Rail costs crisis was known 16 months aIo

back in March, and Shotts for more than a year, before telling the public.

“Passengers will now be asking if they kept it quiet before the election to avoid embarrassment.”

The EY report said the fact Transport Scotland had rejected the majority of the increased cost projections put forward by Network Rail “casts further doubt on the funding position of these projects” and whether the quango would “allow these projects to be completed”.

The EY probe also revealed the Aberdeen to Inverness delivery date had slipped from April to September 2019.

The project management skills of Network Rail come into doubt throughout the consultant’s report.

In one instance, EY spotted sections of the July report for one scheme was “word for word the same as the June report”, suggesting, “reporting’s not being completed with due care”.

A spokeswoman for Transport Scotland said it “was advised by Network Rail in June 2015 of risks that cost estimates ( on Shotts) could increase from £80m to £160m but was still subject to review”.

She added: “While Transport Scotland were made aware by Network Rail of emerging cost and programme challenges on individual projects during March 2016, it was only following a period of robust challenge by Transport Scotland were Network Rail able to provide their assessment of the cost and programme pressures.

“These were not accepted by Transport Scotland.

“Scottish Ministers were made aware of the overall challenges facing the major rail projects portfolio at the end of May 2016 and instructed the independent review to get more clarity.”

Phil Verster, managing director of The ScotRail Alliance which incorporates Network Rail, last week wrote to MSPs to admit, “Network Rail’s cost estimation process was ineffective”, but added the track operator “has already taken steps to address the EY recommendations”.

■