Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Monday, 2nd November 2009 Change Date Latest Issue

Tram bosses in a hole as delays send costs rising

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: 14 November 2008
TRAMS chiefs are facing a battle to keep the project on schedule and expect a legal wrangle over inevitable cost rises.
The timetable for delivering the £512 million tram line by 2011 has already slipped, with work at the trams depot at Gogar in particular causing a headache.

Tram firm TIE is confident of making up the lost time, although it is braced for the unavoidable rise in costs that will result, and disputes with contractors over who is responsible for the extra spending. The troubles facing the project can be revealed following the surprise resignation of trams boss Willie Gallagher.

Mr Gallagher, who was appointed executive chairman of TIE in June 2006, said he was quitting for family reasons and said he looked forward to seeing the trams up and running by 2011.

The decision not to shut Princes Street – which would have allowed the tram work to press ahead faster – and the effects of the global economic slowdown are understood to have put a strain on TIE's budget.

The late change of plan on Princes Street today led one source to draw comparisons with the building of the Scottish Parliament, which opened three years late and came in ten times over budget.

"When you're already on site and then you change spec, it's inevitable that costs and times will change. It's similar to what happened with the Scottish Parliament," the source said.

But trams chiefs insist both publicly and privately that the current problems can be contained within the existing budget.

However, the rising costs – coupled with the inevitable downturn in developer contributions as a result of the credit crunch – does mean the prospect of adding a spur line from Haymarket to Granton is looking increasingly difficult.

City council leader Jenny Dawe said she was "very disappointed" to lose Mr Gallagher at this point. She added: "I am confident that we have a solid team going forward to deliver a world-class transport network for the city, many of whom have worked on other tram schemes and major construction projects."

City leaders are understood to be preparing a quick change of power in an effort to ensure the project does not lose momentum.

The trams project is also due to see the departure of Neil Renilson, chief executive of Lothian Buses and Transport Edinburgh Limited, the firm which will eventually oversee the running of the trams, who announced last month he will retire at the end of the year.

One option believed to be under consideration is splitting Mr Gallagher's responsibilities among current members of senior management.

Deputy council leader Steve Cardownie, who called for Mr Gallagher's resignation following a disastrous start to works on Princes Street, said there now needed to be a "seamless transition" of power.

He said: "I still absolutely think the tram project is a bad idea, but we're too far gone now. There will have to be a seamless transition because the tram project is continuing apace."

The resignation of Mr Gallagher, who had previously held senior roles with Scottish Power Group and the Strategic Rail Authority, is said to have come as a "bolt out of the blue" for council leaders.

Mr Gallagher, who commanded a basic salary of £170,000, is understood to have grown increasingly unhappy about leaving his family behind in Kilmarnock as he travelled through to work in the Capital.

He is also thought to have came under pressure from senior figures in the city council for the mishandling of roadworks which have left the city centre in gridlock.

Mark McInnes, the city's Tory transport spokesman, said the timing of Mr Gallagher's departure raised questions about the running of the project.

He said: "This comes at a crucial time and I'm disappointed there is not going to be continuity. One of the reasons Willie was brought in was his experience in the private sector and his experience at bringing things in on time and on budget.

"I think people will now begin to have a serious look at the project. This is going to be a very difficult job for anyone.

"We've been promised that the project will not go over budget and that the funds have been found, but there are a number of questions and the TIE board needs to quickly get a grip of things and instil confidence in the general public."

Gordon Burgess, of the Leith Walk Traders' Association, said the new boss would have to address concerns from small businesses who have seen their takings drop off as a result of the tram works.

He said: "I think there's no doubt that it's going to be a testing time. From a trader's point of view, the project has been mismanaged with Willie at the helm. I have nothing against Willie Gallagher, but ultimately if things go awry then the buck has to stop with someone.

"I don't know what's going on behind the scenes at TIE, I can only look outside my shop and see the chaos I have had to put up with for the past 15 months."

A council spokesman said today: "We have robust monitoring procedures in place to ensure that the project meets its targets.

"A huge undertaking like the tram works always carries risks, but we have confidence in our contingency arrangements."

TIE declined to add any comment to the council's statements.


Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 14 November 2008 10:34 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Hmm?,

14/11/2008 11:30:03
"However, the rising costs – coupled with the inevitable downturn in developer contributions as a result of the credit crunch – does mean the prospect of adding a spur line from Haymarket to Granton is looking increasingly difficult."

Not that there was any realistic chance of this being built anyway...
2

Hmm?,

14/11/2008 11:30:53
"Where's the anti-tram brigade? I thought they would be out in their droves!!"

Come now, it's only 11.30am :)
3

Skip McClendon,

14/11/2008 11:38:06
#1

Just fed up with the same old arguments every day.

It's a debacle. It's a shambles. It's a gold-plated white elephant. No amount of the same old debate on here is going to change any of that.
4

Goges,

14/11/2008 11:40:42
A very convenient time for Willie Gallagher to have 'family problems' given all the behind the scenes trouble up at TIE.
Willie Gallagher had 'family problems' at a public meeting he attended at Pilrig church hall back in April, maybe he should have quit then when things weren't quite so bad.
Rats and sinking ships immediately spring to mind.
5

Decent,

14/11/2008 11:47:41
I've got deja vu.
6

Goges,

14/11/2008 11:48:36
#6
I believe you can get cream for that
7

Skip McClendon,

14/11/2008 11:48:59
#6

I hope it's not catching.
8

Skip McClendon,

14/11/2008 11:49:41
#6

I hope it's not catching.
9

Farmernot,

14/11/2008 11:54:44
I'm not anti tram but more anti rising cost with a min 3 years to go until its delivered. Cap spending on this and if the forward projections forecast an increase of more than 25% then stop right now.

The 22 bus copes very well !!
10

InsideEdinburgh,

The same office block as TIE 14/11/2008 11:59:33
Funnily enough I heard a rumour (and it is just that) that several of the contracts were to be paid in Euros. And what has the exchange rate done recently....*crash*.
Anyone from TIE care to comment? Anyone from EEN want to investigate this?
11

Wingman,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 12:07:20
4#

Thanks, i think you have said all that needs said.
12

gorgeousgorgieboy,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 12:09:40
Mario you are great. You have given me an iferiority complex.

But I dont think its a very good one.
13

Bill MacD,

14/11/2008 12:13:53
All the infinitely-wise old heads sharing their opinions here about how they know so much better than anyone else makes me hugely proud to belong to such an intelligent nation.

Lesser mortals would think most Scots are pathetic losers who like nothing better than to gripe!
14

,

14/11/2008 12:16:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
15

alex paterson,

edinburgh 14/11/2008 12:16:48
Surely there must be penalty clauses somewhere in the contract that the contractor would not to be held to.
16

,

14/11/2008 12:16:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
17

Dileas,

14/11/2008 12:19:26
No, we're not TOO FAR INTO THIS to pull the plug. At least we are still using the Scottish Government's money. If we cancel NOW we can still avoid hitting Edinburgh residents with a bottomless demand for additional tax, either direct of to repay loans that the City Council authorised itself to take.

Come on, Cllr Dawes - for once show decisivensee - make a decision to cancel and at least minimise the damage done by this no-hope project. It was born as a sales aid for Waterfront houses, promoted through lies and deceit by the discredited Labour administration and its "arms length" company tie, supported by a make-believe business case which exaggerated the ticket box take and relied on Lothian Bus profits to subsidise the tram operations and was eventually sunk by the credit squeeze which killed off the Waterfront evelopment sales and hit the exchange rate.

So where is the justification for continuing? "We've started so we'll continue"? That way lies bankruptcy.
18

Incandescent,

14/11/2008 12:20:13
#1 Gorgie_Tony

Perhaps the bigger question is why, when you were posting on other stories yesterday, you didn't dare comment on the breaking news of Willie's imminent departure?
19

Skip McClendon,

14/11/2008 12:20:37
#19

Well, I walk past the "works" every day and they don't appear to be moving too quickly to me. Who said that someone had died? I'm not prone to exaggeration like you Mario, but that's the seven-hundred billionth time that you have misquoted me on here...
20

,

14/11/2008 12:23:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
21

Skip McClendon,

14/11/2008 12:23:52
#20

Very well said.

The argument that we have poured hundreds of millions into this, so the only way out is to keep pouring hundreds of millions more in, is completely ridiculous.

The Council are scared of looking foolish by pulling the plug. But, at this point, they will look way more foolish in the end if they don't pull the plug.
22

capy,

embra 14/11/2008 12:23:57
Does anybody know how much of this scheme is fixed price. I heard Wheeler rattling on on Talk 107 last night about fixed price contracts.Fine but if there are as it seems large increases due to delays cost of materials,who pays.
As a number of contributors have stated over the last couple of days,there is more to this than meets the eye. The truth wil out.
23

Skip McClendon,

14/11/2008 12:25:18
#24

Woo, Foo. Afraid I didn't get an invite to the completion party.
24

roadstohell,

14/11/2008 12:26:07
#11 Oooooooh !
Now that's good idea, mmhh wonder if they do "broon envelopes" in Euros ?
Mhhhhhh :-/
25

Arrow,

edinburgh 14/11/2008 12:28:39
most of the anti-tram brigade are probably working or late for their work due to the traffic hold ups! as for who is goingto make the money i would suspect it will be the lawyers acting for the council and the contractors. it is a true saying that whichever way the saw cuts there always sawdust.
26

Bob 2,

14/11/2008 12:35:28
Didn't TIE tell us they had FIXED PRICE contracts.


things only get better, so if they are having to DIG into reserves.

bang goes line 1b, and another £3m down the hole in the ground


Sounds like another Scottish Parliament Building in the making
27

,

14/11/2008 12:37:58
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
28

Bob 2,

14/11/2008 12:42:27
gorgie_tony, most people have to work and have better things to do!
29

Council Insider,

On A Day Off 14/11/2008 12:44:46
#10. The 22 bus route does not cope well at peak times. Have you ever tried to get on one between 4.00pm and 6.00pm in either direction?

Viva La Tram and Viva Ma Bonus!
30

Gabriel,

edinburgh 14/11/2008 12:46:27
This tram project for Edinburgh is a big mistake. Maybe it can be stopped now, the roads restored and the contractors compensated. That would be less expensive than continuing. The bus services are pefectly adequate for the city.
31

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 12:46:27
Dileas (20) - well said.

Capy (26) - I have read a good deal of the background papers but have not been able to bring myself to tackle the voluminous contracts which are supposed to be on TIE's website.

However, at the time that Tenders were invited for the projects, there was no approved detailed design available and I would be truly astonished, therefore, if any of the contractors had given a fixed price. There must have been hundreds of changes to the design since that time and it would be interesting to know at what figure claims from Carillion currently stand (particlarly since Carillion got their fingers very badly burnt from, I think, the Nottingham tram scheme, such that they swore "never to touch another tram scheme with a bargepole"). Reports of holes being repeatedly dug and filled in at the same location would suggest that TIE are altering the design as they go.

The business case indicated that the risk for several aspects were to be borne, at least in part, by the public sector and, if I remember rightly, delays to utility diversions fell into this category. These were to have been completed by November 2008 but, if that is not the case and the infrastructure contractors suffer delays, then I would be very surprised, given the terms of the business case, if the terms of their contract precluded them from making substantial claims.

I trust that those at the Council/TIE who insist that the scheme is on time/budget are very sure of the position as, if they are subsequently proved to have given misleading information, then there are many who will wish to see them held accountable.
32

Doh,

14/11/2008 12:57:10


£170,000 a year and he didnt like the commute?

Is he serious.

If that is a typical salalry in Kilmarnock I might have to move there.

He should not be replaced, his duties should shared amongst his deputies.

He was over paid and not very good at his job.
33

charliegreen,

edinburgh 14/11/2008 13:01:46
Over budgeted eh, well a wee bird told me a story this morning that there tarring a couple of spaces in haymarket station car park for 2 hob nobs that are coming on monday morning, whats wrong with the rest of the car park , NOWT , so thats where there money is going, at least some of it.
34

New Town Resident,

14/11/2008 13:05:50
#20 and #25. Absolutely correct, have the courage to cancel now.

It's to be expected that the defenders of this vanity project are now falling back on the bogus economically illiterate argument of sunk money spent, rather than even trying to argue the tenuous benefits any more.

However I would also add that most of the money spent so far has gone on utilities work, a lot of which would have to have been done anyway at some point. We must cancel before the specific tram spend on track and rolling stock begins.

The business case was bogus in the first place, but how can anyone seriously argue in now stacks up given the cratering of the various Forth projects?

To quote that great Lib Dem thinker Mr. Keynes who seems so popular nowadays, "when the facts change I change my mind."
35

Vics35,

14/11/2008 13:07:29
I'm neither for or against the trams in principle BUT the disruption that has been caused was more than TIE ever said there would be.

Getting around town is a nightmare and now from 15 Nov there will be delays getting into the delays in town when part of Portobello High Street is closed.

Getting to and from work or shopping anywhere is becoming impossible, you end up being diverted into other works.

Can't wait for Hogmanay when those restrictions start!
36

scotsol,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 13:07:57
#20 - dull ass - if every major worthwhile public project was expected to go through absolutely on time, exactly on budget, and without any hitch, on pain of instant cancellation, we'd still be living in mud huts. Get real.
37

Megan H,

14/11/2008 13:08:51
#1 Gorgie Tony

You are very good at commenting on other stories why don't you tell us why your party supported the trams and if you think the council tax should be raised to pay for the overspend that will occur form this Lab/Libdem/Tory enforced expenditured
38

Snails dont like curry and chips,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 13:09:08
How are the works at Gogar causing a particular headache - they have turned green fields into a giant quarry where they can play with their bulldozers, cranes and other toys 24 hours a day if they like. What's the problem or have they found that tunnelling under the road is a but more difficult than they thought. As for Gallagher - is he only just realising what it is like to be a traveller in this city and to be constantly confronted by delays due to his tram works and the hundreds of roadworks round the city. What a shame! Rats leaving a sinking ship I believe.
39

a point of view,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 13:13:23
#19 Mario

You say no-one has died. However tram construction traffic (large lorries) in the city have killed both a pedestrian and a cyclist.

So two dead, hundreds of millions spent replacing a bus with a tram, tonnes of landfill, jobs lost in retail, family time lost in increased congestion, listed buildings demolished, shabby temporary surfaces and roadsigns across the new town.

All to get 20 trams, with mostly standing room, onto a route that was previously served by a good bus.

Tram cost = 100 years of the roads, pavements and lighting budget.

Rushhour capacity of the trams = less than 4000 people in each direction (if all trams are completely full).

Population of Edinburgh something over 400,000.

So all our money spent on a system that might benefit just 2% of the population.

Is this a good use of your money and mine?
40

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 13:14:28
#20 Dileas

Excellent post and absolutely spot-on.

If I remember correctly it was promised by our prestigeous Town Council that at no point would Council Tax be used to pay for this fiasco, well, let's just see and start saving.

As you say Dileas, this project should be terminated now, even if we lose the whole £500 million, that's better than what looks like coming if vanity forces 'completion' of this crazy, unwanted 'system'.

#31 Bob 2

Yes Bob, it was reported originally that the price would be FIXED or by that, did they mean manipulated?

This idiot scheme will end up costing several times the money wasted on the Scottish Parliament building.

Terminate this folly now.

Remember, of course that the project was forced through by the Scottish Labour party, the 'Greens', Lib Dems and the Conservatives (unfortunately).

Why? Just to try and trip up the SNP early in their Parliamentary career.

41

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 13:16:54
#40 Mr. Richard C. Normuss

"A bottle of bubbly to the poster who guesses’s to the nearest million."

Richard, didn't you mean 'to the nearest £100 million'?

Seems the more likely.

42

The Judge,

14/11/2008 13:17:03
For the love of god will you just announce it's been cancelled. FFS we all know you're going to do it in the near future just get on and announce it.

The project is dead. The tramLINE is dead. Stop throwing good money after bad.

All this nonsense about being too late in the day to stop it is just that, nonsense. All the contracts can be cancelled, it'll cost us but it'll be cheaper in the long run.

Lots of us have been telling the protrammies for a while it'll end up like The Scottish Parliament building and we're starting to be proved right.

Balance sheets can't lie.

Even the most ardent pro tramLINE supporter must know this will never come in ON TIME & ON BUDGET.

No wonder Tramcar Willie jumped ship yesterday. He's know for months this was coming and filled his boots before he left.
43

a point of view,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 13:18:33
49 Mario

You can't answer my argument, so you tell me to shut up - very poor.
44

Eliz,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 13:19:37
Given that this situation is exactly the mess that was forecast many moons ago, would it be possible to continue the utilities work (thereby leaving us with some improved pipework and preventing Scottish Gas from being a constant presence), re-lay some decent road surfaces and stop there? Future generations with, hopefully, improved intelligence, could revisit this farce in better economic times - although I suspect they would be as amused at our stupidity as the extra-terrestrials in the old Smash potato advert.
45

a point of view,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 13:20:53
53

If you don't like to hear arguments you disagree with, I suggest that you don't read this section of the paper.

and that you don't make comments yourself.
46

Leith Walk Trader,

14/11/2008 13:31:14
#37 The contracts are not on the tie website - they comprise around 30 volumes and take up half a small office at Citypoint, so too large to post online. (And too commercially sensistive.)
47

The Judge,

14/11/2008 13:37:59
#57 Mario far from gloating I'm annoyed about the amount of money that has been wasted, so much more could have been done with it.

Transport in Edinburgh is a mess, we don't need a tramLINE we need someone with a long term vision and the political will to force it through, at the moment we don't have that.

In the past the council have got it spectacularly wrong, with the tramLINE they've outdone themselves.

48

Brian Ferrari,

14/11/2008 13:39:27
Edinburgh - bringing 19th century ideas into the 21st.

Inspiring Capital. What a fecking mess.....
49

Auld Twa,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 13:42:31
Speaking of contracts, what about the one where Carillion gets about £5 million if the Granton spur is not ordered on a fixed price contract by next April ?
Who authorised that contract ?
TIE didn't have the surplus money at the time it was signed and certainly won't be getting it from any obvious source now.
What basis was the basis for signing away £5 million other than on a hope and prayer ?
50

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 13:42:37
Leith Walk Trader (59) - Thanks. I have just checked and see it is just a summary on their website.

The Council and TIE declared at the time and with a little fanfare that, in the interests of transparency, the contracts would be made publicly available but, rather than put them on their website, it now seems that one would either have to go into their offices every day to see the documents or else pay heftily for the privilege of a copy!!

Typical TIE, really.
51

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 13:42:44
So this is what I (and a good few others)suspected was about to burst out of the TIE Cesspool yesterday, with Tramcar Wy-Lie's sudden departure! Once again, this story has all the hallmarks of a TIE damage-limitation press release - 'can be revealed' - topped and tailed as an editorial piece. If TIE (the Council) is 'braced for the unavoidable rise in costs that will result' not to mention 'legal wrangles with contractors over inevitable cost rises', that comes right back to TIE Senior Management; Gallagher's Band of Barrow Boys and Snake Oil Salesmen. And where are our Elected Representatives, Clowncil and Pretendy-Parliament, charged with overseeing the 'robust monitoring procedures' in this growing fiasco? Correct, nowhere to be seen or heard. We'd expect TIE to put the lights out and pretend nobody's home, but does Wheeler really think an anonymous 'council spokesman' is adequate ??
52

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 13:45:26
Auld Twa - a good question and one that should be addressed to TIE and the Directors of Finance and City Development, respectively, I suggest.
53

Brian Ferrari,

14/11/2008 13:45:36
Seriously, who's brain is so stuck in a tramline that they can't imagine that there are better and more efficient ways of bringing clean public transport to the city?

Electric buses would have far greater coverage and would have avoided digging up any roads. And would have been a tad cheaper.

But no no, you want trams, Dickensian, Victorian transport cause that's what "modern" European cities have.

I laugh at your general stupidity.
54

Spathiphyllum,

14/11/2008 13:48:51
£512 million plus, eh?

Why isn't the bus service adequate, anyway?

Who decided and why that we need a tram set?
55

W S,

14/11/2008 13:53:34
You're forgetting that trams will actually be quite fast. Much faster than buses or electric buses. Just what we need to stop congestion and complaints that everyone is giving about buses clogging up Princes Street. They will be like the speed of a metro. Pretty cool eh?
56

Leith Walk Trader,

14/11/2008 13:53:55
#63 You can of course submit a Freedom of Information Request, but the legal chaps from tie will tell you that the whole document is too big, so 'what sections are you interested in?'. Difficult to say if you don't know what's in the documentin the first place...

Catch 22!
57

jtdx,

14/11/2008 13:56:05
#26
http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/internet/council/council_tax_and_finance/council_budget/CEC_council_budget_2008_09

"£20 million a year on roads and pavements", so you are stating that the trams will cost over 2 billion pounds?
or just making the numbers up as you go along?
58

GraemeH,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 14:00:28
#68 - The so called speed benefits of the trams are, like just about everything with this project, rubbish. For a start, the maximum speed of the trams is slower than that of a bus. The faster journey times are due to much fewer stops, no driver ticketing, some off road running and on road priority over all other traffic, including of course the buses. All of these could be introduced for buses at a tiny fraction of the cost of the vanity tram.


59

World class concrete,

14/11/2008 14:04:40
#68: "You're forgetting that trams will actually be quite fast. Much faster than buses or electric buses".

I don't know if you're correct, but if so, why do you think trams travelling much faster than buses along busy city centre streets is a good thing. What about the danger to pedestrians?
60

,

14/11/2008 14:07:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
61

W S,

14/11/2008 14:13:56
yes but congestion is also about capacity. If a tram carries 200+ people, it shifts more people from one place to another at a faster speed, and you need fewer vehicles around at once. Also more people will shift from their cars to trams who don't currently take the bus so some cars will be removed from the road.
62

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 14:15:06
Leith Walk Trader (6) - I'm afraid I have been there many times with both TIE and the Council.

Normally, they cite "commercial sensitivity" but, in this case, they know the documents are so long that few, if any, would be prepared to give up the time/cost of obtaining it. Judging by the rest of the background papers, though, I'd be prepared to bet there would be a few surprises contained therein!


63

roadstohell,

14/11/2008 14:23:00
this is all really sad.
An earlier post mentioned that Scotland is seen in Europe as a drunken useless joke. Sadly this is true, as a frequent traveller to Brussels and other major european cities, I can vouch for the truth of this statement.
It angers me, that we as a people, are seen in this light. However, what makes me really angry is that we are seen as clowns because we vote in clowns !!!
We as a nation are being seriously let down by our elected and non elected elites, we are a nation of
"lions led by donkeys", and it not only makes my blood boil, but also saddens me.

Be it City of Edinburgh Clowncil, or the Clottish parliament, we are not being well served.

Away with the lot of ye's

I am sooooooooo scunnered :0/
Trams,two city tsars,world heritage status the list just goes on and on and on .........

When oh when will this stop ?
When will we get the leaders we deserve ?

TBH I cannae post anymair, I want tae dae sumthin raither than type awa an moan, sumthin like clash idiots heids the gither
64

Spathiphyllum,

14/11/2008 14:23:11
Just think. All that money on trams could have been SO much better spent; on councillors' robes, foreign holidays, free lunches.....
65

jdships,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 14:24:09
1 Gorgie_Tony,

The warning signs have been there all along that we could have another "Hollyrood" on our hands with costs spiralling out of control.
"Hollyrood" was " gently and quietly" swept under the carpet .
Don't think th public will be so gullible a second time round for what is after all just an expensive tourist attraction .

73 Foo,
"Write to the council about the REAL problems."

Do you not consider the tram fiasco a REAL problem ?
Goodness knows how many millions of pounds being spent on a system that will serve under 10% of the poulation.
This is money which could have been used to "repair " the City's long lasting problems

I get no pleasure witnessing this project sliding into trouble I'm just annoyed about the amount of money that has been wasted, so much more could have been done with it.
66

Stray Fox,

14/11/2008 14:26:45
#79 Gorgie_Tolly is a fool.
67

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 14:45:38
Sarah B @37; well said, also 20 & 26 & others - Reminds me of my post from August, 2007, when I reported that a very experienced public utilities contractor/manager was getting the hell out of Embra because he didn't want his reputation tainted with what he recognised as a coming shambles. I agree with #55 - regard the works so far as an overdue rationalisation/modernisation of utility services, drop Burns Grandiose Vanity-Project and restore the streets to some semblance of good order.
68

My opinions count for more than yours,

because I'm special 14/11/2008 16:07:06
So far, there have been 84 messages on this thread. Of these, 63 of could be classified as vacuous droolings from semi-literate, feckless knuckle-draggers.
69

roadstohell,

14/11/2008 16:17:17
will we be able to hang on to the outside of the trams as they do in other countries ?
70

roadstohell,

14/11/2008 16:21:32
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZCYa8EQ_CQ

Mhhh this sounds really good :0/
71

Cabguyken,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 16:23:56
"Mr Gallagher, who commanded a basic salary of £170,000, is understood to have grown increasingly unhappy about leaving his family behind in Kilmarnock as he travelled through to work in the Capital."

Well why did he take the job in the first place? He could easily have rented here Monday to Friday?
72

roadstohell,

14/11/2008 16:27:06
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qw78gxNKHf8

I remember the trolley buses in Glasgow being called "whispering death" as they ran so quietly
73

roadstohell,

14/11/2008 16:34:11
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oDhaZElJ4Ho&feature=related
74

roadstohell,

14/11/2008 16:36:34
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hka8jKueLaQ
75

Scotish Exile,

14/11/2008 16:50:50
yes, scottish parliament mk 2, and we the tax payer foot the bill for another white elephant.
76

Just a tax payer,

EDINBURGH 14/11/2008 18:06:22
#96 I could not agree with you anymore. This is another Scottish Parliament that is going to cost the tax-payer TEN times more.
77

David Harrington,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 18:34:13
There is so much nonsense written here that I really don't know where to start.
First of all, #20, how do you know that the fare take has been exaggerated? If anything, recent projects such as Stirling-Alloa, Bathgate, Edinburgh Park and Larkhall suggest that, if anything, the fare take will have been underestimated. The benefit to cost ratio is very good.
As for the belief that the stalled development at Granton suddenly makes it a waste of time, this is not only short-sighted but just wrong - unless, of course you ignore the population of Leith, the city centre, the West End, Saughton, Murrayfield, not to mention the stadium, shopping centres, Royal Bank HQ and other businesses served by the tram. Utter tosh if ever I've heard it.
The problems so far have been less than one would expect for a project of this size and complexity - the only reason people feel it's a problem is because the minutiae of every hiccup are examined in the greatest amount of detail possible by a newspaper desperate to invent stories to get itself out of a hole of its own making. Why has there been so little about the Portobello roadworks? Of course, it's not newsworthy if it doesn't have anything to do with trams.
78

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 18:35:39
While both projects are monuments to political vanity and stupidity, the Scottish Parliament never really had a 'Budget'. The initial figure was just something Donald Dither pulled out of thin air and scribbled on the back of a fag packet. Once building was started and reached 'critical mass', those responsible perjured their souls to vain idiot politicians, who just kept pouring OUR money into a pit until it was eventually full. A daft, middle-aged Librarian eventually got the blame. The Grand Tramcar Socialist Vanity Project, on the other hand, was sold like the Emperor's New Clothes, or the Springfield Monorail - we just had to have one to be 'World Class. Labour on the Kooncil and at Follyrood are entirely responsible; the SNP had the chance to act and bottled it under pressure from an unholy alliance of Labour, Tories and FibDums. I've no party loyalty, I just despise all politicians.
79

roadstohell,

14/11/2008 18:59:54
we should have known not to get involved with carillon after the mess they were in with the Nottingham trams :0(
80

James (1),

14/11/2008 19:01:47
Just add a zero to the end of the cheque! We must have this tram line at ANY cost or so it appears.
I say that because no matter what the guesstimate was for completion is, it will NEVER come in anywhere near this figure.
That is my gripe. Would you pay 10 times the estimate for work you asked to be carried out?
What is so different about public money then?
81

Euan,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 19:09:47
#20, Dileas

You have well and truly hit the nail on the head, excellent post.

Now really is the time for the powers-that-be to take a proper look at what is going on in this city and pull the plug on the whole tram project before even more valuable public money is washed down the drain.

As Dileas highlights, this really is a critical time for every citizen in Edinburgh.

The way I see it, and I feel I am certainly not alone in my stance on this matter, is that the immediate cancellation of the whole tram project NOW is the only way forward to avoid burdening Edinburgh citizens with years if not decades of crippling and unnecessary taxation - all to pay for the construction and upkeep of a next-to-useless tram line.

Cutting our losses is the only way forward here.

Regardless of penalty clauses in any contracts, the misery caused so far to to everyone (especially local businesses) is dwarfed in comparison to the huge amounts of public funds which will still be continue to be siphoned from the local economy and taxpayers and pumped into the future upkeep of the tram line.

I feel what is most annoying about the situation the tram project now finds itself in is one that was so obviously gong to happen from the start..




82

tumshie heid,

14/11/2008 19:24:09
#98 By the time there is a tram on it's way to the Royal Banks HQ there won't be anyone working there as they will be redundant. A bit like what this tramline scheme should be.
As for Willie moaning about commuting, he created the damn mess that makes every journey take so long now. He is an idiot but we are all bigger fools because that buffoon has been pocketing 170k a year for presiding over the biggest waste of Scottish taxpayers money in years
83

Euan,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 19:31:08
#104

If not the biggest waste of Scottish taxpayers money in the history of this country..
84

micky,

edinburgh 14/11/2008 20:16:38
Is a list of the councillors who voted to go ahead with the trams still available ? & are any of them making any public comments now that the city has been turned into a daily traffic jam ?
Total utter waste of money,time & precious resources !
85

Scotish Exile,

14/11/2008 20:23:53
why are the contractors not signed up to a fixed price lump sum contract, that way the risk of cost over runs is theres????
86

Sarah B,

14/11/2008 20:35:49
David Harrington (98) - If you have the time or inclination, perhaps you would like to read the peer review of the business case by ArupScotland presented to the Parliamentary Tram Line Committee on http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/business/committees/tram-one-bill/genPrin/e1-evid04-03.htm. A similar one was prepared for Tram Line 2. In short, the peer review was highly sceptical of several aspects of the business case, not least the anticipated ridership figures.

More recently, of course, there is Appendix III to the Final Business Case, prepared by Steer Davies Gleave and Colin Buchanan, which states, amongst many other worrying things, that: "The target revenue also rests on a central assumption of long-term positive ecomonic climate and realisation of the currently expected planning scenario." That was in December 2006 and now, of course, we have neither a long-term positive economic climate or a realisation of the (then) expected planning scenario.

The National Audit Office highlighted the tendency for other UK tram schemes, to have overstated patronage by an average of 25%. ArupScotland's peer review could find little to suggest Edinburgh would be any different and, indeed, suggested the shortfall would be higher.

Academic research by Professor Bent Flyvbjerg and his team recommends extreme caution when considering patronage predictions, given the historic tendency (worldwide) for them not to be realised. His figures are nearer the 50% shortfall mark based on a large sample.

As far as the benefit cost ratio is concerned, the entire benefits figure consists of journey savings to cars, buses, trams and freight. However, ArupScotland were critical of both the models and the assumptions, given that no traffic management plan existed or exists to this day. If one were to accuse TIE of pulling the benefits figure out of thin air, they would be unable to supply substantive evidence or reliable modelling to prove their assertions. The model used
87

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 14/11/2008 20:38:29
... used by TIE had a margin of error of +/- 30%.

If you choose to respond to my post, I would be very grateful if you could provide me with sources in relation to the Edinburgh tram project which lead you to believe that I am talking "utter tosh".
88

Cod,

Toshed up 14/11/2008 20:58:06
#109
Bring out your Tosh.
89

Cod,

110 14/11/2008 20:58:31
Always recycle
90

Cod,

111 14/11/2008 20:59:30
Stop speaking to yourself. The Voices. The Voices. They talk of trams.
91

calum,

14/11/2008 21:28:23
#98 David, thank you for exposing yourself for the utter windbag you have been over many months. You're better sticking to real ale, son, because you're out of your depth here. The Tram project is nothing but a laughable scheme with no safety case and an even flimsier business case and you know it! Your latest outpourings prove it.
You have no case whatever and Sarah B has proved it all along, month on month.
Now, to be serious, isn't it about time that National politicians came out from under the stair and asked the questions, made the decisions that we put them in Holyrood to make!
92

roadstohell,

14/11/2008 21:39:54
Good point, name & shame those that wanted to board the gravy tram, let's not allow them to hide or to sit silently, no more "it wisne me , honest"
93

roadstohell,

14/11/2008 21:44:07
We really have got a load of spineless no hopers in both local & national gov't.
Local clowncillors waaaaay out of their depth, the clottish gov't fool of self congratulating buffoons, this is NOT doing my blood pressure any good you know, it ires me to think that they will be sitting smugly reading these comments and knowing that they can hide...... drag em out, get em to do what WE elected them to do, if they can't ,won't do it, then for goodness sake leave the stage.........Grrrrrrrrr
Donkeys, buffoons and wastrels
94

COLINTON.MAINS,

Oakville Ontario 15/11/2008 02:19:18
WILLIE.GOT.OUT..ITS.ONE.PURE.HEADACHE..SIMPLE
95

Alberto.,

15/11/2008 09:00:43
No doubt all this kerfuffle, possible great delays, vast contractual / financial legal entanglements, general chaos for everybody, will have no affect on the, presumably very generous high reward (possibly already allocated if not yet spent!) `to the brave and brilliant Council members, as a 'Special Award' Bonus, for coming up with such a project in the first place - that will probably be 'Ring fenced' for security (possibly already paid to them so they don’t miss out - just in case the ‘till’ is empty (no funding!) at the end of the day!) You know the score!

Do tell me if I am wrong, but remember, Councils nowadays - not generally the greatest group of people in which to place vast amounts of trust in - if any? Trust being a qualification not essential for the particular job in hand, for as we see, quite regularly, there’s always someone ‘who knows a man’ who, with a nod and a wink, can always help out - as a matter of course!!
96

Disgrunted Ebardonian,

Edinburgh 16/11/2008 07:37:56
why waste your breath whats new every project that involves government bodies always run into financial difficulties they do as they please we have no say in the matter even though the people put them in power on our behalf. Its a case of "Im alright jack"
97

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 16/11/2008 11:47:58
And another thing - anybody else noticed that these Stories suggesting yet more delays and budget hikes always seem to be slipped to the Embra Chip-Wrapper on a Friday afternoon. Clearly the Liars in TIE and the Idiot politicians hope that by Monday, all the peasants will remember over the weekend is the Fitba' Scores and the Lottery.
98

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 12:37:20
#123 - almost all of them, outside the SNP, with the honourable exception of Kate McKenzie - the slimy tory group on the council tried to discipline her for 'breaking ranks'. David 'TaxiFor' McLetchie boasts that he pushed the 'Not a Penny More' motion at the Pretendy Parliament but he now refuses to answer difficult questions on the Grand Albino Pachyderm. Jason Rust refuses to answer any correspondence, full stop.

 

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.