Tram chaos ‘was tactic’ in dispute
● TIE chief claims contractor ‘brought city to its knees’ in ‘appalling’ move
The construction consortium tasked with building Edinburgh’s tram network used a dispute over the project on Princes Street in which workers downed tools for several months to bring the city to its knees, an inquiry has heard.
David Mackay, former chairman of Transport Initiative Edinburgh (TIE), said: “i mustn’t bea taround the bush here. I have absolutely no doubt that Princes Street was a tactic – and it almost worked.”
The construction consortium tasked with building Edinburgh’s tram network used a dispute over the project on Princes Street in which workers downed tools for several months to bring the city to its knees, an inquiry has heard.
David Mackay, the former chairman of Transport Initiative Edinburgh (TIE), said the city could have been “the laughing stock of Scotland, if not the world” if the dispute had not been resolved.
Mr Mackay, who was chairman from November 2008 until his resignation in 2010, was giving evidence as the inquiry, chaired by Lord Hardie, yesterday began its 12th week of public hearings.
He was asked about the Princes Street dispute, which arose in 2008 and involved construction consortium Infraco – made up of Bilfinger Berger and Siemens – asking for more money.
He said: “Princes Street is the most important street in Edinburgh, if not in Scotland. To have it closed for any period of time was an obvious huge pressure on TIE to agree to all sorts of things.
“I believe the Princes Street tactics by Infraco were appalling.”
A resolution was eventually agreed which allowed works to progress, with Mr Mackay telling the inquiry that he was told by John Swinney to “get it sorted”.
However, Mr Mackay admitted he was “very unhappy” about having to come to the one-off agreement to solve the crisis, saying he felt it was “unjustified”.
He went on: “We had a contract and I was disappointed that we had stepped outside of the contract.
“But the pressure was enormous and I have to accept now it was the right thing to do at that stage.
“Edinburgh was at a standstill. Retailers were going crazy, tourists were going crazy.”
The inquiry has heard conflicting accounts regarding the nature of the Princes Street dispute, with the consortium previously claiming it was caused by TIE reneging on a gentleman’s agreement.
On the other hand, TIE officials have accused the consortium of using the street to hold them “to ransom”.
Mr Mackay continued: “I mustn’t beat around the bush here. I have absolutely no doubt that Princes Street was a tactic, a tactic to bring Edinburgh, TIE and CEC [City of Edinburgh Council] to our knees – and it almost worked.”
He said if the issue TIE had with the consortium had not been resolved, Edinburgh would have been the “laughing stock of Scotland, if not the world”.
The inquiry into the botched works is looking to examine why the project escalated in cost from an initial £375 million to the final £776m and was delivered three years late on a truncated route. Mr Mackay also described his concern about information being leaked both to the press and the construction consortium. The inquiry continues.