Jenny Gilruth did not break the ministerial code over Haymarket to Dalmeny electrification project

[snowball]

Moderator note - split from:

Haymarket to Dalmeny electrification

A Prior Approval notification (21/05894/PA) has been lodged with City of Edinburgh Council by Network Rail for the "Proposed installation of overhead Line Equipment and associated temporary works, Haymarket to Dalmeny". The notification does not have much detail but can be viewed here...

www.railforums.co.uk

The BBC has this fairly recent report, not about the electrification itself but about the political row:

Gilruth did not break ministerial code - Yousaf - BBC News

The former transport minister was accused of "giving preferential treatment" to constituents.

www.bbc.co.uk

First Minister Humza Yousaf has concluded that Jenny Gilruth did not break the ministerial code when she was transport minister.

The Scottish Conservatives claimed she had broken the code by delaying vital rail works, costing taxpayers £1m.

Tory leader Douglas Ross claimed Ms Gilruth had "given preferential treatment to her constituents" in Fife.

Mr Yousaf has now written to Mr Ross saying he is "confident" there was no breach of the rules.

He said Ms Gilruth was "acting entirely legitimately" in a bid to minimise disruption to the public.

During First Minister's Questions in May, Mr Ross called for an urgent independent investigation into the claims Ms Gilruth intervened inappropriately to delay a rail upgrade for purely political reasons.

The row centred on proposed line electrification work between Edinburgh Haymarket and Dalmeny, which would have caused eight days of disruption from Boxing Day last year.

It was part of a "decarbonisation" scheme to replace diesel trains with electric units on rail routes from Edinburgh to Fife.

Ms Gilruth, MSP for Mid Fife and Glenrothes who is now education secretary, asked for the work to be postponed.

The Tories said officials told the Scottish government this would lead to an extra £1m in cost and cause disruption to 9,000 passengers a day due to the work taking place at non-holiday times.

Mr Ross said that a freedom of information response the party had received made clear that, "instead of a few days of closures after Christmas, Jenny Gilruth pushed for more than six weeks of disruption, including four full weekend closures".

 

[92002]

The BBC has this fairly recent report, not about the electrification itself but about the political row discussed upthread:

Gilruth did not break ministerial code - Yousaf - BBC News

The former transport minister was accused of "giving preferential treatment" to constituents.

www.bbc.co.uk

This is typical Douglas Ross looking for a sound bite.

The work will still go ahead, but not at Christmas 2022.

It's all part of electrification to Aberdeen. The first part going to Dalmeny. Then the Fife Circle and finally to Dundee and Aberdeen.

The other part from Glasgow to Dunblane is complete. However from there to Perth and Dunee is not yet authorised or started. The two strands meet at Dundee.

No rolling stock has even been ordered for the line yet either. Which probably may have a long lead time.

Hardly a resignation issue, more one of common sense.

 

[zwk500]

This is typical Douglas Ross looking for a sound bite.

The work will still go ahead, but not at Christmas 2022.

It seems to me to be a bit of both. Heaven forfend that a political opponent should make a mountain out of a molehill for point-scoring, but also the minister is supposed to put the greater interests of all Scotland ahead of her constituents and delaying the electrification work really doesn't do that.

The important bit to know would be exactly what works were pushed back, whether they would have taken place but for the minister's intervention, and whether the benefits of letting people go shopping outweighed the negatives of the delay.

 

[92002]

It seems to me to be a bit of both. Heaven forfend that a political opponent should make a mountain out of a molehill for point-scoring, but also the minister is supposed to put the greater interests of all Scotland ahead of her constituents and delaying the electrification work really doesn't do that.

The important bit to know would be exactly what works were pushed back, whether they would have taken place but for the minister's intervention, and whether the benefits of letting people go shopping outweighed the negatives of the delay.

Perhaps you should makw a point of listening to First Ministers questions. It's a regular Douglas Ross waste of the parliaments time looking for a sound bite. Most not making any sense.

The electrification teams are currently doing Glasgow to Barrhead and East Kilbride and were busy there over Churstnas.

Other contractors are available but were not invited to use the slot.

 

[Falcon1200]

Other contractors are available but were not invited to use the slot.

So did the work not take place because there was no-one available to do it, and not because Ms Gilruth told Network Rail to cancel it?

 

[92002]

So did the work not take place because there was no-one available to do it, and not because Ms Gilruth told Network Rail to cancel it?

Certainly looks very like it.

 

[Starmill]

Certainly looks very like it.

Mr Ross' claims about the Ministerial Code seem to me to hold no water, much like most of his claims.

However, the work having been delayed and its costs increased as a result of the decision by Ms Gilruth appears to be factual? Do you have some evidence to contradict the internal information released under FOI?

 

[92002]

Mr Ross' claims about the Ministerial Code seem to me to hold no water, much like most of his claims.

However, the work having been delayed and its costs increased as a result of the decision by Ms Gilruth appears to be factual? Do you have some evidence to contradict the internal information released under FOI?

Welcome to the real world. If you have a few spare days have a look through the Scottish Government website. I really don't have that amount of spare time.

If the work was changed to a different date and staff were sent to another site there would be no money wasted. In fact it probably was saved since staff would not need to be brought in on enhanced rates to take site possessions. Trains were not cancelled, no need for replacement road transport and cash was made on trains that were not cancelled.

 

[snowball]

So did the work not take place because there was no-one available to do it, and not because Ms Gilruth told Network Rail to cancel it?

Certainly looks very like it.

If Chris Gibb didn't feel there had been undue ministerial interference, why did he leave so soon after taking the job?

 

[92002]

If Chris Gibb didn't feel there had been undue ministerial interference, why did he leave so soon after taking the job?

In Scotland, Network Rail, ScotRail and the Engineering staff are all in an Alliance. So there is no hiding place for poor decisions being made. They are all employed by Scottish Government. With the Minister and Transport Scotland all part of the Alluance.

 

[Starmill]

Welcome to the real world.

Great phrase for those intent on making themselves sound clever, but meaningless otherwise.

If you have a few spare days have a look through the Scottish Government website. I really don't have that amount of spare time.

Why might I need to spend time doing that? What I said was correct.

If the work was changed to a different date and staff were sent to another site there would be no money wasted.

Those generally aren't the terms contracts with third party suppliers are signed on.

In fact it probably was saved since staff would not need to be brought in on enhanced rates to take site possessions.

Again, highly unusual, so unless you have some evidence to back this up...

Trains were not cancelled, no need for replacement road transport and cash was made on trains that were not cancelled.

Of course this is also meaningless, because now rather more train services will be withdrawn for the engineering works when they do take place, as they will be taking place over a longer time.

In Scotland, Network Rail, ScotRail and the Engineering staff are all in an Alliance. So there is no hiding place for poor decisions being made. They are all employed by Scottish Government. With the Minister and Transport Scotland all part of the Alluance.

This doesn't answer the question which you're being posed though, does it?

 

[mcmad]

I think 92002 has swallowed too much SNP propaganda as the works were around track lowering in advance of putting masts up along with other track renewals taking advantage of the booked possessions and it will indeed cost the taxpayer more money when the works are finally completed.

 

[Starmill]

Given the lack of a response from @92002, I think that this reason for not progressing works as planned:

The electrification teams are currently doing Glasgow to Barrhead and East Kilbride and were busy there over Churstnas.

has been made up.

 

[92002]

Great phrase for those intent on making themselves sound clever, but meaningless otherwise.


Why might I need to spend time doing that? What I said was correct.


Those generally aren't the terms contracts with third party suppliers are signed on.


Again, highly unusual, so unless you have some evidence to back this up...


Of course this is also meaningless, because now rather more train services will be withdrawn for the engineering works when they do take place, as they will be taking place over a longer time.


This doesn't answer the question which you're being posed though, does it?

You obviously have never worked in one of these Alliances. There are no penalty clases between Alliance members. It's a pain and gain contract. All for the good of the members.

 

[Falcon1200]

Certainly looks very like it.

Without any evidence to support that supposition, no it does not.

If the work was changed to a different date and staff were sent to another site there would be no money wasted. In fact it probably was saved since staff would not need to be brought in on enhanced rates to take site possessions. Trains were not cancelled, no need for replacement road transport and cash was made on trains that were not cancelled.

Any time spent planning the work was wasted, and the possessions, train cancellations and replacement transport will still be needed at some stage, just several months, if not years, later than planned.

So just how did Fife commuters get such preferential treatment, and consideration of their transport needs over a few days, when the less fortunate citizens of Kilmaurs, Stewarton, Dunlop, Barrhead, Nitshill, Priesthill and Kennishead are about to be deprived of their entire train service for 6 (six) weeks?

 

[Starmill]

You obviously have never worked in one of these Alliances. There are no penalty clases between Alliance members. It's a pain and gain contract. All for the good of the members.

Indeed but now the work will cost more, because it will take longer to complete. Which is what people are actually disputing about your account.

If you work for the alliance you are free to furnish us with the details and close the matter - you've been invited to several times now but you've just responded with more bluster.

 

[92002]

Indeed but now the work will cost more, because it will take longer to complete. Which is what people are actually disputing about your account.

If you work for the alliance you are free to furnish us with the details and close the matter - you've been invited to several times now but you've just responded with more bluster.

Nobody has said that the work will not be completed in a closure of a number of Days. Just not at the original dates.

Sadly you will not be furnished with the details on a public forum. It's commercially confidrntial. Any original planning will not be lost, just changed to another date.

 

[Davester50]

Any original planning will not be lost, just changed to another date.

It might be the same plans, but it will be need to be re-submitted surely? That won't come at zero cost.

 

[mcmad]

It won't be the same plans, the work will have to be spread over weekends causing more disruption. The best time to do it was when it was originally planned with all the resources were in place and cancelled at short notice no doubt for a hefty fee to the taxpayer.

 

[Starmill]

Nobody has said that the work will not be completed in a closure of a number of Days. Just not at the original dates.

What people have said is that the work will cost more and take longer to complete. That's been corroborated by the information released under FOI. You've stated you believe this isn't true, and you've been asked to provide some evidence on that. Several times now you've refused to do so.

Sadly you will not be furnished with the details on a public forum. It's commercially confidrntial.

You can say it's "commercial confidential", and I can say you're talking rubbish and this is a convenient excuse.

It might be the same plans, but it will be need to be re-submitted surely? That won't come at zero cost.

Exactly. Even in the incredibly unlikely event that the resources were all gainfully redeployed at late notice and no third parties had entered contract for the work before the change, the new timescale will involve closure of the line for longer than previously expected. This is unavoidable now and it's beyond doubt, for obvious reasons, that it will cost more to do the work in this way.

 

[Bald Rick]

It did cost quite a bit of money.…

 

[Davester50]

Even in the incredibly unlikely event that the resources were all gainfully redeployed at late notice and no third parties had entered contract for the work before the change, the new timescale will involve closure of the line for longer than previously expected. This is unavoidable now and it's beyond doubt, for obvious reasons, that it will cost more to do the work in this way.

Thanks. I'm just going from my own project planning and not the railway's way of working.
Replanning costs for even small alterations can add a fair chunk.

 

[Falcon1200]

Sadly you will not be furnished with the details on a public forum. It's commercially confidrntial.

And politically embarrassing.

 

[Noddy]

It did cost quite a bit of money.…

And here endeth the discussion.