01/06/2007 15:08:53
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 673753, Article id was mapped to record!
51

SNP hypocrisy,

01/06/2007 15:23:44

Cracking story Scotsman! Interesting comment from Kenny MacAskill, no doubt he berated the audience and shouted this out at them. Had me in stitches reading this man's reversal in policy from what he termed 'obsolete technology' in 2000. He's the Joker in the pack...

I thought the following paragraphs were the funniest of all. You just can't make this up:-

"Plans for a £50m guided busway between Edinburgh city centre and the airport were abandoned six years ago – and SNP frontbencher Kenny MacAskill was one of the most vocal critics of the plans, claiming it was obsolete technology which had been abandoned everywhere else.

He said at the time: “Edinburgh seems to be the only place daft enough to go down this route.

“We believe these measures offer a real alternative to the current trams proposal”
ALEX SALMOND in 2007
“What we are being asked to do is spend a lot of money for a fancy bus that runs on an ugly bit of concrete. Let’s bin it and concentrate on more realistic solutions such as tramways and investment in rail links.”

Today Mr MacAskill, MSP for Edinburgh East & Musselburgh, denied his past comments were an embarrassment. He said: “Things have changed. Times have moved on. It’s horses for courses.”

52

Bombardier,

Narf Berwick 01/06/2007 15:28:48

Trams work in Melbourne because they are a citywide system that is integrated seamlessly into the wider suburban rail and (limited) bus systems. Melbourne is a city of nearly 4 million people, hardly comparable to the wee Burgh in this respect.

A single line through the city on a route that is already well served by PT is a joke at this cost, regardless of whether you believe it is back pocket change or not. For the money you could massively improve the extensive bus network that already exists and by providing real time data at many more bus stops and improving facilities you could have an impact city-wide instead of just along a single route.

I hate to admit it but the SNP have got this spot on IMO.

53

Concerned of Stockbridge,

01/06/2007 15:36:00

#43 - "And some more facts for those devoid of knowledge- trams are faster than buses- etc."

The only thing that makes a tram faster than a bus is the distance between tram stops (which cost a huge amount compared with bus stops so they can't be spaced closer together. As foe "breaking distances" - short of realigning th elawsof physics, how does something that weighs tens of tons and runs on a steel to steel contact patch pull up in a shorter space than a bus - answer - it doesn't...... By about a hundred yards at speed which thankfully they'll never achieve.

54

SNP hypocrisy,

01/06/2007 15:37:30

27. pehman, sussex / 2:15pm 1 Jun 2007 PS. "Buses can travel at 70 -80 mile per hour, they only crawl at choke points"

That has to be the daftest comment you've given up this week English Nationalist, so you are suggesting now that buses career down Princess Street at 70-80 mph. Great idea. Nurse... Nurse...

55

The Judge,

01/06/2007 15:37:46

Are they going to run a tram story everyday until its been built?

Im not in favour of a single tramline but a whole system that serves all parts of the city would be an excellent idea, in fact lets not build a tram sysyem lets build a Simpsons style MONORAIL!

56

SNP hypocrisy,

01/06/2007 15:41:18

60. hehe that's probably one of my favourite episodes. If Edinburgh is Springfield, then is Glasgow Shelbyville?

57

I'm no really here,

01/06/2007 15:41:57

#43 £592m isn't really a lot a money for a tram network." This is very true, however, this is the price of a SINGLE TRAM LINE, not a network, AND, that is the starting price. I was surprised by one of the posters (perhaps on another thread) who said that this estimate does NOT include the cost of buying land and property along the proposed route.

I also remind you that a £40m parliament building ended up costing 12 times as much. Believe me £1bn will be chicken feed regarding this project.

At the moment there are other priorities that are more important to EVERYONE in Scotland. Investment in renewable Energy resources; Investment in Housing; upgrading the second-class road system we have; investment in the Highlands and Islands infrastructure; investments in Education which "Education, Education, Education" seemed to have missed; investments in care for our people, etc, etc.

I think it is an obscenity to spend this sort of money on a SINGLE TRAM LINE, when, for example, a fraction of that amount could be used to properly fund and staff the Child Protection Unit throughout Scotland.

This not just a case whether the SINGLE TRAM LINE is viable or not, but is certainly a case as to where our priorities lie. Mine is caring for our people and our children and not for pandering to the greed of a few businessmen and politicians.

58

SNP hypocrisy,

01/06/2007 15:43:40

60. Talking of Monorail/trams or whatever it actually is. I've ridden 'the L' in Chicago, now I was impressed when this thing went hurtling up the middle of the road (from the Airport) with cars on each side, but downtown where it's 'eLevated' what an ugly bloody thing it is.

59

eric,

Lothian 01/06/2007 15:44:22

Most edinburgh folk dont want the trams.Well done SNP,

60

Skip McClendon,

On the line 01/06/2007 15:45:29

#60 -

The Simpson's Monorail episode was excellent, but not as good as my personal fave - the Hank Scorpio episode that was actually on Sky 1 last night.

Hank Scorpio for First Minister! He may be a supervillain, but he builds a nice town where everything runs like clockwork!

61

Moyasta,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 15:46:21

Guided buses are a complete waste of money. They have been tried in several cities around the world and have never proved satisfactory. Birmingham built a short line in the 1980s but soon scrapped it. In German, similar technology (known as "O-Bahn") has also proved wholly inadequate as an alternative to trams. They require almost as much infrastructure as a tramway, but without the environmental benefits or load carrying capacity.

I accept that Edinburgh will never have a Metro (for cost and geological reasons). But a tram system of about 5 or 6 lines would be extremely efficient, even though we were only being offered one line in the first instance. I am very sorry that the tram line has been scrapped, but guided busways no alternative. The Channel Tunnel was cancelled in the 1970s then finally built 20 years later at over 10 times the cost. Will we ever learn?

62

Bored,

01/06/2007 15:48:45

No.60

Actually I was thinking more the Batman / Gotham City type overhead railway.

63

Level Headed,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 16:01:08

66 - My hope is we will learn this time, and that the Parliament wont allow the SNP to do this. The Lib Dems already talking about withholding all support on any other SNP proposal, sounds drastic, but if the SNP wont play ball with parliament they cant expect anything back in return.

and Declan (16) needs to up his game!, fantastic finding an example of a city (in the whole World) to back up your pre-disposed argument, and one as close as Australia as well!

I think ill stick with the example of Manchester, Nottingham, Croydon and Birmingham as testement to how effective our tram scheme will be! Even the SNP's financial champion Souter is rushing to take over the Manchester scheme.

64

Micropacer,

01/06/2007 16:14:31

Level Headed if you are "Level Headed" whats your opinion on Alastair Darlings scrapping of Trams in various cities due to them now being so expensive to impliment he doesnt think they are worth it?

Surely this has to be a major warning sign. Im not from Edinburgh but I can see it needs an interated transport policy - surely we dont want to see the cash blown on one project that doesnt in the end do much good!

65

The Judge,

01/06/2007 16:17:52

Why not build a monorail throught the city? Fast, modern & it would be one hell of a tourist attraction. Could you imagine the views you'd get as it swept up Holyrood park or round the castle. We could build any number of routes & it would put the buses to shame.

Forget the trams its a monorail for me!

If Edinburgh is Springfield, then is Glasgow Shelbyville?

Dundee is more Shelbyville, Glasgow would be Capital City :~)

66

Bob 2,

01/06/2007 16:36:46

.......And Edinburgh Labour group leader Ewan Aitken said: “This shows the SNP does not have a clue about how you make radical change in transport provision.” ........

Pardon....have we missed something over the last 20 years from Labour.

Sine 1988 they have spent millions on studies.

1988 - The the Labour controlled Regional Council Spent millions on various options- Trams/Metro/bus lanes - they drew up detailed plans and nothing came of it.

Then we had the West Edinburgh bus way, detailed plans were done....they spent millions relocating businsses around westfield......They even got to the point of havinga prefered bidder....but when FIRST bus came top....they quickly dropped the scheme...it has worked in other towns.

Now what have labour done....still can't find anything radical that they have done.
Never mind the canceled western approach road or road charging.

Labour can howere lay claim to BEING the CREATORS or have had some hand in the CONGESTION around edinburgh.

Theres the Citybypass...built by Labour
They have been involved in the creation of Kinnaird Park, The Gyle shopping centre, Edinburgh Park --- ALL mainly car based projects....congestion included

67

JT fae Cardiff,

01/06/2007 17:24:33

"But tram backers dismissed the idea as failing to deliver the modern, integrated public transport system needed in the Capital."

It seems more integrated into the existing public transport services than a tram. Well, thats how it seems to me.

----------------------------------------------------------
"Mr Salmond promised a full review of the £592 million tram scheme would be presented to parliament."

Well, that can only be a good thing surely? Make a decision based on facts, not based on "oh they look pretty"
----------------------------------------------------------

"But city transport leader Phil Wheeler said a guided busway was not a practical solution. He said: “Trams go faster""

Oh good lord. We're going to have insane tram drivers mowing down pedestrians and cyclists as they bomb down the streets ignoring speed limits. Phil Wheeler needs to rethink what he said there.

----------------------------------------------------------

68

Euan,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 17:30:30

What garbage Ewan Aitken is coming out with. He sure is one jealous, displaced and demeaned Labour politician!

This from a man who SO CLEARLY has no clue whatsoever about transport issues.

Stick to your guns Mr Salmond and stave off these incompetent idots in your midst.

69

,

01/06/2007 17:39:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
70

JT fae Cardiff,

01/06/2007 17:41:12

72 Said: "If First Minister Salmond proceeds with his plans to cancel the Edinburgh Tram Project then not only will he be ignoring the settled will of the Scottish Parliament, he will also be disregarding the decisions taken by all but one of Edinburgh' Councillors before the local elections. The dissenting Councllor was of course none other than S. Cardownie, then the sole SNP Representative on the Council. Now Councillor Cardownie leads a 12 strong SNP Group, "


Now this is interesting as you have opened up a Pro SNP argument without meaning to. The Council PRE-ELECTION contained 1 SNP councillor. The SNP run for election in the City Council on an anti-tram platform. Post election there's now 12 SNP councillors. Coincidence? Nahh.

71

Andrew Allan,

01/06/2007 17:45:59

Media 1., #####
‘Andrew Allan: Based on your views Mugabe acts the way he does due to colonialism. He cannot be judged, he cannot be condemed, he cannot be ridiculed because the evil he employs was apparently introduced to him by white Europeans..OH MY GOD! Are you for real?’ No Mugabe uses the colonisation of his country to his advantage, as it happened, but he is clearly racist, and he doesn’t even hide it. He is a case that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. But McBeth didn’t even name him.
‘But lets move on. You did not respond to my comment regarding Blatter. Why was that?’ Sorry didn’t see it, but I will answer it now. I think we only need to go back a number of years now, to when South Africa hosted the rugby world cup, was there any trouble I should know about that wasn’t reported.

72

Graham,

01/06/2007 17:55:43

JT fae Cardiff clearly likes to open his mouth and let his belly rumble. The main reason the SNP now have 12 elected councillors, where previously they had none elected on an SNP ticket (Cardownie having switched party mid-term) is that the voting system has changed. And the reason trams can go faster than buses is that, where the tram rails are not on the street, the trams are not bound by a 30MPH limit. Edinburgh's trams are intended to run at 50MPH on the off-road stretches (i.e. between Haymarket and the Airport and Granton).

73

Euan,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 18:03:18

Still trying to relate Mugabe with the trams..

Nope, nothing there at all..

Oh, hang on. Ewan Aitken's economic sense may just stack up against Robert Mugabe's - that's it!

74

red salmon,

fife 01/06/2007 18:19:31

trams? buses? the problem is too many cars. the citizens of edinburgh have already proved too selfish to give up their lazy luxury - or don't you remember voting for the increased child mortality and congestion option?

75

Think Tank,

01/06/2007 18:25:23

Alex Salmond is an absolute disgrace to democracy. These are his words:

"...the Scottish Executive is not necessarily bound by resolutions or motions passed by the Scottish Parliament"

Absolute disgrace Salmond- read your own words and see how crazy you sound. You don't deserve to be a First Minister with that kind of contempt for democracy.

SNP OUT.

76

JT fae Cardiff,

01/06/2007 18:28:10

78

Or we could have the Edin Suburban Railway running at high speed ALL the time then since it's ALL off road.

But if we did that we wouldn't get to waste all that lovely money the taxpayers have kindly donated.

77

Euan,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 18:29:51

Can't agree with what you say, red salmon. You clearly do not live here.

I drive around Edinburgh every day and I can get to almost any part of the City, north, south, east or west in around 15-30 minutes.

This is not a big city, and it certainly does not need a tram system which cost a billion pounds - plus.

78

Euan,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 18:30:57

81, Think Tank.

By jove, you talk some crap.

79

exile2,

England 01/06/2007 18:37:44

Trams are certainly effective at getting people out of their cars, and many cities throughout the world have implented new or renewed tram systems in the last couple of decades, I don't know where some posters have got the idea that cities elsewhere are scrapping them. Trams also have the advantage of being pollution-free (other than at the power station), high capacity, and fast (on reserved routes).

They are, however, relatively expensive (though cheaper than underground trains). But so are guided buses, which have not been especially successful when tried (eg in Adelaide).

So that leaves us with conventional buses. London has shown recently that they can be a success - but only after congestion charging was introduced, which allowed the buses to run to timetable rather than ending up as stationary obstacles as they do now in Edinburgh and other cities. Now wouldn't that be a good idea? Wait - hasn't Edinburgh already voted against it?

On the whole, despite the cost, I think a tram system is the best solution. But as with my neighboouring city, Liverpool, the costs MUST be controlled or governments, whether in Westminster or Holyrood, can't be blamed for putting their wallets back in their pockets rather than accept an unlimited commitment.

80

AB_R,

01/06/2007 19:13:13

#81 - Alex Salmomd was quoting Donald Dewar.

With regards the guided buses, what a stupid proposal. I think I would rather have the tram. But to even hint that the tram is part of an integrated transport initiative is being a bit too over the top. Have Transdev, Lothian Buses and First Buses sat down to dicuss how this integration would work?

81

AB_R,

01/06/2007 19:13:45

ooops, Salmond...sorry

82

walter gibralter,

cumbie plook central 01/06/2007 19:46:44

am i missing something here south suburban line = 30m ,old rail lines in the north of Edinburgh could be
used a lot less than £600m probably, the pro tram
lobby remind me of hapless subjects on C4s
grand Designs imo.

83

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 01/06/2007 20:45:07

Guided busways do not need to be guided. Just pave them and make them extra roads reserved for express buses only. Much cheaper. All the so-called benefit of the tram line at maybe 5% of the cost.

There is no argument for the trams that justifies spending over £700m of taxpayers money on at a time when hospitals are short of funds, pensioners are in poverty and there is a chronic shortage of good, social housing. The benefits do no stack up.

I ask again all the pro-tram people. If this scheme is so good why is there no private sector risk capital in it? If the developers want it - let them pay for it.

84

Pilrig,

Livingston 01/06/2007 20:49:43

81 - 'SNP Out' - and bring back jack & the numpties ? Oh ma sides !

85

Steven,

Central Scotland 01/06/2007 20:59:26

The advantages of guided busways are compelling in comparisons to trams.
Cheaper to buy, build and run
Routes are not as fixed-buses can fan out and serve other areas.
Frequencies can be easily increased without spending hundreds of thousands on another tram and possible infrastucture enhancements
More investment is possible as used buses can be put on other routes giving benefits to other passengers. What do you do with a tram you dont need anymore?
I dont agree very much with the SNP but their plans to axe the trams do make sense.

86

lachlan,

01/06/2007 21:13:35

'guided buses' what you pay is what you get.i can just see the rest of europe ripping up their tram systems (and plans for further development) and going for guided buses....not.

87

...G,

01/06/2007 21:39:28

#92, Busses are not cheeper to run than trams, just look at the various reports around online

88

Paul Voltaîre,

01/06/2007 21:42:05

Apart from it going to Granton, I'm all in favour of the trams!
What's your problem, guided buses are just as inflexible!.

89

Eve,

Scotland 01/06/2007 22:11:29

Dear Scotsman,

I would like to point out to you that year 2000 was 7 years ago, this statement shouldn't suprise you. BUT a lot can change in 7 years, personal I have almost completly changed my out look on life (I must point out that this has benfited me.) There are things I belive in today which I didn't belive in or knew existed even 4years ago. I would belive that this would also aply to others also.

I know very little about Edinburgh transport expet it's almost imposssable to park a car any where near the centre.

90

Allis Chalmers,

Here 01/06/2007 23:34:05

Alex needs to put his practical head on, surely. Guided busways take up space like nothing else, and trams in narrow streets don't work either - particularly if they only serve a fraction of the city.

Plenty of modern slimmer compact buses would do very nicely thank you - and make sure they're owned and operated by the City as they used to be when they were all a nice dark red. No bias here - oh no!

Do what they do in Italy - give them the absolute right-of-way over all other traffic, and scrap the bus lanes to give more road space. If it works with Italian drivers it'll work anywhere!

91

Jayess,

02/06/2007 00:05:24

All of the sensible arguments point to 'Axe the Trams', and the 'For' people never answer these.

The Evening News certainly does not want the Trams Axed, because there will be so much mileage for them in the disasters that will inevitably follow if it goes ahead.

It will be Holyrood all over again. There is no fun for them in anyone getting things right.

92

Julian,

02/06/2007 01:00:02

Eve # 97, what does the fact that your life has changed in 7 years have to do with it? How can one compare a 10% period in your life to the transport needs of a city which has been here for 900 years?

It's what has or has bot changed in this city which is relevant and you (or Kenny Mackaskill in the article)have not given us one example why trams are not relevant now when they were 7 years ago

93

Auckland Arab2,

02/06/2007 07:36:07

#100 Julian

Have your trams, if you are dead set on them, but you pay for them. The other taxpayers in Scotland might prefer their tax dollar spent on something a bit more useful.

94

Watcher 11,

East Lothian 02/06/2007 08:20:46

How long did it take Brian Souter to think this one up?

95

,

02/06/2007 08:47:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
96

saltire.1,

moray 02/06/2007 08:48:05

5
not sorry i voted snp,just proud

97

,

02/06/2007 08:50:07
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
98

,

02/06/2007 08:54:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
99

,

02/06/2007 08:57:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason: Scotsman Import, Original comment id: 674938, Article id was mapped to record!
100

saltire.1,

moray 02/06/2007 09:01:45

scrap the trams,there is life outside edinburgh,up grade the A96.inverness to aberdeen road which is a disgrace

101

hibbydoug,

edinburgh 02/06/2007 10:16:54

Can someone tell me how the fares are going to be collected on the trams?, if there are 90 people getting on with one driver you could be at a stop for hours.

102

James R,

02/06/2007 10:27:02

‘Could someone explain how a single deck tram can carry more passengers than a double deck bus seating 90..’

Quite simple: Trams can carry several hundred people at once who can get on and off at stops in seconds, whereas the movement, dwell times, passenger alighting and boarding limits bus flows. You can simulate all the sort of stuff with computers and observe it.

Trams can be cheaper to run than buses over a longer period – they last a lot longer for a start and are better at getting people out of cars.

Most of the cost of the current systems is the political system, that’s why millions of pounds have been spent so far with zero results.

103

...G,

02/06/2007 10:29:37

#112, like any sensible transprot system accross europe I would expect the driver will not check tickets. There will be inspectors on the tram.

This makes it far more efficiant than the bus.

#111, trams are generally designed for a greater proportion of people standing than a bus with increased space for pushchairs/wheelchairs/baggage

104

pehman,

sussex 02/06/2007 13:01:49

am2 115
the option to defy parliment, was instilled by D Dewar, to stymie the SNP. Now its been [or the threat of it] used by the SNP, you want to change the rules AGAIN

105

pehman,

sussex 02/06/2007 13:10:16

115 am, It was also written in at the same time that w/minster can disreguard motions passed by the Scottish Parliment, do you support that ?

106

Geordie Peebles,

02/06/2007 14:38:32

It's quite amusing to see the opposition parties lock themselves into supporting the spending of half a billion pounds into one tram route in Edinburgh as their "core" issue to attack the SNP.

Imagine an election forced on such a localised and expensive issue.

It would become the singular issue around the whole country with the SNP saying there are more cost effective options so money can be directed towards the local priorities of the area where they are standing.

In contrast Labour, the Tories and LibDems would be on the defensive having to argue why they are so obsessed about spending half a billion on a single tram route in Edinburgh instead of the local transport, education and health priorities of the area they are standing in.

And in Edinburgh it would be THE issue with more voters aware of the SNP's stance than in the election just past where they enjoyed a big swing because of it with none of the other parties making it a headline issue.

It would be turkeys voting for Christmas and all because they swallowed TIE's largesse. It's incedible that they think this is the issue!

107

Geordie Peebles,

02/06/2007 15:31:16

# 119. AM2,

"Whatever happened to their "consensus politics"?"

Doesn't this question also apply to the opposition in their lemming like obsession to return to their constituencies and argue for spending half a billion pounds on a single tram line?

"With costed manifesto commitments of £2538m per annum, £849m above forecast additional funding"

If they are costed then they won't be above funding.

However the CPPR did find that in terms of uncosted policies it was the Liberal Democrats having 89 uncosted policies, Labour 77 and the SNP 35.

Yet Labour and the LibDems want to spend half a billion pounds on one tram line. What about the other uncosted commitments they were voted in on?

"like that idiotic £1659 million pledge to pay off student debt"

Oh dear. The Allan Wilson gambit of trying to make it look like a one of payment. Just for the sake of claity could you tell people over what period this would be paid off at?

"No Scottish executive has ever before defied a parliamentary motion or resolution."

In true pantomine style I will have to say "Oh yes they have".

108

Miss H,

02/06/2007 18:42:37

119 - the guy before you has grasped this much better than you have. To quote:

'It's quite amusing to see the opposition parties lock themselves into supporting the spending of half a billion pounds into one tram route in Edinburgh as their "core" issue to attack the SNP.'

I think many of us thought they might have focused their attack on the local income tax or student debt proposals.

But no, it's the mad dash for trams.

Tell me, when the SNP publish figures showing this scheme to be a profligate waste of public money how much credibility do you think that Labour and the Lib Dems will have when attacking SNP costings?

109

JIAF,

Anywhere Needed 02/06/2007 21:03:33

could someone point out to these tram backers that these trams are not modern, but old hat.
Are we to go back in time? Get a new hobby tram backers, Maybe train spotting eh.

http://shirleymckie.myfastforum.org/sutra34.php#34

110

Taras Shevchenko,

03/06/2007 10:21:30

The trams in other cities e.g. Dublin ended up costing 2 or 3 times the original budget; couldn't we put the plans for trams on hold for now?

I know there will already be budgets in place.........BUT......couldn't we spend these hundreds of millions of punds on accelerating the training/education and regeneration of places such as Niddrie/Craigmillar & Springburn not to mention Dundee.

I'm from Edinburgh but realise that there's a bit of shame in feathering the nest of the capital through pride and not looking after the parts of our country that really need it.

When I say training/education I don't mean media courses or other useless pursuits where the people come out being illequipped to contribute and help to make our economy stronger. I'm talking about training on trades and/or professions like medical/nursing, business/ICT etc?

The other area is small businesses - banks are there to make money from you and unlike other countires like USA and Australia, small businesses don't get help from banks. Maybe SNP could attack the culture there - I won't hold my breath.


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.