Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 7

[Edinburger]

Ridgemont said:

Strocky said:

And by not engaging "properly" in the pantomime that is the first week in Westminster how has that materially affected the electorate in real terms?

See this is just copious bks. They were elected to Westminster. Unlike Sinn Fein, who will not take the oath, they have engaged with the Westminster process. If they don't like its procedures then they can work with the Speaker and the other parties to have Erskine May updated. But in the meantime they should STFU and behave like adults, because in all likelihood if they wish to achieve anything meaningful for their electorate they will need to learn how to work within the system, and not st on their own doorstep.

The reality is that the SNP know full well how to do this, as they have worked in coalition at Holyrood. The fact that they are behaving as they are, is clearly a deliberate strategy, and/or a failure of party discipline. Either of which is eroding any goodwill in *all* other parties.

Cretinous infants.

Have I woke up in 2017?

Jeez, judge them after a few months or years. Not the first week. Remember you're hearing all the negative bile from the anti-SNP and/or anti-Scottish English media. They won't report on the 'do what they're expected to do' stuff.

I'm often confused on whether this thread is full of old codgers complaining about today's kids, or whether it's kids sharing their immature views.

[James P]

Edinburger said:

AC43 said:

Edinburger said:

To all the cynics and criticisers of the Edinburgh trams:

- Nearly five million passengers have travelled on Edinburgh Trams during the first year
- That's about 370,000 ahead of target
- Set to surpass revenue targets by 3%

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-ea...

Is that he same tram system that was supposed to take three years to build but took 6, that was supposed to cost £375m but which will end up costing £1bn and which supposed to run all the way to Leith but only makes it to the end of Princes St?

Another fabulous use of taxpayers' money in Scotland. File alongside Scottish Parliament building.

Yep. Just like the Channel Tunnel which was over a year behind schedule and over £2bn over budget.

And?

[Edinburger]

James P said:

Edinburger said:

AC43 said:

Edinburger said:

To all the cynics and criticisers of the Edinburgh trams:

- Nearly five million passengers have travelled on Edinburgh Trams during the first year
- That's about 370,000 ahead of target
- Set to surpass revenue targets by 3%

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-ea...

Is that he same tram system that was supposed to take three years to build but took 6, that was supposed to cost £375m but which will end up costing £1bn and which supposed to run all the way to Leith but only makes it to the end of Princes St?

Another fabulous use of taxpayers' money in Scotland. File alongside Scottish Parliament building.

Yep. Just like the Channel Tunnel which was over a year behind schedule and over £2bn over budget.

And?

And... lots of huge engineering projects go over budget, over deadlines, etc. All over the world. Channel Tunnel was just one example. C'est la vie. Let's not be getting a semi just because you can have a dig at a Scottish project, eh?

[AstonZagato]

Edinburger said:

James P said:

Edinburger said:

AC43 said:

Edinburger said:

To all the cynics and criticisers of the Edinburgh trams:

- Nearly five million passengers have travelled on Edinburgh Trams during the first year
- That's about 370,000 ahead of target
- Set to surpass revenue targets by 3%

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-ea...

Is that he same tram system that was supposed to take three years to build but took 6, that was supposed to cost £375m but which will end up costing £1bn and which supposed to run all the way to Leith but only makes it to the end of Princes St?

Another fabulous use of taxpayers' money in Scotland. File alongside Scottish Parliament building.

Yep. Just like the Channel Tunnel which was over a year behind schedule and over £2bn over budget.

And?

And... lots of huge engineering projects go over budget, over deadlines, etc. All over the world. Channel Tunnel was just one example. C'est la vie. Let's not be getting a semi just because you can have a dig at a Scottish project, eh?

You were the one who tried to trumpet the "success" of the trams and now are getting all defensive now it is being pointed out that they aren't a success at all.

Having seen the chaos building them caused, given the overspend, given the time over-run, given that they were publicly funded, I think some good passenger numbers (over a made-up prediction of how many people might use it) are scarcely grounds for saying that the naysayers got it wrong.

One of the things I find strange when I fly into Edinburgh is that you can see the main north-bound railway lines running alongside the airport boundary. That railway line runs straight to Waverley (which is where the tram goes). I'm not sure of the logic but if the goal was a fast time from the airport, it would have been simplicity itself to build a connection. I always get a taxi as they are faster into town.

The tram is nice though. But for £1bn, I would hope so. I almost got caught out the first time I used it as I just managed to catch one as it pulled up to the stop. Once on, I discovered you can only buy a ticket on the platform.

[Edinburger]

AstonZagato said:

Edinburger said:

James P said:

Edinburger said:

AC43 said:

Edinburger said:

To all the cynics and criticisers of the Edinburgh trams:

- Nearly five million passengers have travelled on Edinburgh Trams during the first year
- That's about 370,000 ahead of target
- Set to surpass revenue targets by 3%

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-ea...

Is that he same tram system that was supposed to take three years to build but took 6, that was supposed to cost £375m but which will end up costing £1bn and which supposed to run all the way to Leith but only makes it to the end of Princes St?

Another fabulous use of taxpayers' money in Scotland. File alongside Scottish Parliament building.

Yep. Just like the Channel Tunnel which was over a year behind schedule and over £2bn over budget.

And?

And... lots of huge engineering projects go over budget, over deadlines, etc. All over the world. Channel Tunnel was just one example. C'est la vie. Let's not be getting a semi just because you can have a dig at a Scottish project, eh?

You were the one who tried to trumpet the "success" of the trams and now are getting all defensive now it is being pointed out that they aren't a success at all.

Having seen the chaos building them caused, given the overspend, given the time over-run, given that they were publicly funded, I think some good passenger numbers (over a made-up prediction of how many people might use it) are scarcely grounds for saying that the naysayers got it wrong.

One of the things I find strange when I fly into Edinburgh is that you can see the main north-bound railway lines running alongside the airport boundary. That railway line runs straight to Waverley (which is where the tram goes). I'm not sure of the logic but if the goal was a fast time from the airport, it would have been simplicity itself to build a connection. I always get a taxi as they are faster into town.

The tram is nice though. But for £1bn, I would hope so. I almost got caught out the first time I used it as I just managed to catch one as it pulled up to the stop. Once on, I discovered you can only buy a ticket on the platform.

Not defensive - corrective. But how can you say they aren't a success when they clearly are?!

I agree about the train line from the airport but there was some argument, maybe geological, about why simply diverting that wasn't possible, as well as the fact they wanted the tram to link business centres such as Gogarburn and South Gyle and also serve the locals. Correct outcome, in my view.

Taxis can be fast - but that's due to the (much loathed on PH) bus lanes. And they're relatively expensive.

You can buy tram tickets at the platform or online, and you can buy one on board but they charge a supplement for that just like many other trains do e.g. the Heathrow Express.

[Greedydog]

Edinburger said:

Not defensive - corrective. But how can you say they aren't a success when they clearly are?!

By what metric are they a 'success' other than the total passenger number being ahead of council projections?

5 million passengers seems a big number but it's a small fraction of the capacity over the period. How many of these were passengers were one off novelty trips? How many were pensioners riding free? How many of these take place outside peak commuting hours? Does this passenger figure even cover the running costs of the tram system let alone the interest payments on the initial investment?

I live, commute and work in Edinburgh regularly flying from Edinburgh airport and I (someone you would think would be the target demographic) have no use case for the tram. Most of my colleagues say the same. Granted, for those on the route it's a great service but the vast majority of the population of Edinburgh have no reason to use it on a daily or weekly basis.

Criticism of the tram debacle is well founded and comparing it to other over budget engineering projects is merely seeking to muddy the water. Articles such as the one you linked to with no meaningful metrics and are clearly PR attempting to put lipstick on a pig.

[blinkythefish]

Edinburger said:

Einion Yrth said:

Edinburger said:

I can't see how it would be quicker to take the bus to the airport rather than the tram, so no that's not correct.

I have no idea whether it is or not, and since I don't live anywhere near it I have no dog in the fight, but that is a massive logic fail, right there.

Just looked at Transport for Edinburgh and it's 35 mins from the airport to the city centre. That's no slower than a bus. Depending on the time of day, you could do it quicker in a car.

But airport > city centre journeys are aimed at business travellers and tourists and the tram is a pleasant, easy, efficient and inexpensive option.

Just as important, if not more, than whether it's a few minutes faster or slower than a bus.

The bus is only 30 minutes vs the trams 35.
It cost less to ride on (4.50 vs 5.00).
It was already in place and operating before the tram idea, so required 0 additional spending vs £1Bn.
It doesn't need loads of tracks laid all over the place, which are proving dangerous for cyclists and a boon for ambulance chasers:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east...

On top of that, busses can be re-directed for roadworks and when one breaks down it's a 20 minute job to bring in a tow truck and move it out the way, where the trams need speciallity lifting gear and shut the whole of the west end for four hours:

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/transpo...

Yeah, more trams!

[AstonZagato]

Edinburger said:

Not defensive - corrective. But how can you say they aren't a success when they clearly are?!

Edinburgher earlier:

Passenger numbers are only one metric. To declare it a success on one dimension and ignore the failures on other metrics is beneath you.

Edited by AstonZagato on Friday 29th May 11:07

[Big Rod]

AstonZagato said:

One of the things I find strange when I fly into Edinburgh is that you can see the main north-bound railway lines running alongside the airport boundary. That railway line runs straight to Waverley (which is where the tram goes). I'm not sure of the logic but if the goal was a fast time from the airport, it would have been simplicity itself to build a connection.

Always wondered that myself. The line runs past the west end of the runway would've been a lot more cost effective to build a station there in my mind.

[simoid]

Interesting that Edinburger thinks one can judge the Edinburgh trams after a year, but not the SNP MPs until 2017.

The trams are a ginormous waste of money. We could've given Edinburgh a decade of free bus travel (at current passenger numbers, granted) for the money spent on trams.

[simoid]

Re. The rail links to Edinburgh airport:

There was a £650m plan to link the airport directly to trains to all of Scotland's major cities with a station in the terminal, but this was cancelled by the SNP in 2007.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh_Airport_R...



http://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/work-begins...

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh_Gateway_s...

Now we have trams to Edinburgh for £1bn(?) and are getting a station on the Fife circle line and telling folk to get a tram to the Edinburgh stations if they want to get to Glasgow.

Edinburgh airport could've been hugely more accessible to public transport from across Scotland. I've lived around 10 miles from the airport by car but I couldn't get there using public transport in less than an hour and a half. It's actually slightly quicker to cycle!

[roachcoach]

simoid said:

Interesting that Edinburger thinks one can judge the Edinburgh trams after a year, but not the SNP MPs until 2017.

The trams are a ginormous waste of money. We could've given Edinburgh a decade of free bus travel (at current passenger numbers, granted) for the money spent on trams.

As I recall, the SNP promised to scrap them (they were a labour plan) but u-turned in a shock move for a political party reneging on promises as soon as elected.

Also the fundamental question is this:

What was the problem they solved? Where was the assessment of a problem so large it required hundreds of millions to solve? Or did we just burn a billion quid to bring back transport from antiquity because .... reasons (and we hate cars)?

A billion pounds....remind me how many teachers, nurses or firefighters that is?

[Welshbeef]

Edinburger said:

Yep. Just like the Channel Tunnel which was over a year behind schedule and over £2bn over budget.

So you are trying to compare one of the biggest and most challenging engineering projects ever undertaken in the UK - which is what 25miles long (and costs shared 50:50 with France so UK overspend is £1billion assuming your numbers are correct) to a one city tram system...

Now I'll not take away the skills required to plan and build the thing but I'd wager on the technically challenging perspective v channel tunnel it's like a 1 out of 10 v an 9/10 out of 10?

Tunnel 1 year over due
Tram 3 years overdue

Tram £675m overspent or more importantly nearly 3x overspent


Actually (assuming Wikipedia is correct) it was £4.650billion total cost and 80% over its predicted budget (tram 300% over)


Crucially why it was overspent
1. Enhanced safety
2. enhanced security
3. enhanced environmental demands
4. Financing costs (due to market forces) 140% higher than forecast

It's been making a profit for the UK govt & private share holders since 1995

[r11co]

Edinburger said:

I can't see how it would be quicker to take the bus to the airport rather than the tram, so no that's not correct.

I've used both, and thanks to Edinburgh's plethora of lanes and traffic light filtering specifically for busses they are indeed faster than the trams for the same journey.

It would have made infinitely more sense to build a railway terminal seeing as the line already ran past Edinburgh Airport. Edinburgh City Council cited Amsterdam as a place they were trying to emulate with the tram program, yet Schipol is connected to Amsterdam Central by railway using a station built below the airport concourse.

The tramline is a redundant vanity project that no doubt lined the pockets of a few council officials and their cronies who won the construction contracts.

Edited by r11co on Friday 29th May 12:42

[Welshbeef]

So £1billion to spend on transport infrastructure.

Was a tram system in The Scottish capital the best use of the money? (I don't know) what about all those who don't live in or go to the capital? Isn't this potentially the exact same point the SNP make about London? All that money going there to fix up and improve things yet Hebredies Glasgow Dundee Inverness and everywhere else?


Discuss.

[r11co]

Welshbeef said:

So £1billion to spend on transport infrastructure.

Was a tram system in The Scottish capital the best use of the money? (I don't know) what about all those who don't live in or go to the capital? Isn't this potentially the exact same point the SNP make about London? All that money going there to fix up and improve things yet Hebredies Glasgow Dundee Inverness and everywhere else?

Discuss.

Simple. SNP = gross hypocrisy.

[matchmaker]

r11co said:

I've used both, and thanks to Edinburgh's plethora of lanes and traffic light filtering specifically for busses they are indeed faster than the trams for the same journey.

It would indeed have made infinitely more sense to build a railway terminal seeing as the line already ran past Edinburgh Airport. Edinburgh City Council cited Amsterdam as a place they were trying to emulate with the tram program, yet Schipol is connected to Amsterdam Central by railway using a station built below the airport concourse.

The tramline is a redundant vanity project that no doubt lined the pockets of a few council officials and their cronies who won the construction contracts.

Transport in Edinburgh (TIE) also project managed the Stirling-Alloa-Kincardine railway reopening. Whilst a huge success in terms of passenger numbers, its costs rocketed from £37m to £85m and completion was two-and-a-half years late. It now needs extensively (and at £17m, expensively) rebuilt.

TIE couldn't run a bath. Subsequent rail reopening projects in Scotland (Airdie-Bathgate and the Borders Railway) have fared much better under Transport Scotland/Network Rail control.

[DocJock]

Welshbeef said:

Edinburger said:

Yep. Just like the Channel Tunnel which was over a year behind schedule and over £2bn over budget.

So you are trying to compare one of the biggest and most challenging engineering projects ever undertaken in the UK - which is what 25miles long (and costs shared 50:50 with France so UK overspend is £1billion assuming your numbers are correct) to a one city tram system...

Now I'll not take away the skills required to plan and build the thing but I'd wager on the technically challenging perspective v channel tunnel it's like a 1 out of 10 v an 9/10 out of 10?

Tunnel 1 year over due
Tram 3 years overdue

Tram £675m overspent or more importantly nearly 3x overspent


Actually (assuming Wikipedia is correct) it was £4.650billion total cost and 80% over its predicted budget (tram 300% over)


Crucially why it was overspent
1. Enhanced safety
2. enhanced security
3. enhanced environmental demands
4. Financing costs (due to market forces) 140% higher than forecast

It's been making a profit for the UK govt & private share holders since 1995

Worse still, 300% over budget and only delivering part of the promised infrastructure.

[///ajd]

Edinburger said:

///ajd said:

technodup said:

've a feeling that the phrase 'you never have a second chance to make a first impression' will trump your feeling, and they will continue to be treated with the contempt they deserve.

It's like a school trip to Alton Towers at the minute.

ETA at the Tory (and Labour) benches. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4NObZwYJDk&fe...

Edited by technodup on Thursday 28th May 16:07

LOL, funny to see just the SNP listening to themselves.

The tories even got their poshest toff in the history of posh toffs to treat them with respect at the end. A posh tory being exceedingly nice to them, that might have confused them!


On the white roses:
"The white roses were worn in tribute to Hugh McDiarmid, who wrote a poem called The Little White Rose of Scotland."

Hugh McDiarmid
"MacDiarmid listed Anglophobia among his hobbies"
"Letters were discovered showing that he believed a Nazi invasion of Britain would benefit Scotland. In a letter sent from Whalsay, Shetland, in April 1941, he wrote: “On balance I regard the Axis powers, tho’ more violently evil for the time being, less dangerous than our own government in the long run and indistinguishable in purpose." A year earlier, in June 1940, he wrote: “Although the Germans are appalling enough, they cannot win, but the British and French bourgeoisie can and they are a far greater enemy. If the Germans win they could not hold their gain for long, but if the French and British win it will be infinitely more difficult to get rid of them.” Marc Horne in the Daily Telegraph commented: "MacDiarmid flirted with fascism in his early thirties, when he believed it was a doctrine of the left. In two articles written in 1923, Plea for a Scottish Fascism and Programme for a Scottish Fascism, he appeared to support Mussolini’s regime."



So the SNP wore white roses to covertly celebrate their hatred of the English! Nice.

Edited by ///ajd on Thursday 28th May 20:13

Why the obsession with historical events?

We all know that we all have some parts of our history which we'd conveniently not brag about.

The obsession with history is down to the SNP in this case, not observers.

They chose to wear the roses.

THey say it was to celebrate the "little rose of scotland" in a poem by a bloke from the past.

It turns out they were not even scottish roses, but normal ones.

What is the message they were wanting to send?

Look at these roses, to celebrate a poet who hated the english and wanted the nazis to win.

Really?

[simoid]

DocJock said:

Worse still, 300% over budget and only delivering part of the promised infrastructure.

At least the Chunnel doesn't stop at Guernsey