Now being spoken about on R4...
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Tram latest
(83 posts)-
Posted 13 years ago #
-
"Tom Buchanan is talking about putting the trams to a referendum with choices of Haymarket, St Andrew's Square or Leith for destination."
Oh for ****s sake, just make a ****ing decision will you? Just ****ing do something and stop ****ing about. **** **** ***ity ****. You bunch of *******s
Can I just note for the record - this is possibly the only place I have ever seen the trams discussed in a reasonable and intelligent way with opposite (rather than opposing) views being able to debate the matter in a rational manner.
Sorry...
Posted 13 years ago # -
@Min that was perfectly rational and I don't think it contained any swear words.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Well if anybody can see any swear words it is just their dirty minds. ;-) Perhaps I should stand in the next election?
Posted 13 years ago # -
Seriously, this went waaaaay beyond parody a long time ago and now it has gone waaaaay beyond even that. I am literally speechless. And angry.
Posted 13 years ago # -
This is making me want to riot.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Perhaps I should stand in the next election"
Not unless you are prepared to stand in all seats as the sole representative of the None Of The Above Party.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"This is making me want to riot."
One doesn't do thaat in Ednbraa.
Posted 13 years ago # -
No, apparently not. That is two of us so far, not much of a riot really..
Posted 13 years ago # -
The sad thing is that progress has been so slow that no decision is likely to be final or even noticed.
As Min was maybe saying we just want people to make decisions and stick by them. I would have though the 'people on the ground' would want to get ahead. I thought employment was hard to find. This should be a buyers market ;-) (sorry I know the tram project is quite different from anything anyone has ever come across. It will I'm sure form a core module in how not to make things happen...)Posted 13 years ago # -
So I don't think we're getting any tram going anywhere now.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Having followed the statements from the Lib Dem councillors on Newsnight Scotland following the recent vote for Haymarket, it would appear Swinney has cannily supplied them with a "significant change of circumstances" which means that another vote on the trams can be held on Friday (the deadline for Bilfinger Berger's breach of contract clause). Now that the SNP government has indicated it prefers St Andrews Square over Haymarket, it will be interesting to see what position the SNP group within CEC will take...
Posted 13 years ago # -
Posted 13 years ago #
-
Anyone wanting to make any sense of all this should watch the episode of "Yes, Minister" called "The Bed of Nails" - truly a work of genius (and appearently where the term Integrated Transport was first coined).
Posted 13 years ago # -
"so now it is going to St Andrew Square after all"
Don't believe everything you see on the internet.
They've still got to find the money to cover the current 'estimate'.
Then there'll be the next emergency begging bowl requirement in a couple of years.
Then the extra to meet the running costs which won't be met by the fares because (the sold off) Lothian Buses will be keeping its fares down.
I made all that up - bit like the projected tram costs...
Posted 13 years ago # -
So this is it? Final decision? Never to be changed again?
Right.Posted 13 years ago # -
"So, the trams will go to St Andrew Square"
Still not putting money on that.
First CEC has to 'find' the cash, then it has to be built within that new/current/revised/approxi-estimate.
Today's vote doesn't make it just happen - or remove many of the problems accumulated over past few years...
Will Princes Street be shut on Monday??
Posted 13 years ago # -
Yes. Expect a few more years of millions of pounds being thrown on the tram bonfire in the meantime.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Posted 13 years ago #
-
The one thing I feel that comes out of the St Andrews Square > Haymarket > back to St Andrews Square move is that it puts the SNP government slightly more behind the whole project than they were previously.
Will that have any finincial implications - i.e. a greater chance of government money?
Posted 13 years ago # -
it puts the SNP government slightly more behind the whole project than they were previously.
Got to remember that originally the SNP vote came mainly from north of Central Belt.
From a northern perspective the south is awash with infrastructure projects.
• M74
• Dalkeith Bypass completed
• Other roads I can't remember
• Forth Bridge
• Bathgate rail electrification
• Glasgow Airport rail link (cancelled but some money spent on prep work)
• Borders railway (although that's moving very slowly)
• Rail electrification between Edinburgh, Glasgow, Stirling
• Trams
• Glasgow subway revampMuch demand for road upgrades instead of anything involving rails....
Aberdeen bypass should please some voters in north though...
Posted 13 years ago # -
New A830 to Mallaig. That's probably not all that new anymore mind.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Why they didn't do this in the first place is beyond me. The SNP preferred to sit back and say "nothing to do with us". Finally they've seen sense.
However: "Significant challenges remain in completing the crucial Haymarket to St Andrew’s Square section. For example, the Scottish Government remain concerned that there are more than 700 separate instances where utilities may remain in conflict with the project design – some even after they were diverted as part of the earlier utilities diversion works contract."
Design changes? Or incompetent contractors?
Posted 13 years ago # -
Cabinet Secretary for Infrastructure and Capital Investment Alex Neil announced that a team of experienced project managers from Government agency Transport Scotland will fill key senior roles in the new governance structure with City of Edinburgh Council and will bring the professional approach that has seen major projects such as the M74, completed ahead of schedule and under budget.
Oh dear...
Posted 13 years ago # -
Yeah, exactly.
'On time' translated from politician speak: 30 years late.
'Under budget': only 4 times the original estimate, instead of 5 times.Posted 13 years ago # -
I think you're being a little selective there Crow.
The SNP said they didn't want to build it because it would never come in at the suggested budget. It seems they were right.
Wendy with her Lib Dem and Tory chums pushed it through the parliament. This was an attempt to derail the fledgeling SNP government in 2007 by sucking £500,00 out of their budget which could have been better spent elsewhere.
It was a unionist plan in the first place announced by the transport minister of the time Iain Grey in the early naughties. It should have been cancelled along with GARL but Wendy saw a chance for screwing over John Swinney and jumped at with no regard for the larger consequences.
Your local SNP councillors didn't want to be involved because it was a Hobson's choice. If they backed it they were tarred with the inevitable failure, if they didn't they were in trouble too.
Last month a Labour councillor put up a plan which she never expected to be accepted and was shocked when it was. It just got too stupid so Mr Swinney stepped in and allowed them a rethink.
I'm usure why green groups like this tram plan as it's a feeder for the airport at one end and new housing developments at the other.
Have you a different version of this?
Posted 13 years ago # -
@wee folding bike
That's a reasonable assessment.
I'm still not sure if I think opposition parties were merely playing politics with the minority SNP Gov. Some of them must have believed the tram was a good idea...
Certainly I think it;s true that a lot of people directly involved, believed that they would only have to wait for a change of government (and more money) - which didn't happen!
It's a shame Swinney/Salmond didn't have the nerve to stick to their manifesto promise.
"Your local SNP councillors didn't want to be involved because it was a Hobson's choice." I think that's unduly kind...
"Last month a Labour councillor put up a plan which she never expected to be accepted and was shocked when it was." True, but a bit more complicated.
It was a serious attempt to get the line built as far as Haymarket, with time to really cost the onward options and work out ways of paying for it. What Labour failed to do was promote the idea that this was the 'interim solution' - however undesirable.
This was used as an excuse for Transport Scotland/SG to step in - which should have happened about 3 years ago.
"I'm usure why green groups like this tram plan..." Yes, I have asked various people. Answer seldom gets better than 'public transport good' and 'it's just the first stage in a network'.
In short all parties, and CEC officials and tie staff are jointly and variously to blame.
Sadly no-one will truly be held held responsible. What might have been a good idea at one time is very unlikely to be worth all the money and 'grief'.
LATEST - BBC News - "contract with BB supposed to be signed at 4.00. Talks still going on".
Posted 13 years ago # -
It would not have been appropriate for the government to intervene. This was a local government affair. I can only imagine how it would have been covered in the Hootsmon and BBC if they had done. Swinnney was able to step in after the Haymarket vote because there was a material change. I suspect I would have been in two minds if I had been him. I might have let them hang themselves but perhaps he is a nicer person than me.
Posted 13 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
