Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Tory at odds with party on trams route

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Edinburgh Evening News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 01 November 2006
THE Tory transport spokesman in Scotland believes Edinburgh's proposed tram route should only run from Ocean Terminal to Haymarket.
David Davidson MSP placed himself at odds with his Tory counterparts on the council, who have so far backed the tram route as far as the airport.

But Mr Davidson said the money saved by reducing the cost of trams could be put towards a new Forth Road Bridge or an upgraded Waverley Station.

At a special business breakfast, organised by the Edinburgh Chamber of Commerce, both Mr Davidson and SNP transport spokesman Fergus Ewing called for further improvement to boost capacity at Waverley. They said money saved by scrapping the plan to tunnel underneath Edinburgh Airport could be used to build a new rail line at Waverley.

But Labour's Bristow Muldoon, and the Lib Dem's Tavish Scott both stood by the airport rail link and the trams project.

Transport firm TIE, which is in charge of both schemes, sponsored yesterday's event at The Balmoral Hotel.

Chairman Willie Gallagher said the city was at the point of taking a "quantum leap".



The full article contains 211 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 01 November 2006 11:06 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Edinburgh transport plans
 
1

JJ52,

01/11/2006 13:09:47

The money already wasted on this white elephant could have made the south suburban line a reality. Improved road and rail links, and still saved some cash . God know what could be done with the money involved in making this come true..

2

Jimmy,

edinburgh 01/11/2006 13:09:57

that's absurd. The Tories have always hated public transport and this just demonstrates it again. Trams are found in nearly every major city in continental europe- edibnurgh needs them urgently

3

Paul Voltaire,

http://paulvoltaire.spaces.live.com 01/11/2006 13:16:13

The trams in Edinburgh are not onlly a white elephant but a huge money pit as well.

4

Andrew Savoir-Faire,

01/11/2006 13:18:39

couldn't Edinburgh be different and not have trams instead - what about a monorail?

5

FedUpTaxPayer,

Edinburgh 01/11/2006 13:37:48

We certainly don't need both a tram and train line to the airport. What a waste of money that would be.

One only - and if we could please try to make whichever option is selected represent good value for money (I know that goes against all public sector spending).

6

Road Raga,

01/11/2006 13:46:36

Colin, is your comment based on facts or just your opinion ? given that nearly 8million people use the airport every year I think more than one public transport mode can be justified.

7

MOAI VINCENT'S COUSIN,

Edinburgh 01/11/2006 13:50:16

Steven (6). If "8 million people use the airport every year" and the buses have coped very well, why are we looking at throwing hundreds of millions of pounds at buses with steel wheels?

8

Concerned of Stockbridge,

Edinburgh 01/11/2006 13:59:07

post #2:

"Trams are found in nearly every major city in continental europe" - care to list them - they'll only be those where the lines are the original 19th Century ones. Hint - trams were a solution to a transport problem that existed at the turn of the 19th and 20th Centuries - they have no relevance in this Millennium.

Trams are inflexible and far too large for a city with a chaotic heart covering everything from teh 12th Century onwards - nothing larger than a coach and 4 should be allowed into the centre - buses and vans included.

9

SimonW,

01/11/2006 14:33:43

Obviously Willie Gallagher has no idea what a quantum leap is. By definition there is no smaller leap possible, it's the minuscule jump of an electron between states, so infinitesimally small.

As an ex resident of Munich I know a good tram system would work well. It's a great pity they didn't go for a similar system to Dusseldorf though where the trams go underground when they get to the city centre to avoid adding to the congestion but are on the streets further out to minimise costs.

10

bikerider1,

reality 01/11/2006 14:59:04

i think this tory councillor is half right. now if he could only get them to dump the rest of it itd be perfect.

11

Leila,

01/11/2006 15:08:47

I'd like to know what will happen to the trams when Princes Street is closed for Hogmanay, Festival Fireworks, various marches, marathons, etc. Does anyone know?

12

MOAI VINCENT'S COUSIN,

Edinburgh 01/11/2006 15:11:37

Carol - I seem to remember reading an articles ages ago in the Evening News saying that all these events would need to go elsewhere as TIE were insisting that nothing should interfere with the running of the trams.

13

Matthew,

01/11/2006 15:34:25

What about electrified Mongolian pogo sticks?

14

Andrew,

Livingston 01/11/2006 15:37:52

12- Nothing SHOULD interfere with the running of the trams!!!!!! Let's see them up and running asap!!

15

Matthew,

Maybury 01/11/2006 15:53:55

I'm in favour of trams to Leith and Granton. You can't be arrested for soliciting from a tram. It wouldn't be kerb crawling, would it?

16

Road Raga,

01/11/2006 16:26:48

Jane I don't think buses cope very well, which is why a higher % of passengers drive to Edinburgh airport by car than almost any other big airport in the UK (and Europe I should imagine).
If the same attitude of the anti tram lot prevailed in the past, there would be no railways in edinburgh, no airport, no roads in fact there would be virtually no advancements in this city.
thankfully there are people who can see past their little front garden.

17

MOAI VINCENT'S COUSIN,

Easter Island 01/11/2006 17:00:09

"quantum leap". INTO A SLURRY POND.

MOAI VINCENT'S COUSIN HAS SPOKEN

18

MOAI VINCENT'S COUSIN,

Edinburgh 01/11/2006 17:03:56

Steven, I think Lothian Buses would disagree with you. Their Airlink Service has been very successful and, in fact, beats the tram on journey time.

It is not a question of being "anti-tram", it is a question of looking at all the evidence supporting this particular proposal and deciding whether the project is likely to deliver the benefits anticipated and whether those benefits will be great enough to justify both the significant costs and the disbenefits.

At present, TIE have no documentation to support Phase 1 or 2 (let alone the others) of the scheme and, therefore, cannot demonstrate that the project is a good one. For you to suggest that only you have either foresight or vision is quite arrogant, particularly when your comments on the tram proposal appear to be based on little more than wishful thinking.

I doubt there are many people who would disagree with the "strategy" of trams, trains, air travel, etc, but, as always the devil is in the detail and, as there currently is no detail available from TIE for Phases 1 or 2, it cannot be concluded by any means that this particular tram proposal is robust.

19

MOAI VINCENT'S COUSIN,

Edinburgh 01/11/2006 17:05:01

STEVEN

Have you looked at the EARL background papers - these show that cars will still be the main form of transport to the airport, with levels significantly greater than current.

Tram gets most of patronage from existing buses (Lothian buses are being forced to cut the Airlink service in half, in order to prop up the tram) and new airport patronage. Very lttle will be former car drivers.

EARL then takes some 40% of tram patronage to and from the airport.

Hence, it is clear - build EARL, drop tram and retain Airlink service, plus expand bus services (look at the Fife service).

20

MOAI VINCENT'S COUSIN,

Edinburgh 01/11/2006 17:07:16

Tram schemes work well when they serve key generators, run along major transport corridors, through high density area, provide a frequent service and enough tram stops. Like French schemes.

Unfortunately, the current Edinburgh Tram proposals do very little of these.

21

MOAI VINCENT'S COUSIN,

Edinburgh 01/11/2006 17:10:06

Carol (11) - the powers of the approved Edinburgh Tram Bills means that most marches and events will be banned from Princes Street.

A number of events will be permitted - Fire Works and Hogmanay - will be permitted and trams will have to stop running along Princes Street. They will terminate at Shandwick Place and St Andrew Square, respectively.

22

MOAI VINCENT'S COUSIN,

Edinburgh 01/11/2006 17:11:43

JD (14) If TIE had their way, nothing would interfere with the running of the trams - not even stopping at tramstops!

23

inter alia,

the capital 01/11/2006 17:13:30

[#11:Carol] they suddenly glow - an incandescent glow - then they pop up somewhere else looking really, really different [source:"Quantum Leap"]

24

FedUpTaxPayer,

01/11/2006 21:03:23

STEVEN

We already have two forms of public transport to the airport - buses and taxi's. I find it very difficult to believe spending £1bn on anothe two, a train line and tram line represents the best use of public money.

People going to the airport will, in the main, be going on one off holidays or business trips. I'd prefer the money spent on improving peoples daily commutes - I think more people would get benefit from this more often.

25

Julian,

02/11/2006 00:55:11

Jane # 18, You said there is no detail from TIE on phases 1 and 2. Presumably details of journey times are available since you also concluded that the buses were faster to the airport than the trams.

26

Julian,

02/11/2006 00:58:18

James # 20. which exactly of the points you made about a good tram system will the Edinburgh one do very little of? ie. "run along major transport corridors, through high density area, provide a frequent service and enough tram stops"

27

Ricky,

02/11/2006 09:33:06

Ban buses, trams, trains, cyclists - free up all the current road and ground space they occupy - introduce - hydrogen powered personal people transporters - make driving lessons part of the education curriculum - change working practices - and hey presto!

Transport and Environmental issues solved - freedom of travel enjoyed!

28

bikerider1,

reality 02/11/2006 15:31:58

so youll drive from your house in east lothian, to one of the park and ride sites, get a bus to the tram line,then take the tram to the airport,then repeat it all on the way back after your holidays.
hmmmm wont that be so much quicker and easier than driving round the bypass straight to the airport

29

Douglas,

Bathgate 03/11/2006 23:47:24

#30: Possibly the same Edinburgh that was invented for Ken Stott to drive around unhindered and park at will in Rebus.


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.