Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Saturday, 7th November 2009 Change Date

Tram line design months late as budget slips £10m off track

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: 10 March 2009
THE cost of designing Edinburgh's tram line is more than £10 million over budget and months behind schedule, the Evening News has learned.
Despite two years of work on the £512m line, transport chiefs have still not finalised the final design of the airport to Newhaven route.

It is understood that problems with key sections of the route – including Picardy Place, York Place and Princes Street – have pushed design work over budget and off schedule. The lack of finalised designs is at the heart of an ongoing dispute between tram firm TIE and its German contractor Bilfinger Berger.

The New York-based Parsons Brinkerhoff Group was given the £23m design contract in 2005.

It was expected the design would be finished last February but this changed when contracts were signed with the tram consortium in May.

It was then agreed that the consortium – which includes Bilfinger, Siemens and tram-maker CAF – would take responsibility for the final completion of the design.

However, this last phase – around 20 per cent of the total design work – has proved the most difficult in terms of getting the contractors, TIE and the city council to agree to a final plan.

Yesterday, the Evening News revealed just £40m remains of the original £96m set aside for overruns or tram line problems.

TIE today said it would not be drawn on the overrun, but added that completing the design work was a "contractual responsibility" for the contractors.

Administration and opposition councillors both raised concerns about the cost increases. Deputy council leader Steve Cardownie said: "This is not good news and once more brings into question the original tram budget."

The city's Labour leader Andrew Burns said: "This constant flow of stories about potential budget problems simply underlines the urgent need for some clear political leadership of the tram project."

"For such a large-scale development it's crucial that the politicians currently in charge get to grips with every detail and ensure a proper understanding of what's going on."

A spokeswoman for TIE said: "As TIE is in dispute with the Infraco consortium it would not be appropriate for us to comment on contractual issues related to this dispute."


Tram closure 'not putting shoppers off'
THE closure of Princes Street for tramworks has not put shoppers off visiting the city centre, according to new statistics.

The figures show visitor numbers in key areas in the first week of the closure were generally higher than the average for the first six weeks of this year. Shoppers' footfall at Rohan on George Street showed the biggest increase with 99.2 per cent, which was followed closely by George Street's Dome which saw an 86.3 per cent rise in footfall.

Latest News on South Bridge showed the biggest drop in footfall – 59.9 per cent down – with Offbeat on the same street experiencing a 15.4 per cent reduction in passing shoppers.

Three out of four areas on Princes Street saw an increase in visitors for the week beginning February 23, when all diversions and road closures were in place. A council spokeswoman said: "George Street and St Andrew Square have been positively affected by the tram works. Princes Street saw footfall remain steady or increase."

General manager of Jenners store, George Bell, said: "We have benefited from having the tram outside our front door. Obviously more people are now getting off the bus on George Street or St Andrew Square, but the diversions do seem to be running smoothly and this past weekend was pretty buoyant for us. But it's very early days."

The city's economic development leader, Tom Buchanan, insisted the figures were only one indicator and added: "We're not going to pretend everything is rosy."

Watchdog says no to tram probe
MSPs have criticised the Auditor General's decision not to investigate major problems with Edinburgh's trams project.

Lothians Nationalist MSP Shirley-Anne Somerville contacted Audit Scotland along with Edinburgh Conservative MSP David McLetchie to request an investigation after work ground to a halt last month.

Mr McLetchie said he accepted the decision but would prefer it if the Auditor General was prepared to "crack the whip".

Ms Somerville reportedly said: "It is disappointing, but no surprise, that Audit Scotland is unwilling to intervene. We must get a real estimate of final costs and the finish date for a project that is clearly running behind and well over budget.

"Audit Scotland should reconsider and come back to investigate what chance there is left of finishing this project on time and on budget."

Auditor General Robert Black said: "I consider it would be inappropriate for me to become involved at this stage.

"Auditors will, of course, continue to monitor the project's progress through our normal audit activity."

The full article contains 800 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 10 March 2009 12:22 PM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Edinburgh transport plans
 
1

Niadh,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 11:36:26
£10 million over budget and months behind schedule and that is just the design phase!
Why the hell wasn't this not completed BEFORE any work was started on the route itself?
It's none the wonder Bilfinger are looking for more money. They probably don't know where they are supposed to be going from one week to the next.
Yet another example of how badly this project is being managed and more evidence to support the belief that this is going to go massively over budget.
Disband TIE now and use their annual budget to pay proper project management companies to do the job properly.
2

edinburgher,

10/03/2009 11:57:18

Why cant the people who are supposed to be running this project take the bull by the horns and make the only decision that they have left and shelve the route through the city centre and run it from Haymarket.
The good citizens of Edinburgh have had enough and I think this proposal would be accepted.
It is only politicians who are reluctant to make this sort of decision because of flak they would receive.
It has not been a total loss as some may think as money has been spent on new water and gas mains and other utilities which would have been replaced sometime in the
future.
Let's get Edinburgh back too normal,please.
Let's get Edinburgh back to
3

alfonsa pedrosa,

embra 10/03/2009 11:58:19
This system is worse than a DIY kit,just get digging and by that time we should have the drawings ready,wonderful.
4

allknowing,

10/03/2009 11:59:09
Lets have a multi-million pound project, but not have any final plans in place for it.

FFS, is this the way leftie, green people do things is it.God save us all.
5

Marathon,

10/03/2009 12:01:15
On the basis that some individual with any control over this circus of a project has access to this forum, please read the following very carefully:

SCRAP THIS WASTE OF MONEY NOW. NOBODY VOTED FOR IT, NOBODY WANTS IT, AND NOBODY CARES FOR THE MESS IT IS MAKING OF OUR CITY. IT HAS BEEN SOLD TO US ON THE BASIS THAT IT WILL HELP EDINBURGH BECOME A WORLD CLASS CITY. EDINBURGH HAS BEEN A WORLD CLASS CITY CINCE THEY BUILT THAT BIG CASTLE THING ON THAT BIG ROCK THING A FEW YEARS AGO. END OF STORY.

Thanks.
6

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 10/03/2009 12:01:29
Yawn . I do not believe there is a crisis . these things happen in every big project - will easily make the time and cost " shortfall " up by the end .
When the trams come folk will thank us in the labour Party for our foresight .
7

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 10/03/2009 12:03:43
5 - you are spouting rubbish . What did option 2 include in the congestion charge referendum ? The one which was approved by the voters .
8

Marathon,

10/03/2009 12:04:54
Voice of Reason: Option 2 did not include a castle!!
9

J4cko,

10/03/2009 12:07:16
Scrap the whole thing now!

People should unite and oppose this scheme and make sure its stopped now.

Some sort of action group should be set up and we should campaign to have it ended.

After all, we are in a democracy and if so many are opposed to it, why should we put up with it being forced upon us at our expense!!
10

TankEngine,

Uphall 10/03/2009 12:14:45
When are the council and TIE going to wake up and smell the coffee?
How can building project run smoothly in other countries and in the private sector, but come to Scotland and the public sector then it's always over budget and months, no years late!!
11

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 12:15:19
Drip - Drip - Drip, slowly the sheer incompetence of TIE and the chaotic extent of their project (lack of) management is being exposed to scrutiny. And what of our Elected Representatives? Just what the hell DID they think they were voting for, when they decided to throw £Half a Billion at what we now know were little more than scribbles on the back of fag-packets?
And #7, ALL 'Options' in Dopey Burns TollTax Referendum included 'Trams' - it's utterly disingenuous for the Tramoraks to now claim that the 'Shove It' response to the TollTax was somehow a ringing endorsement for trams.
12

James (1),

10/03/2009 12:17:46
I am shocked! I always thought that this project would come in on budget, on time or perhaps sooner. To be told it is over budget and behind is totally unexpected.
I could go on but have to go as the psychiatrist is demanding I take my medication.
13

Leila,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 12:23:19
#7 Voice of Reason: are you the same person who had a letter published in the EN a couple of weeks ago making this same strange claim that the congestion charging referendum was in some way a referendum on Lines 1 and 2?

The congestion charging referendum was never intended as a referendum on Lines 1 and 2, and no one saw it as such at the time. By then, lines 1 and 2 had become part of the "baseline" strategy and were not available for either approval or rejection by the electorate. Please stop making this false claim.
14

Sarcasm,

10/03/2009 12:26:41
#12
You couldn't let Voice of reason go in your place could you.

He expects the scheme to easily come back within budget and on time.

A much more deserving case I think.
15

nSyratzcGlaw,

10/03/2009 12:30:47
Well, all we can do now is pray.

Let Jesus into your hearts and he will build it with his love.
16

scotsol,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 12:34:43
Sir
I would like to express my outrage at the publication of your disgusting pro-tram story entitled "Tram closure 'not putting shoppers off'". Do you not realise that it is only acceptable to report anti-tram news, and the daily thoughts of Chairman Cardownie? Pro-tram stories are nothing more than the irresponsible propaganda of dangerous Greens, liberals, and homosexuals, and should be presumed to be lies until proved otherwise. No such proof is necessary with anti-tram stories, naturally, which are of such transparent honesty that to ask for proof would be impertinent. This is particularly obvious with the aforementioned story. How dare anyone suggest that Princes Street traders are not being ruined by the tram works? I visited the street this morning at 6 am, and there was nobody there!

Very Disappointed/Deranged, Carstairs.
17

nSyratzcGlaw,

10/03/2009 12:35:08
I think TIE need to work on their relationship with the media. never mind , another 5p drop in share price and this paper is gone completely.
18

aurorablue,

10/03/2009 12:35:14
Why go ahead with a project when the plans have not been finalised, what a bunch of nincompoops! (to put it politely)
19

Harry Callahan,

10/03/2009 12:38:24
Yawn!!
20

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 10/03/2009 12:39:53
Might I remind everyone Holyrood cost less than forecast .
21

Harry Callahan,

10/03/2009 12:42:22
#7 Voice of reason

The congestion charge referendum was never approved. The people of Edinburgh responded with a big fat NO.

Perhaps what you are trying to say is not too clear in your post.
22

Harry Callahan,

10/03/2009 12:43:18
#20 Who told you that??

You are clearly trying to wind people up.
23

Bob 2,

10/03/2009 12:44:00
transport chiefs have still not finalised the final design of the airport to Newhaven route.


yip no wonder the contractors are not happy.

Yip its the Scottish Parliament building all over again

No1 sums it up
24

nSyratzcGlaw,

10/03/2009 12:44:40
23 Bob , have you accepted Jesus into your life ?
25

Bob 2,

10/03/2009 12:45:11
20 Voice of reason,EDINBURGH 10/03/2009 12:39:53
Might I remind everyone Holyrood cost less than forecast .

what forecast was that... wasn't the original cost estimated at £40 off million?
26

Bob 2,

10/03/2009 12:46:31
The New York-based Parsons Brinkerhoff Group was given the £23m design contract in 2005.

new york based ?

lets hope they've been working to British Measurements!!!
27

nSyratzcGlaw,

10/03/2009 12:46:32
25 Yes Bob it was 40 million . but I want to know about You and The Lord. Jesus can bring an end to suffering and in his house you shall bide, if you want to.
28

The Judge,

10/03/2009 12:48:47
Administration and opposition councillors both raised concerns about the cost increases. Deputy council leader Steve Cardownie said: "This is not good news and once more brings into question the original tram budget."

Steve voted for the tramLINE.

----------
The city's Labour leader Andrew Burns said: "This constant flow of stories about potential budget problems simply underlines the urgent need for some clear political leadership of the tram project."

Andrew voted for the tramLINE.

29

nSyratzcGlaw,

10/03/2009 12:49:08
Put your stuff in my fridge Bob and ye the feet on the couch, But cease your witter for in the lords house there shall be no more Edinburgh type miseryface.
30

Bob 2,

10/03/2009 12:49:19
Three out of four areas on Princes Street saw an increase in visitors for the week beginning February 23, when all diversions and road closures were in place.

of course there will be an increase....close a number of busy parts of Princes Streets path off and of course the number of people walking on the shops side will increase

Biggest question is.... are they Buying....

John Lewis has already indicated a drop in sales.

Edinburgh Open for Business
31

Bob 2,

10/03/2009 12:50:50
breweries come to mind...
32

Big bob 79,

10/03/2009 12:52:16
#20.... ha ha that statement is as good as Trams are on time and on budget
33

The Judge,

10/03/2009 12:52:34
From todays letters page.

I fully support TIE and its unrelenting efforts to secure a sensible and proper resolution for the good of Edinburgh residents, businesses and the travelling public.
Phil Wheeler, transport convener, Edinburgh City Council

Straight from the horses mouth, the man in overall charge of Tie, who sits on the Tie board, who accepted match tickets & hospitality from Tie, has full confidence it Tie.

At least he didn't use the words "world class" & "on time & on budget"
34

Big bob 79,

10/03/2009 12:57:45
#33
Phil Wheeler, what a load of rubbish last week 05/03/2009 he was slating TIE saying he palced to must trust in them

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/topstories/Transport-chief-says-39we-placed.5041238.jp

With this muppet at the helm no wonder the whole Project is ready to roll over and die







35

Bob 2,

10/03/2009 13:00:50
TIE today said it would not be drawn on the overrun, but added that completing the design work was a "contractual responsibility" for the contractors.

Are TIE not the Project Managers for this multi million pound project?
36

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 13:03:06
#33 - "Straight from the horses mouth"? - wrong end of the Equine Quadruped's digestive tract when describing Phil Wheeler's increasingly bizarre utterances!
37

Edinburgh 100,

Musselburgh 10/03/2009 13:03:34
TIE and Edinburgh Cooncilors have failed in this project because they failed to take the public along with them. The saying of "if your gonna tell a lie tell a big one" comes to mind. Politicians and TIE have constanly used spin etc to try and sell us the trams. Even the most basic of checks/scrutiny identified the faults in the plan but TIE and the cooncilors papered over the cracks in the plan. TIE and Edinburgh cooncilors over the last 2 years have spouted "on time and on budget" even when it was blatantly obvious this wasnt going to happen.

TIE and Edinburgh Cooncilors have been exposed as the amutuers they actually are. They have relied on the new political campaign style of spinning stories. Unfortunatly the public can see through the spin quite quickly.

TIE and the cooncilors have 2 choices

1. Contuinue with the trams, Edinburgh residents will pay. Cooncilors will pay with there seats.
2. Cancel the trams Edinburgh residents will pay. Cooncilors will pay with there seats.

38

nSyratzcGlaw,

10/03/2009 13:08:04
35 Its lazy reporting. JP are worth diddly squat right now, do you think they are giong to spend half a day on the phone in order to get the facts straight ?
39

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 13:18:56
#37

Option 2 is really the only acceptable one in that we (the Council Tax payers of Edinburgh) will pay a lot less if this abomination is cancelled now.

It is something of a scandal however, that the politicians and councillors who forced this through will escape unscathed other than of course to lose their seats in many cases.

In my view this is a case where those responsible should be personally charged for the outstanding balances and cash shortfalls. It is also something of a scandal that the true figures, i.e. money spent to-date, how far things are behind schedule, etc should be made public but of course, are not.

Perhaps it is time for a full-scale investigation by the National Audit?

40

Bootboy,

10/03/2009 13:19:56
The key to successful project management is to have the plan which meets the needs finalised and locked. Then its a case that the plan is stuck to by the project manager. Its even in the project management manual which was clearly not delivered to TIE!!!!

End this mess now and let the buses reclaim the streets!!!
41

Eric The Archer,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 13:20:32
Can anyone provide a list of all the Councillors who voted for the Edinburgh tram line? I would also like to know who voted against. I am sure that such a list would be useful come the next elections.
42

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 13:24:13
Eric (42) - all the Edinburgh councillors voted for the project, with the exception of the SNP councillors and Councillor Kate McKenzie (Cons.) who abstained and was disciplined for having done so.
43

Myke Wylson,

Free Food Wheeler 10/03/2009 13:26:13
With all these freebies from Lothian Buses, tie and transport edinburgh - Wheeler will say anything for pies.

Gifts and hospitality

Date lodged Gift/Hospitality

28/05/07 Lunch, £10, Evening News - 25 May 2007
12/06/07 Lunch, £20, Cancer Research UK - 11 June 2007
19/06/07 Lunch, £35, Lothian Buses plc - 13 June 2007
19/06/07 Dinner, £25, The Royal Bank of Scotland plc - 12 June 2007
07/08/07 Ticket for Match and Hospitality, £30, Heart of Midlothian FC- 28 July 2007
11/10/07 Dinner, £30, David Hume Institute - 4 October 2007
24/10/07 Lunch, £20, Stevenson College - 17 October 2007
11/11/07 Dinner and Hotel Accommodation, £160, tie Ltd - 29 October 2007
16/11/07 Lunch, £25, Napier University, 15 November 2007
21/01/08 Travel and Lunch, £150, Lothian Buses plc, 7 November 2007
05/02/08 Tickets for Match and Hospitality, £200, tie Ltd, 3 February 2008
07/02/08 Lunch, £40, Tom Ponton, 5 February 2008
20/02/08 Lunch, £30, Transport Edinburgh Ltd, 13 February 2008
18/03/08 Dinner for two, £60, Lothian Buses plc, 15 March 2008
10/04/08 Dinner, £30, tie Ltd, 8 April 2008
20/05/08 Travel and Subsistance costs, £400, Optimum Conference Organisers, 15/17 April 2008
02/06/08 Dinner, £30, ASH GUPTA, 29 May 2008
11/06/08 Lunch and Book, £40, Lothian Buses plc, 10 June 2008
01/07/08 Book and Cuff links, £25, Cllr Leadman - Ontario, 30 June 2008
28/08/08 Dinner, £40, Sir Terry Farrell, 25 August 2008
28/08/08 Breakfast, £20, Edinburgh Airport Ltd, 27 August 2008
28/08/08 Dinner, £45, Lothian Buses plc, 27 August 2008
05/09/08 Lunch, £12, Evening News, 3 September 2008
29/09/08 Dinner, £40, Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport, Scottish Annual Dinner, 25 September 2008
04/11/08 Receipt at Cafe Andaluz, £20, 29 October 2008
08/12/08 Lunch, £15, Royal Incorporation of Architects in Scotland, 3 December 2008
11/12/08 Drinks Reception, £15, George Street Ass
44

An angry man,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 13:27:46
@#42 And then we can start shooting them as I've recommended all along.
45

OddJob,

Edinboring 10/03/2009 13:28:45
If those saying "scrap it now" could explain the rationale to me I'd be ever so grateful!

Ta.
46

Proghead,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 13:29:07
Here we go again. The Evening 'we hate trams' News finding more 'news' about the tram project. Print something else !!! It's a massive project, of course there are going to be overuns, delays, unforseen problems. Have you never had the builders in ? Get it finished and stop bleating like the nimbys you are.
47

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 13:29:56
(45) - an interesting suggestion.

Perhaps a term in the stocks with all rotten tomatoes charged at £10 a shot might raise some funds?
48

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 13:31:25
#46

Could you possibly explain the rationale for keeping it?

49

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 13:32:45
Proghead (47) - I see the Council are planning to borrow money towards its existing £45m contribution to the tram scheme. Could you please advise where you think additional shortfalls and the ongoing tens of millions of pounds per annum required to subsidise the public transport system (FBC - Appendix III) should come from? Should the Council borrow that as well?
50

The Judge,

10/03/2009 13:32:54
Could someone please explain why Tie are taking Phil Wheeler plus guest to the football & throwing in hospitality?

Why do the feel the need to bribe a member of the Tie board with OUR money?

51

I don't buy the Evening News,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 13:33:40
How much design has to go into a tram line? Surely they're just metal tracks sunk into tarmac?
52

Proghead,

10/03/2009 13:37:48
#50 Sarah B

Ask yourself a question - Why do we pay council tax ? Mine is £2200 a year for getting my bins emptied. I have no street lighting, no water supply ( it's private ) and no mains gas, but the council value my property at that level. I would rather it was spent on world class public services, like a tram system, than all of the waste I suspect is going on. Also the coucils contribution is 10 % of the actual cost, but they will get a return when it's finished by upping business rates on the tram routes. Fun fun
53

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 13:44:37
Proghead (53) - and whilst the money is to go on the tram, it will be unable to go on anything else.

Your Council Tax would have to be increased to pay for the tram as there is currently no allowance in the budget for any cost overruns. I am not convinced that such an increase for such a purpose would be generally popular with Edinburgh Council Tax payers.

Even if the tram is completed, we are then looking at massive amounts of money being needed by the new public transport company to cover the losses generated by the tram. Either that, or we stand by whilst the new company increases fares and cuts bus services and frequencies in an attempt to breakeven. I disagree that all this is likely to result in a better public transport system or lower car usage.
54

Proghead,

10/03/2009 13:53:10
54 - Sarah B

But what else does it go on ? That was my question. I do not believe we currently get VFM on our council tax. Stop wasting it somewhere else and funds would be available. If you want to have an integrated transport solutuion, it can't be run by private enterprise alone, it has to be subsidised. Look at all the bus companies duplicating 'profitable' routes and ignoring ones that would be a service
55

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 13:58:41
Proghead (55) - seems to me that Lothian Buses did a pretty good job of providing a public transport system which did not require subsidy at all, except for a few routes that the Council chose to adopt.

It also managed to increase public transport usage to a level only bettered by London. In my view it did that by providing a good network, with frequent and reliable services for relatively cheap fares. That is how it encouraged car drivers to leave their vehicles at home.

It was a good formula. The introduction of the tram scheme is highly unlikely to see a better public transport service than previously and I, therefore, do not see the justification for expecting Council Tax payers to pay more.

Your argument seems that we should waste money elsewhere so that we can waste money on the tram.
56

Hugh Roscombe,

10/03/2009 14:03:16
Get the trams ready now and drag Edinburgh into the 20th century.
57

Proghead,

10/03/2009 14:03:49
56 - Sarah B

No I said we should STOP wasting money elsewhere so that we can SAVE that money to use on the trams. As far as I can see, the blue meanies do a better job at 'encouraging' people out of the city in their cars than the buses do.
58

Proghead,

10/03/2009 14:04:53
57 - Hugh

Were you being ironic ? We are already into the 21st Century
59

Hugh Roscombe,

10/03/2009 14:06:08
59

My point exactly. Scrap the thing now.
60

Big bob 79,

10/03/2009 14:08:23
#56
Lothian Buses rely heavily on subsidies, most routes have money pumped into them by the council to keep the buses on the road before 7am and after 7pm, Lothian has been asset stripped its buses are rented and as for passenger increses over the last 10 years it was fabficated as the new management has foundout counting journies made instead of actual passengers carried, dont be fooled
LB is undergoing right now MAJOR cuts and down sizing and its looking very much like TIE,TEL and LB will be rolled into one then sold off to fill the massive funding black hole



61

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 14:09:20
Sarah & Proghead

It was promised faithfully (well, as faithfully as a politician can be) that this project would under no circumstances be funded from the Council Tax.

Well, let's just wait and see on that one.

My own view is that the various cut-backs in 'servioes' we have seen lately are the result of Council Tax funds being diverted against the 'evil day' that the City Fathers are forced to sdmit that they (i.e. 'we') can't pay for it.

At the end of the day, if this crazy 'project' is allowed to continue, the Council will be forced to up the Council Tax to pay for this and in the process will be committing political suicide.

Personally I'm going to have a very hard job deciding who to support in the next elections.



62

pongo2009,

10/03/2009 14:09:21
"TIE today said it would not be drawn on the overrun, but added that completing the design work was a "contractual responsibility" for the contractors."


well perhaps, but without public knowledge of how the contractor is remunerated under the Contract, an irrelevent and fatuous comment


63

Proghead,

10/03/2009 14:12:35
#62

Yes, fair point. Who are you going to vote for ? Bigger question than just the trams. Here come nursey with my pills. Fun fun
64

Real Resident of Edinburgh,

10/03/2009 14:12:55
#43 That's not strictly true. When the "Financial Close and Notification of Contract Award" for the Edinburgh Tram project came before the Council on 1st May 2008, all 58 Councillors voted in favour of proceeding. Check it out here:

http://cpol.edinburgh.gov.uk/getdoc_ext.asp?DocId=111850

- pages 12-13 of that document indicate there was no division. Indeed, paragraph 6 on page 13 was an 'amendment' actually put forward by the SNP.

ALL 58 supported the close of the contracts. EVERY ONE.
65

Jenny Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-MacArthur,

10/03/2009 14:15:27
#7 Voice of reason

As you seem to be suffering from amnesia, let me remind you of the full text of that referendum:

People of Edinburgh!

Do you want…

(1) Trams?

(2) Nice trams?

(3) Nice, cuddly trams?

(4) Nice fluffy cuddly peekaboo wackadoo trams to kiss and hug?

(5) Brave rampant unashamed trams running wild and naked and free, casting off the shackles of "Christian morality" / financial reality and leaping gloriously into the Radiant Ecstasy of Being?

And may I remind you that every single person who voted, voted in favour of trams, with a staggering 272% of voters endorsing option (5)?

That's what we call democracy, and if you don't like it, naff off back to whatever theocratic fascist tyranny you come from!!
66

Jenny Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-MacArthur,

10/03/2009 14:17:15
#16 scotsol

You'll find we don't like sarcasm on this forum.
67

AB_R,

10/03/2009 14:20:29
The one thing that has been conviently omitted from the "footfall" figures is the rugby internationals that have taken place in Edinburgh. Both Wales and Italy have been in the city this year, last year it would have been England and France, the Welsh will have brought up more support than England and France combined.
68

Real Resident of Edinburgh,

10/03/2009 14:22:09
#28 All fifty-eight of the current Councillors voted for the "Financial Close and Notification of Contract Award" for the Edinburgh Tram project when it came before the Council on 1st May 2008. Check it out here (page 12-13 of this minute):

http://cpol.edinburgh.gov.uk/getdoc_ext.asp?DocId=111850

Here's the full list of names:

Elaine Aitken
Ewan Aitken
Robert C Aldridge
Jeremy R Balfour
Eric Barry
David Beckett
Angela Blacklock
Mike Bridgman
Deidre Brock
Gordon Buchan
Tom Buchanan
Steve Burgess
Andrew Burns
Ronald Cairns
Steve Cardownie
Maggie Chapman
Maureen M Child
Joanna Coleman
Jennifer A Dawe
Charles Dundas
Paul G Edie
Nick Elliott-Cannon
Paul Godzik
Norma Hart
Stephen Hawkins
Ricky Henderson
Lesley Hinds
Allan G Jackson
Alison Johnstone
Colin Keir
Louise Lang
Jim Lowrie
Gordon Mac kenzie
Kate MacKenzie
Marilyne A MacLaren
Elizabeth Mag inn is
Mark Mclnnes
Stuart Roy Mclvor
Tim McKay
Eric Milligan
Elaine Morris
Joanna Mowat
Rob Munn
Gordon J Munro
Ian Murray
Alastair Paisley
Gary Peacock
Ian Perry
Cameron Rose
Jason G Rust
Conor Snowden
Marjorie Thomas
Stefan Tym kewycz
Phil Wheeler
lain Whyte
Donald Wilson
Norrie Work
69

Real Resident of Edinburgh,

10/03/2009 14:25:29
Sorry - missed out the Lord Provost:

The Right Honourable George Grubb.

And, sadly, Elizabeth Maginnis (in the list above) is now deceased.
70

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 14:34:06
Proghead (58) - Stringent as the blue meanies can be, I doubt that they could have achieved bus passenger number increases of around 1.5 million year on year for the 7 years prior to the tram scheme commencing.

Much as you are keen to have the trams, it is the buses that will continue to transport the vast majority of public transport users. The city could and would cope without the tramline, but I do not believe the city would cope without the buses.
71

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 14:38:08
Real Resident - I think you are correct that they all voted to sign the contracts, but I think the decision to approve the business case at the end of 2007 was not supported by the SNP group or Councillor Kate McKenzie.

I suppose the thinking was that, as the Council had approved the business case, there was nothing for it but to sign the contracts.

Who knows? The workings of a politician's mind is something quite beyond me.
72

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 14:42:11
Peter (62) - I also will have difficulty in deciding how to use my vote.

Re the funding of any shortfall, I saw Councillor Cardownie recently suggesting that it may be an option to use money from the Capital Projects Budget rather than Council Tax increases. Of course, that would mean that other new projects would have to wait until the tram had received as much money as it required.
73

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 14:46:25
Big Bob 79 (61) - that is an interesting post. Can you provide me with a link so that I can check that information?

In relation to your second paragraph, I am not sure whether it will require to be sold to fill the black hole; or whether it will be so weakened by the losses it will sustain after the tram starts running, that it will become subject to takeover. Either way, the result would be the same and Edinburgh would have a privatised system with all the disadvantages that would bring.
74

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 14:48:39
#71 Sarah,

"it is the buses that will continue to transport the vast majority of public transport users."

Absolutely spot-on as usual Sarah.

Obviously, with only one tram line buses must remain the only real transport option available to the majority of citizens, allowing of course, that the bus services are not subject to huge cuts in order to force people onto the trams.

Mind you, the trams will only be capable of carrying a max. of approx 5,000 passengers anyway, based on the 250 per vehicle stipulated at the moment multiplied by the 20/22 vehicles which would be purchased to start the 'service'.

75

Old Cartha Boy,

10/03/2009 14:49:54
I know this is about as scientific as the referendum results that brought us nearer the abyss with this project but here are the findings/votes of the EEN readers on the tram scheme.

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/template/VoteResults.aspx?SiteCode=EN&VoteQuestionID=31066

Looks conclusive to me!
76

RubberMaid,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 14:54:06
Pro trams or against trams this project looks like it is running at least one year late and now looks like it will only deliver half of the original plan for about twice the original price. I seem to remember costs being repeatedly revised and resubmitted to Parliament. I mean in April 2005 the budget stood at £243m for line 1 and £230m for line 2, then increased in September '05 to £539m for both lines and then a week after that resubmission a contingency of 80m was added along with another increase in budget.

With all this news emerging now of poor management, waste, and other troubles why has Parliament not sacked a single incompetent TIE / Edinburgh Council manager? Does this mean our elected officials think TIE / Edinburgh Council are blameless? Why hasn’t Parliament or ombudsman pursued those officials that must have concealed from parliament (the public) the true and appalling state of this tram project? Don’t they even care that public money is being so flagrantly wasted?
77

nSyratzcGlaw,

Angry of Kent 10/03/2009 14:55:12
Theres only one thing worse than cancer and thats people harping on about stuff in a virtual newspaper
78

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 15:13:22
#73 Sarah B,

Well done Sarah, talk about 'belling the cat'? As a matter of note and interest, I take it that Cardownie & Co are giving serious consideration to putting this cost(s) on to the Council Tax payer as a direct add-on?

I am afraid and sorry to say that I have long expected this would develope.

If so, what liars the body politic are.



79

Sorry Edinburgh,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 15:15:46
NUMBER 16, YOU ARE AN OBVIOUS BIGOT, WHY USE HOMOSEXUALS WHEN NO NEED TO, YOU HAVENT INCLUDED BLACK/ASIAN/ELDERLY/DISABLED PEOPLE OR DID YOU JUST FORGET YOU @RSE
80

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 15:21:35
Peter (79) - I am afraid I don't know what any of the policitians are planning to do as most seem to have been floored by recent events.

All I am aware of is that the SNP (Shirley-Anne Somerville and Steve Cardownie) have asked for an update as to the project's current financial position but that TIE have not given them that information yet.

81

Jenny Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-MacArthur,

10/03/2009 15:30:30
#43, #48, #50, #54, #56, #71, #72, #73, #74, #81

Why does this forum continue to allow the lunatic ravings of Sarah B?

This woman obviously knows nothing about anything and is having a nervous breakdown in public.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if she turned out to be a Roman Catholic bishop!!
82

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 15:34:32
#76 - our arrogant, toytown politicians don't give a (rhymes with 'Duck') what the public think - this is what Jason Rust (my cooncillor) told me on the subject:- "The days when action is taken on the back of an Evening News poll are thankfully not yet with us.
As for my reputation I am quite content."
Well there you have it. All we can do is keep bobarding the clowns and try to shake them out of their 'rabbits in the headlights' syndrome.
83

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 15:40:39
#82 Jenny

You couldn't be more wrong, Sarah has conducted careful research and produced a sensible analysis of the trams situation, perhaps you are just slightly envious of Sarah's well articulated arguments?

#81 Sarah, thanks for getting back. I am glad to hear that Mr Cardownie and others are attempting to wrench the facts from TIE et al, but perhaps it is time to request the services of Audit Scotland?

I fear (of course) that these costs will be passed on to we poor Council Tax payers and in some respects I can't wait to hear the anguished wails of the tram supporters if/when that happens (my own wails will be pretty loud I can assure you!).

You won't be able to give away property in Edinburgh if this worst-case scenario happens.



84

Big bob 79,

10/03/2009 15:46:10
#74 I cannot for each and every route, sorry. But I can give you a recent example
http://cpol.edinburgh.gov.uk/getdoc_ext.asp?DocId=122595
Here you will see the type of funding thats offered and the pattern of gettign extra cash for routes, LB withdraws the route as it not profitable, locals complain, CEC stumps up more cash.
Another source of income which is abused is CEC route development funds.
4 New buses were bought for service 60 with CEC route development cash.
LB then withdraws the route and retains the buses? now running on the 13.
The new operator never got the buses which were paid for by CEC the buses that are running have no ability to take wheelchairs



85

nSyratzcGlaw,

10/03/2009 15:55:15
Woo, JPR up 42% today. Does anyone here work for the Scotsman ? Whats the insider knowledge ?!
86

Hesiod Claxton,

10/03/2009 16:18:07
Peter #84

Is there a misunderstanding here?

Jenny Mac Mac Mac isn't a pro-trams commenter. Quite the reverse: she's a hostile parody of one.

So if she calls Sarah B an ignorant lunatic, it's a compliment to Sarah's knowledge and good sense.
87

Ron S,

Within 750m of a proposed tram line (this might ch 10/03/2009 16:19:49
#83 Thomas
"As for my reputation I am quite content."
That's what Teflon Trevor thought - before he bit the electoral dust. Arrogance didn't do Dougie Anderson much good either, in the end.
I think that the councillors know that they are in for a god hiding for this tram fiasco.
88

Ron S,

10/03/2009 16:20:56
I meant good!
89

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 16:21:17
#87 Hesiod,

Obviously I missed that subtle point. It looks like you know Jenny better than I do.




90

Goat Boy,

10/03/2009 16:36:25
This is worrying news! I thought £33 million per mile was bad enough, but it looks like it might be even more.
91

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 16:42:21
Peter (84)/Hesiod (87) - thank you.

It's a bit like the guests of the Two Ronnies must have felt - an awful sort of backhanded compliment!

Peter - the end of the above article says that the Auditor General considers it "inappropriate to be involved at this stage". An MSP told me that the Auditor General does not look at schemes until they are finished one way or another. If he were to look at a scheme halfway through and (greater) problems subsequently materialised, then the Auditor General would become accountable so he does not look at projects until they are at an end.
92

Son of Gramsci,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 16:44:55
Practical point:-

- I've looked at the "tram" on Princes Street.

- I've looked at the corner of North St Andrew Street and York Place.

- I can't figure out how the tram will get round the corner, which is tight and has a fairly steep slope on NSAS up to the Square.

Anyone figure this out?
93

Capitalistic,

Edin 10/03/2009 16:45:23
This is the most important project in the capital this decade. This tram needs to de finished. Not today and not tommorow, but someday soon the economy will recover and we need more houses in the city, access to the expaning airport for commerce and tourism and a way of moving people that is efficient and modern. To stop now will look short sighted to those who live in the city a few years from now. We need to take the hit and move on, get it built.

P.S. Isn't Princess Street nice and quiet without the traffic apart from those bloody tartan shops. Trams only?
94

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 16:55:53
#88 - Ah, Trevor and Donald, Arch-Narcissists - if they'd been chocolate, they'd both have eaten themselves! Where Are They Now?
95

Liz,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 16:57:32
#94
"P.S. Isn't Princess Street nice and quiet without the traffic apart from those bloody tartan shops. Trams only?"

No, it is a bl**dy awful mess and those responsible need to be strung up! How on earth can it take more than a couple of weeks to lay the tracks etc?

As for being quiet and making it tram only in the future. What about all the poor sods for whom the tram will not serve!? (what? 90% of the city?) the rest of us will still need to get around. How about the £500million+ had been spent on electric buses? Quiet, allegedly environmentally friendly and could be implemented across the whole city with out the need for installing expensive rails...
96

grumpy200,

edinburgh 10/03/2009 17:02:53
Every day brings yet another story of delay, overspend and failure in respect of the Tram project. It is patently clear that the final outcome is going to be one with which nobody will be happy, So--- can we find an OUT right now. I believe that we can. Forget Trams and concentrate on trolley-buses. No more need to lay tracks or build any more bridges/embankments; only overhead cables needed; Full flexibility to cover the WHOLE city so that ALL voters can use them; Despite what has been said about the quietness of trams, T/buses are much quieter; and every passenger gets a seat, not just one in three. This will use much of the work now done, including the depot at Gogar

Grumpy200
97

nSyratzcGlaw,

10/03/2009 17:08:52
Im really happy I dont actually know any of you miserybags personally.
98

Eliz,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 17:10:26
#93 As far as I know, that corner is to be "redesigned" to accommodate the limited tram.
99

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 17:12:35
#92 sarah,

Thanks again, I didn't read that last part at all, otherwise I wouldn't have been suggesting an investigation by the National Audit Office.

#94 Capitalistic,

"someday soon the economy will recover."

Sorry , but you probably couldn't be more wrong. While I am not an economist, I have two good friends who are (one is very much in the public eye at the moment). Both tell me that the current recession will continue certainly until the end of this year and most probably into the next year. It is predicted that no really perceptible change will be seen until well into 2011. In these circumstances, I (for one) can't see any organisations within the UK who will offer to bail out this project and City.

We have to be realistic and cancel the tram scheme now before the City of Edinburgh and its citizens are ruined. Better to lose the £300 million currently supposedly spent rather than a £1billion + (money we don't have) in 2 or 3 years.



100

Jenny Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-Mac-MacArthur,

10/03/2009 17:13:29
#93

This is exactly the kind of bigoted insistence on "basic physics" that led to Sir Isaac Newton being burned at the stake!

What you don't grasp, curled up nice and snug in your fundamentalist cocoon, is that TRAMS CAN DO ANYTHING. They can burrow, they can fly, they can travel faster than light!

So OF COURSE they can go round corners. Even "tight" corners (ooh, aren't you clever, using a big scientific word!).

In fact, corners - like every other obstacle, physical, financial, political, whatever - are utterly powerless against the irresistible shape-shifting post-quantum ultra-science of The Tram!

Resistance is useless! Hallelujah!!
101

The Judge,

10/03/2009 17:40:04
#93 The tram in Princes St is only a 3/4 scale model not a full sized tram. It's worse than you thought.
102

piper,

10/03/2009 17:49:55
THEY should have went to IKEA
103

Boy Wonder,

10/03/2009 18:06:15
TImE to get shot of this whole ill-fated disaster and try to save some face!
104

GrahamH,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 18:12:45
Scrap it now, pay a couple of penalties, save hundreds of millions. Council wants to save face then have a referendum, which they should have had to start with.
105

regentlad,

Lothian 10/03/2009 18:14:38
93: The junction of York Pl/St Andrew St was one of the most difficult turns for Edinburgh's old trams - and remember those were not even half the length of the proposed 'world class trams'. The camber in the road had to be backed-up and the pavements narrowed. Its unlikely the New York designers will pick up on much of these blackspots - I'm not surprised they've still not finished the designs. This a job better placed with local project people, yet another contract given overseas.

Consider also the circumference required for a tram of the size proposed to negotiate turns and curves. In the old days at the Mound route 23 and 27 trams from Hanover Street had to cross to the other side of the road at The Mound to negotiate the curve there. The tram project will only have one line and fortunately not too many curves but I'd guess that no traffic, neither cars, buses or cycles will be allowed to operate on the same roadway. The Council haven't stated this as yet.
106

Euan,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 18:19:22
'The lack of finalised designs is at the heart of an ongoing dispute between tram firm TIE and its German contractor Bilfinger Berger. '

So people are like David Mackay and Phil Wheeler still saying that Bilfinger Berger are 'holding us to ransom'?

Hmmmm, I would have said it was obvious who was at fault and ultimately responsible for the complete breakdown of planning, failed completion of infrastructure works and enormous cost over-runs of this doomed project.

It was obvious from the start that TIE was responsible for the dire situation the tram project finds itself in, and there can be no doubt about that whatsoever.

Shame on all of them.

Scrapping this project now HAS to happen, otherwise we are going to see Edinburgh fall into a very, very sorry state over the next few years...
107

Mad Meg,

10/03/2009 18:21:05
It's not too late to re-route the tram so that it goes past Cobbinshaw House at Calder Gardens.
That would kill the trams once and for all.

108

Euan,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 18:32:05
#109 Regentlad

Good points.

Concerns which were also raised some months ago about the almost certain very high-pitched screeching noises as the huge trams try to negotiate their way into St Andrews square.

We've all heard trains on tracks and how loud and irritating they can be.

I can hardly see local residents being too pleased when they are woken up by a god awful noise as a late night tram rumbles past.

Then again it's all hypothetical. With the entire project on it's knees, with a bit of luck and common sense applied, we'll never see any trams blundering their way through Edinburgh's streets..


109

regentlad,

Lothian 10/03/2009 18:42:33
It was the Labour, Tory and Lib-Dem councillors and MSP's who supported the tram project. Perhaps the SNP could have done more to stop it as their election manifesto suggested. I believe the Tories most culpable as it was they who voted to abandon Edinburgh's trams in the 1950's and sent millions of pounds of civic assets to the scrapheap.

Two politicians who have been consistent are Kenny McAskill who correctly stated the money would have been better spent on the bus system and Shirley-Ann Sommerville who has repeatedly asked Audit Scotland to become involved. After all, it was Audit Scotland who checked the tram contracts and stated they made business sense. So now that the contract has gone pear-shaped and the contractors are claiming between 20 and 80 million pounds (we don't know exact figure!), why are Audit Scotland not stepping in? What do they have to hide after all they checked all contracts. What's the point in having auditors if they're going to hide and run away when a huge problem like his occurs?
110

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 18:51:09
#93 & #99 & #99, you're correct - the NStASt/York Place Junction will have to be reconstructed with quite a bit of superelevation so that these articulated monsters don't 'ground' as they take the corner. The resulting 'humph' should make things interesting for any traffic still allowed to travel between Queen St and York Place. It'll also be interesting to see if TIE's designers notice the rather interesting 'heave' that's apparent all the way along the north side of Queen Street from the NStASt junction - there's longitudinal cracks in the road, the kerbline and the paving slabs, as well as rucking of the tarmac, suggesting the road foundation might be slipping towards Queen St Gardens like an old carpet. Only the trees seem to be supporting it, and the large gas main, and electic interconnector. But what would I know?
And #109, you're right about the Mound Junction, too - the police pointsmen of old had to keep their wits about them on the Mound double point, to avoid the tram's swept path; and they were only 4-wheelers.
#108 - Absolutely Brilliant!
111

regentlad,

Lothian 10/03/2009 18:57:14
112: Those living directly on the tram route will certainly become experts on the tram timetable. Noise/vibration will be difficult to abate and of course there is also the scenario of electrical interference on residents TV's and computers though TiE were studying ways to reduce/avoid this just prior to Willie Gallacher leaving. In respect of noise, there aren't too many stopping places - a tram running down Leith Walk won't be heard until it brakes - but vibration could well be unavoidable as these will be huge trams. I'd say though that if the track and roadway are well maintained then a smooth passage will ensure noise/vibration kept to minimum.
112

regentlad,

Lothian 10/03/2009 19:29:41
44: Cllr Wheeler certainly enjoys his lunches - if others are paying. Even a charity giving him a 20 pound lunch on 12 June 2007! And educational institutions like Napier and Stevenson are always complaining they don't get enough funding. Time they scaled down the meals they hand out. It appears from the list Wheeler and TiE's contribution to transport matters in Edinburgh consist of sitting down and gorging themselves.

Electors of Corstorphine/Murrayfield - don't seek out your local councillor at feeding time, be a pity to disturb the man as he gulps down his free vino.
113

Sarah B,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 19:52:13
Regentlad (115) - Did Audit Scotland did check the contracts?

I think they were asked to look at the project just after the last election but they set their own remit and looked only at the methodology used to arrive at costs. At that time, I don't think the contracts were finalised.

I agree the Tories are, indeed, culpable as they stated their support was based on a robust business case. In my view, the BC never was robust but they have strenuously backed the project from the start.
114

your the best,

lothian 10/03/2009 21:21:37
No doubt they are milking this for all its worth. Another free villa in the med. Remember the trams go to Granton and Sighthill.. Ned country. watch your purse when there is standing room only. And by the size of them it looks like that is going to be often!
115

COLINTON.MAINS,

Oakville Ontario 10/03/2009 21:22:26
the.city.of.EDINBURGH.with.one.of.the.best;public.transport.systems.in.the.world.needed.this..nightmare.like.a.hole.in.the.head.for.a.city.so.small.shear.stupidity
116

krusty the klown,

10/03/2009 21:50:49
#123 well, millions were spent over budget for a parliament and it's associated spongers that were not really needed cos there already was an established parliament, so, what's the harm for some nice modern public transport that will get me to work when there's no diesel left?
117

Mr G saunders,

cramond 10/03/2009 22:17:14
Big bob, u know nothing of lothian Buses, i can assure you as i work there that the company has not been 'asset stripped' and that we do not receive funding to keep the buses on the road in the early mornings and in the evenings. The exact opposite is true with Lothian giving the councils that own us a considerable dividend every year!! Nor are the buses 'rented' wot an absolute load of rubbish!! unless you know what you are talking about then please keep your ill informed rants to yourself
118

Julian.,

edinburgh 10/03/2009 22:35:13
Euan,

What about those victorians who never kept records of the pipes they laid. Do they not bear some responsibility for the delays...or is that just another one of David Mackay's bare faced lies?

PETER-VERY DISAPPOINTED,

Sorry mate, but you can't construct an argument on the basis of figures plucked from the air. 1bn+ for the tram line. Why don't we just make it £2bn? Then nobody (not even me) could possibly argue against it going ahead;-)


119

Julian.,

edinburgh 10/03/2009 22:36:17
Sorry, should have said argue for it going ahead.
120

Thomas the Tank,

Edinburgh 10/03/2009 23:22:13
#126 - I doubt very much there are any 'Victorian pipes' still in use - that's just another of TIE's Lies and Excuses. Any old cast ironwork still in the ground will likely have been bypassed by modern services, often by 'moling' for smaller bores, but the Utility Companies found it cheaper and easier just to leave the abandoned plant where it was. The Council Suits knew places like Leith Walk were a mares nest but deliberately underestimated the complexity of the task to sell the Tram Scheme to gullible idiot politicians. Do you know anything about roadworks in Edinburgh? Like, why the Council neglected the opportunity for the last 25 years or so to map new/replacement services as they were installed?
121

krusty the klown,

10/03/2009 23:51:06
#131 - your ignorance is equally incredible,anyway perhaps Paulo you should stick to driving around the streets in the digital transport you are clearly more accustomed to?
122

Julian.,

edinburgh 10/03/2009 23:56:11
Thomas the tank,

I'm beginning to see a pattern emerging here with the anti-tram camp: Take any positive tram piece of infomation, dismiss it automatically as lies and spin by TIE, fail to come up with any evidence to back this up. LOVELY JUBBLY, JOB DONE.
123

Julian.,

edinburgh 11/03/2009 00:00:27
But OK, lets not take what TIE say at face value about the pipes.

How about Scottish Water?

"But Scottish Water insisted it was investing heavily to reduce the leakage levels from the city's crumbling Victorian-era network of water pipes"

Or how about Transco?

"Most of the iron pipes are over 40
years old; some are more than 100 years old. Transco prioritises the replacement of
these pipes"

Or are they just mouthpieces for TIE as well?
124

Julian.,

edinburgh 11/03/2009 00:05:38
Paolo,

Thanks for that.

No I don't but I suppose I would benefit from line 3 if it ever arrives.

But you have to admit that some of the anti-tram misinformation spread about on this site is as bad as the accusations being made against TIE.

125

easts_mat,

Sydney 11/03/2009 00:31:40
Having lived in Edinburgh for three years, it is great to see the whinge, no progress attitude hasn't changed one bit. Edinburgh is a beautiful city but it is hardly a world class city (YET). The infrastructure in the city is quite poor, and the trams are an excellent example of forward planning by the city council. Ten years time, population of around a million people in the greater edinburgh area. you would be whinging that the trams were never built.
126

easts_mat,

Sydney 11/03/2009 00:40:34
#137 - living in a country with the second highest living standards and living in the times magazine acclaimed top ten city in the world, living here is quite good. constant 25 degrees, sunny days and a country NOT in recession
127

tumshie heid,

11/03/2009 08:04:42
Julian, where is the positive tram information that you talk of? Every day another example of TIE's blatent incompetance/ dishonesty is revealed. Didn't you categorically deny that the guided busway was inoperable due to the trams only last week, yet that is exactly the case?
There isn't really an "anti tram camp", just the vast majority of people who realise that the trams are an unneccessary, wasteful blight on Scotland's budget. They will serve no purpose at all to most of Edinburgh's commuters.
They will of course look nice and shiny so that self serving councillors can admire their arrogant little faces in the reflection off the side.
128

tumshie heid,

11/03/2009 08:11:47
126 Glad to see you have made it back to your wonderful city. Nice to see the stereotypical Aussie inhabitant exists. My question is if Aussieland is as great as its inhabitants will loudly tell anyone who listens in bars over here then why are you all here?
Why not just stay in your superior country and laugh at the rest of the world.
Whilst Australia still allows drive through off licences there will never be a recession there.
129

Peter - very disappointed/concerned,

Edinburgh 11/03/2009 10:28:12
#119 Julian.

Admittedly that figure is my own speculation, but based on past experiences here in Scotland/UK, works of this nature (e.g. Holyrood, the Millenium Dome) end up being many times the original estimates.

It would appear that Mr Cardownie has been attempting to get exact figures on current expenditure and timings from TIE without success. To me this would indicate that either they can't produce these figures (which seems most unlikely) or don't want to make them public which I think indicates that they are well over-budget as things stand.

Again, based on Hoyrood, the original estimate was £40 million, that ended up being a mere £432 million (10 times the original figure).

I would respectfully suggest that the trams (allowing that this daft project goes ahead) will be at least twice the current estimate.

May I enquire, would you be happy to meet large (or indeed any) increases in Council Tax to meet the shortfall? I think there can be little doubt that our local political masters are considering this as they will have no other options in these times of recession.

#117 krusty the klown,

"some nice modern public transport that will get me to work when there's no diesel left?"

I wouldn't worry about there being no diesel left Krusty, we will all be long dead before that happens.

You can safely depend on bus services for a long time yet be they diesel or electrically powered which seems to be seriously suggested for newer/replacement fleets.



130

OddJob,

Edinboring 11/03/2009 12:16:55
#49

Sure:

We've probably already spent £350,000,000 on it and "scrapping it now" would probably cost another £100,000,000. A total cost of £450,000,000 for no change to the transport system and 3 years of disruption for traders in Leith Walk, princes St and the West End - not to mention the general public.

The flip-side being a likely total cost of £150,000,000 more and a new transport system to bring people into the heart of the city from the airport and to take the same people from Princes St out to Leith - thus giving the Leith Walk and West End traders a return for the disruption they have had to endure. The genral public should benefit from the lack of bus number 22s clogging up Princes St as they wait patiently in line behind each other.

Whether or not the Tram work should have started in the first place is another debate - but scrapping it now would be ridiculous.
131

Happy Hibee,

13/03/2009 16:49:10
The design is late because the authorities who have to approve it have continually failed to give direction, clear guidance and make decissions.

Once a design is produced it has to go the the council (Highways, Planning, etc), did you not notice the senior council staff drafted into tie to try and unblock the problems they have created!!!!

Wait till the full story gets out, you will be stunned.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



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.