Northern Powerhouse? Unlikely if this is true.

[rockershovel]

8 hours ago, billbedford said:

 

...and Scotland would seem a lot more attractive than a certain other Eastern European country. 

No National Service, for one thing. 

 

One point I did  find a little surprising was that without exception, the Poles regarded their N S as a complete waste of time, apparently blind to the direct benefits if increased employability...

[Northmoor]

5 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

Leeds and Liverpoowould have had tram systems 20 years or so agbut the Chancellor of the day spent the money in his own constituency of Edinburgh.  Both the English ones were well advanced with Parliamentary approval in place.  Leeds had actually spent about £40million  clearing the routes in places and a big road scheme in Hunslet had space for the tram route designed into it.  Liverpool,had actually bought 1000 tons of rail as the price was right. Such is political decision making. 

 

Jamie

If the Chancellor was Gordon Brown, his constituency was Kirkaldy - across the Forth in Fife - where demand for a tram system has been muted.

[phil-b259]

9 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

 

 

Of course I have yet to hear how the Opposition is reacting to the Government's latest pronouncements.  Perhaps they are keeping their powder dry?  Whatever, transport policy making is going to continue facing problems of 5-year parliaments whoever wins next time.

 

Why rush something out now and look foolish when (1) the media are already doing quite a good job of trashing Sunaks plan anyway and (2) You have your own partys conference in a few days time thus giving an ideal platform to provide a thought out response.

 

As the Labour party are only too awere, with the state of the nations finances they have to be careful and not go round giving the Tories a lifeline by appearing to be profligate with the nations cash.

 

Also its worth remembering that although Sunak and the Tory party may be deeply unpopular right now, the general election is still many months in the future and one should never discount the possibility of a surprise result. Look back to the 1992 election - the Tories were in trouble yet John Major still managed to pull off what seemed like the impossible and retained the partys grip on power by a mere 7 seats. Kier Starmer and the Labour party would not want to find themselves in a similar position after the next election....

[jjb1970]

Politicians will do their usual thing, offer all sorts then if elected claim nobody knew just how bad things are, nobody noticed the deficit, debt, increased interest rates, problems with the  bond market etc. We're very sorry but we can't afford most of what we promised to get your vote. And of course for at least the first term anything people don't like is all the fault of the last lot (though strangely they claim credit for anything that goes well).

[phil-b259]

2 minutes ago, jjb1970 said:

Politicians will do their usual thing, offer all sorts then if elected claim nobody knew just how bad things are, nobody noticed the deficit, debt, increased interest rates, problems with the  bond market etc. We're very sorry but we can't afford most of what we promised to get your vote. And of course for at least the first term anything people don't like is all the fault of the last lot (though strangely they claim credit for anything that goes well).

 

Indeed - but if a party wants to be more than a single term protest vote they also need to be seen to have a credible plan for the longer term - and crucially that means putting forward positive ideas - not just constantly going on about how bad things are.

 

Though some might hate to admit  it, a key factor in Tony Balirs 1997 and 2001 landside victories was the positive vibe that the party was giving off - it wasn't just that people believed the opposition were incapable of forming a competent Government, they actually believed that a Labour Government would be a positive development for them.

 

So yes, while any incoming Labour Government will from a practical point of view have to prioritise 'austerity' even if not by name, for most of its first term that does not preclude the party from putting forward assparational / positive sounding noises about the future.

 

Therefore with HS2, its entirely possible that Labour could re-commit itself to phases 2/3 in principle citing it something it would wish to progress when the nations finances are better even if it cannot actually do much in the short term.

 

Thats why the forthcoming Labour conference will be so interesting - its one of the last opportunities the party will get to showcase that they can be more than a protest vote...

 

 

[jamie92208]

6 hours ago, Northmoor said:

If the Chancellor was Gordon Brown, his constituency was Kirkaldy - across the Forth in Fife - where demand for a tram system has been muted.

No it was Alastair Darling, MP for IIRC, Edinburgh Central. 

 

Jamie

[62613]

On 06/10/2023 at 05:05, jamie92208 said:

No it was Alastair Darling, MP for IIRC, Edinburgh Central. 

 

Jamie

Except that 20 years ago (in 2003), he wasn't the chancellor

[jamie92208]

54 minutes ago, 62613 said:

Except that 20 years ago (in 2003), he wasn't the chancellor

I can't remember the date the Edinburgh system got the go ahead but Darling was definitely involved. 

 

Jamie

[jamie92208]

3 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

I can't remember the date the Edinburgh system got the go ahead but Darling was definitely involved. 

 

Jamie

He was Transport Secretary at the time according to Wikipedia. 

 

Jamie

[Bon Accord]

2 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

He was Transport Secretary at the time according to Wikipedia. 

 

Jamie

 

Transport in Scotland has been devolved to Holyrood since 1999. Neither Darling or Brown have ever been members of the Scottish Parliament.

[jamie92208]

5 hours ago, Bon Accord said:

 

Transport in Scotland has been devolved to Holyrood since 1999. Neither Darling or Brown have ever been members of the Scottish Parliament.

Yes but the finance for the tram systems, which was some sort of special funding for light rail, was provided by Whitehall. There were four systems competing, Merseyside, Edinburgh, Leeds and Portsmouth. Edinburgh got the money. 

 

Jamie

Edited October 8, 2023 by jamie92208

[Bon Accord]

10 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

Yes but the finance for the tram systems, which was some sort of special funding for light rail, was provided by Whitehall. There were four systems competing, Merseyside, Edinburgh, Leeds and Portsmouth. Edinburgh got the money. 

 

Jamie

 

It can't have been special funding though.

One of the first things the SNP administration did on entering office in 2007 was to hold a vote to cancel the Edinburgh Trams project in order to use the money elsewhere in the overall budget. If it had been special funding specifically for light rail from London then it would surely have been ring fenced to some degree.

 

Interestingly in 2015 Darling said this about the Edinburgh trams:

 

"I’m not going to pretend I was always in favour of the tram because people know I wasn’t. It’s built now and I’ve been on it a few times, but 
Edinburgh has one of the best bus networks in the country. What worries me is if the bus service is tied into the trams and the debt for the trams, that will have consequences.”

 

On the subject of trams he said this:

 

“I stopped most tram projects in England because they all had the same features that the Edinburgh trams has – you start off with a price which is hopelessly unrealistic, you then discover nobody knows what’s under the ground, and the whole thing has to be rethought."

Edited October 8, 2023 by Bon Accord

[62613]

49 minutes ago, Bon Accord said:

 

It can't have been special funding though.

One of the first things the SNP administration did on entering office in 2007 was to hold a vote to cancel the Edinburgh Trams project in order to use the money elsewhere in the overall budget. If it had been special funding specifically for light rail from London then it would surely have been ring fenced to some degree.

 

Interestingly in 2015 Darling said this about the Edinburgh trams:

 

"I’m not going to pretend I was always in favour of the tram because people know I wasn’t. It’s built now and I’ve been on it a few times, but 
Edinburgh has one of the best bus networks in the country. What worries me is if the bus service is tied into the trams and the debt for the trams, that will have consequences.”

 

On the subject of trams he said this:

 

“I stopped most tram projects in England because they all had the same features that the Edinburgh trams has – you start off with a price which is hopelessly unrealistic, you then discover nobody knows what’s under the ground, and the whole thing has to be rethought."

Again, the question should have been "Why do publically funded projects go so badly over budget?" Given that most of them are strategically important, it's a question that needs sorting.

 

[cctransuk]

10 minutes ago, 62613 said:

Again, the question should have been "Why do publically funded projects go so badly over budget?" Given that most of them are strategically important, it's a question that needs sorting.

 

 

Depends on the source of the 'public funding'.

 

I spent forty years designing, letting and supervising local government civil engineering contracts. The 'Contingency Sum' item at the end of the priced Bill of Quantities was invariably 10% of the foregoing items - and I had to have a bl**dy good reason at the time of Final Accounts to pay any of it!

 

The problem with central government funded contracts is that they are perceived as a bottomless honeypot. Anything and everything gets charged to them - ultra-swish site accommodation, of the size of small towns; new motorway interchanges to access them; five star hotel accommodation for senior executives on site visits; first class travel; endless consultants' fees - the list goes on, and on, and on ....

 

At one time, there was the man who wanted the hole digging, and the man who dug the hole. Nowadays, there's an army of non-productive bodies dictating when the hole must be dug, how the hole must be dug, where the muck must be placed, how the public should be prevented from falling down the hole, how the man who digs the hole should be provided for when he needs to receive himself ......

 

So - not a big surprise that organising the digging of the hole costs multiples of the cost of actually digging the hole!!

 

CJI.

[jamie92208]

1 hour ago, Bon Accord said:

 

It can't have been special funding though.

One of the first things the SNP administration did on entering office in 2007 was to hold a vote to cancel the Edinburgh Trams project in order to use the money elsewhere in the overall budget. If it had been special funding specifically for light rail from London then it would surely have been ring fenced to some degree.

 

Interestingly in 2015 Darling said this about the Edinburgh trams:

 

"I’m not going to pretend I was always in favour of the tram because people know I wasn’t. It’s built now and I’ve been on it a few times, but 
Edinburgh has one of the best bus networks in the country. What worries me is if the bus service is tied into the trams and the debt for the trams, that will have consequences.”

 

On the subject of trams he said this:

 

“I stopped most tram projects in England because they all had the same features that the Edinburgh trams has – you start off with a price which is hopelessly unrealistic, you then discover nobody knows what’s under the ground, and the whole thing has to be rethought."

Thanks for thst. At the time thst Leeds and Mersetram were cancelled I was heavily involved in tram Preservation and remember how brassed off the English cities were when Edinburgh appeared to be allowed to go ahead under an Edinburgh MP as Transport Secretary and a Fife based PM.  It didn't go down well in Leeds.  I also spent time last night trying to find the answers and filin the gaps.  As a tram enthusiast I'm glad that Edinburgh got it's system but still annoyed that the EngIsh systems didn't go ahead. 

 

Jamie

[APOLLO]

The Liverpool Tramway !!!!!!

 

Back in 2004-9 I was planning gas main replacement and diversion jobs in the NW. I did quite a bit of gas main diversion costing etc for Line 1 of the proposed Liverpool Tramway, Pier Head to Kirkby, some were VERY expensive jobs diverting existing large diameter / low & medium pressure lines along the route - some in the median strip of the A580 etc where the tram was to run. Some work was actually done on site (though not all of it, a couple of million quid or so). I was told that 30 odd Km of special tram rail was actually landed from Europe at Hull Docks the week before it was cancelled. Not one metre of track was laid as far as I know. What happened to that rail I do not know (Scrapyard on Dock Road no doubt !!).

 

It was cancelled because all the money allocated was spent (or disappeared), and lots more requested - well, it is Liverpool !!! I do know that a lot was spent on many, many meetings in the lavish offices in the City, where there was always a buffet lunch fit for a king. I attended quite a few meetings with the other statutory authorities (Electricity, Water, Telecom etc). At Noon "They" (in suits, couple of dozen of them and nowt to do with the meeting) all came out of the woodwork for the buffet with us, then promptly disappeared back into the woodwork at 1pm. What a show !!

 

Liverpool - just what more do you expect Laa !!

 

Brit15

 

 

[62613]

57 minutes ago, cctransuk said:

 

Depends on the source of the 'public funding'.

 

I spent forty years designing, letting and supervising local government civil engineering contracts. The 'Contingency Sum' item at the end of the priced Bill of Quantities was invariably 10% of the foregoing items - and I had to have a bl**dy good reason at the time of Final Accounts to pay any of it!

 

The problem with central government funded contracts is that they are perceived as a bottomless honeypot. Anything and everything gets charged to them - ultra-swish site accommodation, of the size of small towns; new motorway interchanges to access them; five star hotel accommodation for senior executives on site visits; first class travel; endless consultants' fees - the list goes on, and on, and on ....

 

At one time, there was the man who wanted the hole digging, and the man who dug the hole. Nowadays, there's an army of non-productive bodies dictating when the hole must be dug, how the hole must be dug, where the muck must be placed, how the public should be prevented from falling down the hole, how the man who digs the hole should be provided for when he needs to receive himself ......

 

So - not a big surprise that organising the digging of the hole costs multiples of the cost of actually digging the hole!!

 

CJI.

Surely the consultants' fees, and the extra to dig the hole today would be included in the budget, anyway. Are we saying the people who are overseeing the financial aspects are keeping an overview of where the money is going (yeah, right!). My thoughts on this are that there is stuff that wasn't included inthe original budget (tunnels under the Chilterns springs to mind), delays in starting the thing , resulting in increased land purchase values, inflation, and so on.

[jamie92208]

3 hours ago, APOLLO said:

The Liverpool Tramway !!!!!!

 

Back in 2004-9 I was planning gas main replacement and diversion jobs in the NW. I did quite a bit of gas main diversion costing etc for Line 1 of the proposed Liverpool Tramway, Pier Head to Kirkby, some were VERY expensive jobs diverting existing large diameter / low & medium pressure lines along the route - some in the median strip of the A580 etc where the tram was to run. Some work was actually done on site (though not all of it, a couple of million quid or so). I was told that 30 odd Km of special tram rail was actually landed from Europe at Hull Docks the week before it was cancelled. Not one metre of track was laid as far as I know. What happened to that rail I do not know (Scrapyard on Dock Road no doubt !!).

 

It was cancelled because all the money allocated was spent (or disappeared), and lots more requested - well, it is Liverpool !!! I do know that a lot was spent on many, many meetings in the lavish offices in the City, where there was always a buffet lunch fit for a king. I attended quite a few meetings with the other statutory authorities (Electricity, Water, Telecom etc). At Noon "They" (in suits, couple of dozen of them and nowt to do with the meeting) all came out of the woodwork for the buffet with us, then promptly disappeared back into the woodwork at 1pm. What a show !!

 

Liverpool - just what more do you expect Laa !!

 

Brit15

 

 

The 1000 tonnes of tram rail were bought by a dealer and I believe that some has been used on Preservation projects. It didn't go for scrap. 

 

Anyway have we got any firm news about NPR.

 

Jamie

[APOLLO]

2 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

The 1000 tonnes of tram rail were bought by a dealer and I believe that some has been used on Preservation projects. It didn't go for scrap. 

 

Anyway have we got any firm news about NPR.

 

Jamie

 

Glad some of the rail went to a good home !!

 

As to news on NPR they're still looking for Boris's fag packet with the plans on the back that he lost at Warrington Bank Quay station a while ago !!!!

 

 

https://www.warringtonguardian.co.uk/news/19637564.prime-minister-boris-johnson-seen-warrington-bank-quay/

 

Brit15

[Roddy Angus]

4 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

I was heavily involved in tram Preservation and remember how brassed off the English cities were when Edinburgh appeared to be allowed to go ahead under an Edinburgh MP as Transport Secretary and a Fife based PM.

 

Just to make it clear, both the Edinburgh Tram (Line One) Act 2006 and the Edinburgh Tram (Line Two) Act 2006 were Acts of the Scottish Parliament.  Whilst Messers Brown and Darling may have supported the tram project, it was the Scottish Parliament, not the UK Parliament which approved the construction of the tram network in Edinburgh.

 

The major problem with any significant project in older towns and cities is the lack of accurate maps of what utilities and other structures actually exist under the areas covered by roads.  In Edinburgh, substantially more work was required to reroute utilities and to remove obstructions, such as an air raid shelter in Princes Street, than was originally anticipated.  

 

Lessons were learned and the second stage of the Airport to Newhaven route was built mainly on time and to budget, including having to remove old graves which were under an existing road.

 

I hope this information is helpful.

 

Roddy

[billbedford]

6 hours ago, 62613 said:

Again, the question should have been "Why do publically funded projects go so badly over budget?" Given that most of them are strategically important, it's a question that needs sorting.

 

 

I think that this article will give you at least part of the answer.

[jamie92208]

Just to clarify something.  I have done some digging about the fate of the 1000 tons of new tram rail left over from the cancellation of Merseytram in 2005.  Apparently much of it is in use, the MER bought a batch and it:s installed on Douglas promenade and various places on the Mer.  A short stretch refurbished a level crossing on the Seaton tramway at Colyford.  The remainder was bought by Crich, so it has not been wasted. 

 

Jamie

[Richard_A]

On 08/10/2023 at 17:13, cctransuk said:

 

Depends on the source of the 'public funding'.

 

I spent forty years designing, letting and supervising local government civil engineering contracts. The 'Contingency Sum' item at the end of the priced Bill of Quantities was invariably 10% of the foregoing items - and I had to have a bl**dy good reason at the time of Final Accounts to pay any of it!

 

The problem with central government funded contracts is that they are perceived as a bottomless honeypot. Anything and everything gets charged to them - ultra-swish site accommodation, of the size of small towns; new motorway interchanges to access them; five star hotel accommodation for senior executives on site visits; first class travel; endless consultants' fees - the list goes on, and on, and on ....

 

At one time, there was the man who wanted the hole digging, and the man who dug the hole. Nowadays, there's an army of non-productive bodies dictating when the hole must be dug, how the hole must be dug, where the muck must be placed, how the public should be prevented from falling down the hole, how the man who digs the hole should be provided for when he needs to receive himself ......

 

So - not a big surprise that organising the digging of the hole costs multiples of the cost of actually digging the hole!!

 

CJI.

I can agree with this, I used to work for a company which built modular concrete and steel structures, and on one job in Newcastle there was about 2 assistant managers for every manager/engineer on the site it was ridiculous.

 

I remember my boss losing his temper with one because he kept sticking his nose into what we were doing but when he was challenged on why he kept trying to change things he couldn't give an answer apart from he'd have to ask the reason why! 

[Northmoor]

My long experience of the public sector is that it is very good at spending a thousand to make sure it doesn't waste a hundred. 

 

In the defence of many, many of those public sector managers, every time there is an (in percentage terms, trivial) overspend on some scheme, there is wailing and gnashing of teeth in certain newspapers and governing politicians of the time respond by introducing yet another layer of checks and reporting requirements.  While you're reporting, you ain't doing it.....

[Mark Saunders]

4 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

My long experience of the public sector is that it is very good at spending a thousand to make sure it doesn't waste a hundred. 

 

In the defence of many, many of those public sector managers, every time there is an (in percentage terms, trivial) overspend on some scheme, there is wailing and gnashing of teeth in certain newspapers and governing politicians of the time respond by introducing yet another layer of checks and reporting requirements.  While you're reporting, you ain't doing it.....

 

Private sector incompetence is hardly reported in comparison.