Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


It's fixed - now who pays bill?

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: 06 September 2006
THE debating chamber of the Scottish Parliament reopened yesterday to fresh controversy over who is going to pay the £500,000-plus cost of repairing the roof.
The chamber was closed in March after a beam swung loose, almost crashing into a glass screen and ending up dangling over the heads of the Tory benches. Now, more than six months on, it has reopened in time for Jack McConnell, the First Minister, to kick off a debate on the future of Scotland today.

Over the summer recess, builders installed 128 stainless steel pins, or dowels, on the end of 64 beams to ensure they remain in place. But questions remain over who should pay.

The costs include £250,000 for hiring temporary accommodation while the chamber was closed, £30,000 for temporary straps to make the beams safe and £130,000 to design and install the metal pins. It is thought scaffolding cost about £100,000. Possible contenders to foot the bill include Arup, the structural engineer that designed the roof; MSD Design, which made the parts, and Laing O'Rourke, which installed the roof.

Parliamentary officials have vowed to do everything possible to recoup the costs to the taxpayer. A spokeswoman said: "We were always clear that we had three priorities: public safety, getting the chamber fixed and cost recovery.

"With the chamber reopened, the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body's sight is now firmly fixed on liability. We can confirm that the matter is receiving full and careful consideration."

But Margo MacDonald, the independent MSP, said she was "not holding her breath".

She said the fact liability had not been decided before repairs began would make it difficult to ascertain who was responsible.

"Much of the parliament building process was based on the concept that it will be all right on the night, and when it is not all right on the night, there is no answer," she said.

Page 1 of 1

 
1

Daibhidh,

06/09/2006 00:01:21

"THE debating chamber of the Scottish Parliament reopened yesterday to fresh controversy..."

When will the tiresome hacks in the Scottish media stop doing down devolution and the parliament building? This problem was not caused by devolution, nor was it caused by the parliament or MSPs...it was caused by shoddy workmanship...

I for one am tired tired tired by all of this negative reporting. It does our country a massive disservice. I really don't care about the roof of the building...let's get on with more important issues and fill our newspapers with success stories (of which tere are many) rather than washing our dirty clothes in public which does not help our country on jot...

2

SouthernSkye,

Isle of Skye 06/09/2006 05:40:41

I feel sorry for the company that has done the repairs, how long will they be waiting to get paid if it is not clear WHO is to pay?

This particular building is a shambles. Cut their losses now and find a normal, good ole fashioned solid building (an old one for example that we KNOW has stood for many years already). Then they can get on with the damned job instead of 'debating' (arguing?) who is to pay......This time !

3

Ted,

06/09/2006 06:20:30

Nope, David's right. I'd go further: the building is a success. It's open and accessible, people come all the time and meet their MSPs, give evidence to committees, all the rest of it. Have you been to Westminster? Also, Southern Skye, have you been to Holyrood? There are no more losses, we've got a great building and the idea of throwing it away and moving to a pokey leaking old school that's only a quarter big enough: no thanks!

4

IanW,

06/09/2006 06:39:48

Who is going to pay? - That is a no-brainer question. Muggins, the scottish tax-payer that's who. They had to pay for the incompetence of those so called leaders who drew up the initial contract and ended up paying ten times as much as the first estimates!! If they wer in private industry they would have been booted out at once.

5

Chris seeing red,

06/09/2006 06:44:01

Payment has been tendered my friends. Do you really think for one minute that the people collecting for the repairs are going to stand around while the debate wages about the wages? No, not for one minute! We, the taxpayers, have paid the bill now the question is who is going to repay us? Of course we won't see the repayment because it will most certainly go toward something else, something equally as debatable.

6

Paul Voltaire,

06/09/2006 07:11:52

There is a Black Hole down Holyrood way where cash seems to head down.
Still,its worth it all, I think so, maybe.
Bit of a con really.

7

SouthernSkye,

Isle of Skye 06/09/2006 07:19:52

James, yes I've been there. I think it is a wonderful building, a style icon almost. However, years ago I had a Lancia (designed by Guigario) a beautiful car, everyone liked it, but I had to keep throwing money at it by way of repairs. In the end I got rid of it and bought a Ford Cortina. Quite a normal boring car but it did the job without any of the fuss, and cost, of the Lancia.

8

paulr,

06/09/2006 07:28:53

Shoddy workmanship, Bad design all true.
Do us all a favour and demolish the eyesore.
It is without doubt one of the ugliest buildings created in the last 30 years, it does not in any way fit in with its surroundings and it certainly does not complement the city.

9

Andrew,

Cumbernauld 06/09/2006 07:53:40

Wasn't it under guarantee????

10

mr chips,

glasgow 06/09/2006 08:26:02

9. Andrew, Cumbernauld /.You will find this hard to beleive, but they forgot to renew the building insurance, so it was not covered by the guarentee.
mad but true.

11

mr chips,

glasgow 06/09/2006 08:27:49

Maybe mcabes efficiency savings can pay for it.

12

Aileen,

Greece 06/09/2006 08:37:18

The people who installed the beams intially should pay, obviously shoddy work if they had to be repaired.

13

mcsponger,

06/09/2006 08:46:17

The English tax payer!

14

St pauli,

06/09/2006 08:56:29

go on Margo, at least try!!!

15

Bejjy,

United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland 06/09/2006 08:56:41

I personally do not care who pays for the cost of the repairs to this "white elephant" of a building as long as it is not the long suffering English taxpayer who have beeen subsidizing Scotland for far too long. And this situation will continue for evermore as there is no way that Scotland will become independent because it has'nt got the ability to be self reliant.

16

Dave,

Western Isles 06/09/2006 09:08:28

Easy now everybody. Lets not rise to the f*ckwit and 15 and Andy Capp at 13. Say nowt.

17

SILVANA,

GLASGOW 06/09/2006 09:22:34

Sorry guys but I will never ever accept that building and more to the point the cost and on going costs. I would have more faith in our parliament if they had chosen to opt for a lesser and more sensible building. I think of all the good that the excess expenditure could have done for Hospitals etc. And I as a Scot of the not so united kingdom agree with Patriotic Jack. I do not see any reason in the English Tax payer subsidizing Scotland when we (Scottish Government) are throwing money hand over fist to this piece of nightmare architecture. Perhaps, if we were to become trully independent the Government will start to do some accounting and spend where it is needed: Hospitals, Education, Services for the Elderly.

18

Bejjy,

United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland 06/09/2006 09:22:41

Dave 16 Just the inane retort that I would expect of a barbarian of the Western Isles.

19

Dave,

Western Isles 06/09/2006 09:23:54

The point is that it's done so lets pay the bill and move on.

20

SILVANA,

GLASGOW 06/09/2006 09:27:04

Dave, England does subsidise Scotland

21

Grant,

06/09/2006 09:41:55

It doesn't Mairi, but if it makes SOME insecure English people happy, who are we to complain?

22

Bejjy,

United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland 06/09/2006 09:47:27

What makes you think that I am English Enormity or is it just a supposition?

23

Dave,

Western Isles 06/09/2006 09:47:28

Mairi

You are not Scottish nor from Glasgow or you would know where the money actually came from. What's the Gaelic for Glasgow and what does it mean?

24

SouthernSkye,

Isle of Skye 06/09/2006 09:52:48

Ought to be taking a look at our spell checkers and/or location as 'subsidizing' is the American spelling, 'subsidising' the correct UKoGB&NI spelling. Jack, be patriotic by all means, but not a U.S patriot!

25

Bejjy,

United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland 06/09/2006 09:54:48

Southern Skye. You are being pedantic; either spelling of the word suffices would you not agree?

26

Dave,

Western Isles 06/09/2006 10:06:13

Southern Ske

You are quite correct. Correct spelling and punctuation (apart form the odd keyboard mishap) is a sign of intelligence and consideration. Good for you for keeping the standards up.

I believe the best spoken and written Queens English is in Inverness. Which I believe is in Scotland.

27

G.,

Edinburgh, the not so United Kingdom 06/09/2006 10:09:05

patriotic jack you are nothing more than a troll. An arse of the highest order. If you have nothing relevant to say don't bother.

28

Bejjy,

United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland 06/09/2006 10:20:50

And you have something relevant to say Graeme?; pray please tell us what it is and please try doing so without the obscenities if that is possible.

29

mcsponger,

06/09/2006 10:25:05

Dave26 possesive apostrophe in the word Queens is missing, I believe

30

Dave,

Western Isles 06/09/2006 10:38:01

Beg your pardon Andy. Unfortunately I'm a product of a relatively modern English education and therefore didn't get an education in proper englund.

31

Yogi,

06/09/2006 10:42:44

It ain't over 'till the ..... lady sings!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EruS1zvX2n8&mode=relat...=
YouTube - Alice Sheridan Gies It Laldy Wi The Singing

32

rasputin,

06/09/2006 10:58:41

I would like to see the Scottish Parliament renamed Satans Bawsack.Patriotic jack , whats wrong are your suspenders hurting?

33

.,

06/09/2006 11:16:22

The only people who genuinely believe the cost of the building is an issue are morons with no concept of what large unique building project costs.

The Sydney Opera House was projected at $7m and came in at over $100m in the 70's for God's sake!
New Wembley is around £800m.

If you believed this building would cost £40m then you are a fool. This was a figure plucked out the air before the building was even designed!

34

Dave,

Western Isles 06/09/2006 11:46:04

Anon

That's the point, we were taken for fools. Not many of us have the ability to cost a job of this size and therefore we have to rely on people who can, the same people employed by the Executive to do so and inform the MSP's of a ball park figure. What we got was a figure that left the ball still in it's wrapper in the shop!

Just to let you know, the Welsh assembly was built pretty much on time and pretty much on budget. What did they have that we didn't?

By the way, i take it you were not a fool and knew that the parliament was going to come in at 10 times the original estimate?

35

Yogi,

06/09/2006 12:24:50

Who says White Elephants don't need fed?

36

WJohn,

West Lothian 06/09/2006 12:38:25

Never mind. it will be nice when it is finished. The pigeons need a roost, it looks lovely from directly above and it has more fiddly bits than the Greenwich Dome.
From the front of the debating chamber the modesty boards in front of the debating chamber desks look like a lot of fat backsides climbing the steps. Very symbolic and a nice touch of irony.
Also, as a corollary to what Anon from nowhere states above, if you believed what a politician told you about the building, you were doubly foolish.

37

Daibhidh,

06/09/2006 12:48:47

Mari #17..." would have more faith in our parliament if they had chosen to opt for a lesser and more sensible building."

You show your ignorance...the parliament building was put out to tender by WESTMINSTER, not the Scottish Parliament. Almost ALL the cocks up were created by WESTMINSTER when they controlled the parliaments construction process.

The MSPs and Scottish Parliament have had to carry the blame for all of this, but the problems and over-spend all almost ALL down to London, NOT Scotland. Go and check your facts.

Points 2, the building we now have is not the building that £40m was quoted for, so you simply cannot compare the final cost and this make-believe £40m figure that Tony BLiar et al initially signed up to...

38

Gordon Zola,

Leithski Walka 06/09/2006 13:06:36

Parliment pieces all on site now. My cousin Jerzy and me build it for you cheap price garantee.

39

Gordon Zola,

Gorgiezawa 06/09/2006 13:17:23

Glupi brat, Pawel. They already build it two years ago. This was only a repair.

40

Gordon Zola,

Leithski Walka 06/09/2006 13:34:02

Mistake you are make maly siostra. Parliment not build yet. Big pile of bits like in Jerzys scrap yard it look like.

41

Mr Piles,

Coldwall 06/09/2006 15:24:43

pawel... excellent observation my good man !

42

SILVANA,

06/09/2006 20:28:11

DAVID 37

MY EGO DOES NOT REQUIRE A WHITE ELEPHANT AND YES AM SCOTTISH AND FROM GLASGOW BUT SINCE YOU ARE SURE OF OTHERWISE, READ THE FOLLOWING EXTRACT:
ENGLAND is subsidising Scotland by £3 billion a year more than it needs at the expense of less affluent English regions, according to an academic audit.

A year-long study by two economists into the structure of subsidies concludes that Scots receive 22% more per head in public spending than England and that this is not deserved because people north of the border are already wealthier than people living in most English regions.

However, contrary to the claims of politicians such as Ken Livingstone, the London mayor, that inhabitants of the capital are losing out, the academics also find that Londoners receive 42% too much in public spending because they earn more than anywhere else in Britain.

The report by Professor David Bell of Stirling University and Professor Sir Donald MacKay, a former economics adviser to the Scottish secretaries for 25 years, was seized on by English politicians. Boris Johnson, the Tory shadow higher education minister, described the spending gap as “intolerable” and demanded that Gordon Brown, the chancellor, change the procedures for distributing money.

43

HA,

07/09/2006 06:52:20

Is there anyone in Scotland who doesn't (rightly) hate the Scottish Executive? (except for those on the gravy traian themselves)


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



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.