Fury As Transport Scotland releases heavilly censored tram files
Artist's impressions of trams in Edinburgh
THE Scottish Government was today accused of “breathtaking” secrecy over the trams project after Transport Scotland responded to a Freedom of Information request with 17 pages of documents almost completely blacked out. Officials took a thick marker pen to page after page of the information, leaving just the odd paragraph intact.
Lothians Labour MSP Kezia Dugdale said the blackout was “unacceptable”.
She said: “This level of secrecy is breathtaking. We need to know why ministers ordered Transport Scotland experts off the project way back in 2007.
“They were the ones able to advise on potential pitfalls, they should have been at the table, but somebody ordered them off.
“These papers show who it was – but we are not allowed to know.
“We need total honesty and openness on the trams. People cannot hide behind a marker pen and those responsible for mistakes must be prepared to take full responsibility.”
The Evening News revealed earlier this month that Edinburgh City Council and its trams firm TIE responded to a similar FoI request by first claiming they no longer held the information requested, then admitting they did have the documents but would not hand them over, claiming it would cost too much to do so.
Transport Scotland said the redacted information related to the formulation of government policy.
A letter explained: “Officials and ministers must be able to work in an environment where they are able to discuss the making of policy without the threat of the release of those deliberations. We consider the interest of the public is better served by withholding the information.”
But Ms Dugdale said: “People in Edinburgh are furious by the way the trams have been handled by the council and the government. The public has a right to know. A news blackout like this is unacceptable.”
She said the public inquiry which she has called for – and which ministers have agreed to in principle – should now have the power to compel witnesses to attend and produce paperwork.
Lesley Hinds, Labour’s transport spokeswoman on the city council, said: “There are real concerns that even under Freedom of Information law so much information is scored out. We need a rigorous, full inquiry to make sure they can get to the truth.
“You’ve got to ask what the Scottish Government have got to hide here.
“It must be pretty embarrassing stuff to go to this effort. Clearly something has gone catastrophically wrong with this project and the public want answers.”
Gordon Henderson, development manager for the Federation of Small Businesses, said the lack of information only added to the need for a full public inquiry.
“We have always supported the case for a public inquiry, and this certainly adds fuel to that argument, as it seems it will be the only way to find out what is behind the black ink.”
Labour said it planned to appeal to the Information Commissioner for the release of the full documents.
What the remains of the documents say . .
Transport Scotland – July 6, 2007:
Last week’s decision of parliament that ministers accept the wishes of Parliament to support the Edinburgh tram project to the limit of the previous administration’s funding limit. You subsequently set this at “£490m” and no more, although there there were other references to “£500m”, essentially emanating from the Auditor General’s report. You also took the opportunity to confirm that the scheme was the City of Edinburgh’s - not the executive’s - in the post-debate press conference.
Transport Scotland – July 6, 2007:
To achieve . . . clarity of roles and ensure that situations could not arise subsequently in the governance of the project which might generate further calls on central funding, I propose that Transport Scotland’s future engagement should be on the basis of revised grant conditions and once these conditions are in place Transport Scotland staff should withdraw from active participation in the governance of this project.
On behalf of Finance Secretary – July 11, 2007:
Mr Swinney agrees with the approach outlined in Option 3 (annex C of the minute) as the cap on Trams and he also agrees that Transport scotland should “scale back” its direct involvement with this project.
Email to a friend
Print this page- Family mourn death of Glasgow ‘fight’ schoolboy
- Rangers takeover: Duff & Phelps threaten legal action against BBC
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
- Rangers administration: Fans fear Duff & Phelps claims could scare off Green
- Rangers takeover: triple penalty punishment enough, says Johnston
- Alistair Darling leads ‘No to independence’ fight over tea and biscuits
- Scottish independence: SNP flip-flops over Nato
- Scottish Independence: SNP ‘won’t be Yes campaign’s only voice’
- Scottish independence: Alex Salmond’s pledge to sign up 1m voters
- Today’s youth not fit to be employed, says car firm Arnold Clark
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Sunday 27 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 10 C to 22 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 62 comments to this article
Page 1 of 5
Mark Bishop
Wednesday, April 18, 2012 at 01:15 PMPerhaps the Grim Seeker of Truth Ian Hislop should put his Private Eye team on this one and rootle out the facts. He's about the only person I trust not to cover things up. It doesn't matter what your political persuasion is, WRITE to your MP and SPOIL your ballot papers and let this Council know what you think about them. Certainly don't vote for any of them.
SarahB
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 11:44 PMWOTTPI (50) - Audit Scotland describes itself as the public's financial watchdog and yet what use has it served? My previous MSP actually asked Robert Black in, I think, 2006 through the Public Audit Committee, to take a hard look at the tram project and he replied that AS could not do that as it did not normally examine projects until they were complete at which point they may decide to undertake a retrospective review. The cynic in me believes that the reason for their reluctance is that, if they did get involved at a more useful moment, then they feel they would become responsible, at least, in part for a project's outcome so they would really rather not! Concerns about the tram project were clearly being raised long before the contracts were signed and yet AS, even when asked directly by Mr Swinney, put together a remit which did not cover the most crucial financial questions. Some financial watchdog that hears the concerns grow louder and louder and yet refuses to investigate! Indeed, the inadequate report which they did eventually produce in 2007 only served to confuse by giving the impression that the project had been thoroughly scrutinised when it had not.
judgedredd777
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 10:22 PMNow that`s "Hear No Evil Sea No Evil" Guilty by the majority vote in Edinburgh. The Revolution will take no Prisoners. So get real and tell the truth before the Judge gives his verdict. The "Vanity Tram" is is a larger crime than the Banks and the Credit Crunch. Show no Mercy.
judgedredd777
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 09:38 PMNow that`s "Hear No Evil Sea No Evil" Guilty by the majority vote in Edinburgh. The Revolution will take no Prisoners. So get real and tell the truth before the Judge gives his verdict. The "Vanity Tram" is is a larger crime than the Banks and the Credit Crunch. Show no Mercy.
William Forbes
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 09:26 PM17 pages? Why all the fuss? Try and get info on GARL - my record is 36 pages "redacted" as they say. I didn't even know there was such a word - it will be interesting to see if the Scottish Government invented that word.
Hazelkaye
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 08:40 PMFurthermore- there are the EGIP and RAIL 2014 'consultations' (Tee-Hee_Hee) in the offing! How many of the critical and just responses will be sensored, redacted and deleted because they don't 'fit the bill'? NEED I ASK? THOUGHT NOT!
Jams
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 07:59 PMA spokesman for Transport Scotland said "We just don't #### # ####. So you can all just go #### ##########"
Lord HawHaw
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 07:49 PMPS, wonder who will use the pistol and who will take the poison in the leaders bunker, after the dear deputy has tried to make a seperate peace with the allies?
Lord HawHaw
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 07:47 PMIs there any truth in the claim that the council as well as censoring the freedom of speach in the past the present and one can only assume the future, also run a special department who carry out " wet " op's or assasinations and is run from Murryburn ?
Niebiosa tam sa naprawde nieskrzydlowe ludzie tam
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 06:44 PMwasted
Niebiosa tam sa naprawde nieskrzydlowe ludzie tam
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 06:43 PMI will be wasting my ballot paper, by writing "None of the above", I will NOT vote for any party political candidate, nor will I abstain. Let's see the shameless piggies take a seat where the spoiled ballots are greater than those "wated" on them !
Niebiosa tam sa naprawde nieskrzydlowe ludzie tam
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 05:42 PMAll this means is that they have something to hide. Names could have been redacted, if that was a concern, but to do this sort of this , well, it is simply a kick in the teeth to the citizens of Edinburgh,indeed of Scotland, this reeks of arrogance.
WOTTPI
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 05:11 PMSarahB @41. Oh yes I forgot that argument that the Scot Gov can't tell AS what their remit is. All sounds a bit fishy to me. Maybe it can't be done officially but surely a quiet word in the AG's ear is on order. If they didn't think Swinney was looking for an answer on whether the thing would come in on time and budget what the hell did they think he was after??!! The man in the street generally expects that AS are there to look into that kind of thing. Of course if he couldn't ask AS for that type of information with regard to the project then who could he have asked? Step forward his officials at Transport Scotland who were surely well placed (having been on the tram board up until that point) to say if the £500m for the whole route was realistic!!!
Jools in Edinburgh
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 04:55 PMSarahB......Old Jim is a rabid anti-Labour Nationalist. It's a complete waste of time saying anything to that guy as he blames all the ills of this world on Labour and thinks Alex Salmond and the SNP are the best thing since sliced bread
noodle doodle
Wednesday, November 23, 2011 at 04:34 PM#43 I think people in edinburgh are now at the point of just despising all politicians in general. The flavour of them makes no odds anymore expect to the activists on here claiming "but theys are worser, aye"
Page 1 of 5
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.