‘ Ridiculous’ tram project an ‘ extremely poor deal’ for city
The “ridiculous” contract for the Edinburgh trams project represented an“extremely poor deal” for the city council, an inquiry has been told.
A lawyer for several former employees of Transport Initiatives Edinburgh( TIE )– the local authority’s arms- length company tasked with handling the scheme–said the contract “tended to encour - age disputes” and the pricing information within it was confusing.
The Edinburgh trams inquiry further heard claims from the main contractor that work to deal with utilities in the ground was the “critical delaying factor” throughout the project. The statements were made during closing submission sat the official inquiry into the Scottish capital’s troubled trams project.
The inquiry, chaired by Lord Hardie, is examining why the trams were delivered late, over budget and with a far shorter route. The eventual cost of the project at £776 million was more than double the sum earmarked at the outset.
The cost of the inquiry now stands at £ 9m, Transport Scotland has confirmed.
Addressing the inquiry, Douglas Fair ley QC, re presenting several ex- Tie employees, accepted some of those he represented “may on occasion have made errors of judgment”.
He insisted that was against a backdrop of “extreme difficult y created by others who either preceded them or in some cases were senior to them within the organisation”.
“Nowhere was that more so than in the context of the contract,” he said.
“If I may paraphrase a recent pronouncement by President [Donald] Trump, this was a contract which was ridiculous and which should never have been made.
“It was a terrible contract for Tie and, by extension, a terrible contract for CEC [ City of Edinburgh Council].”
Mr Fair ley agreed with a view expressed by others “that the way in which the contract was constructed tended to encourage disputes”.
The QC called one part of the document as “clunky”, “cumbersome” and “at best productive of extensive delays”.
“An unintended effect of that was to allow a contractor, if it had a mind to do so, to hold its employer to ransom,” he said.
Pricing details in the contract were described as “confusing and opaque”.
Mr Fairley further claimed the decision to withdraw Transport Scotland from the governance structure of the project was“particularly illjudged ”.
Garry Borland QC, acting for contractor Bilfinger Construction UK, said the utility works were “very far from complete” in the run- up to the contract between Tie and the infrastructure consortium ( Infraco) being finished.