Letters: It's time council apologised for the trams debacle

WHY has our council got itself in such a mess with the trams project? The electorate were assured before the work started that all would go to plan, and there would be as little disruption as possible to Edinburgh's business community and the people residing here.

The first phase of the work was carried out in Leith. It was like going on to a building site for most people. It did not go to plan like the council had promised. Now the work was due to start on Princes Street and we are being told that the company laying the trams wants more money.

This work has now ground to a halt as our council and the company laying the tracks argue over the finer details, such as more money. We have been told that it could put this part of the project back by as much as year.

Meanwhile, Princes Street is looking more like a building site, the same as Leith Walk did, with no solution in place to get this work finished.

Our council set up businesses at the beginning of these works so that they could be in control of the whole project from the start. So if the blame should go anywhere, it must lie with our councillors who have ignored all advice given to them from the experts.

It is time for our councillors to apologise to the people of Edinburgh and businesses affected by the mess that has been created.

Andrew Murphy, Royal Mile, Edinburgh

Nigel must not try to rewrite history

IF it was not so serious it would be laughable. Nigel Griffiths, Labour MP, argues in your paper (February 24) that the tram project should be scrapped and attempts to shift the blame from the Labour Party for its ill-fated conception.

The only party to oppose the signing of the contract from the tram project was the SNP. Twelve SNP councillors' names are recorded in the council minutes of 28 June 2007 (as you attempt to rewrite history, Nigel, in order to complete your duplicity, would you like to rewrite the council minute?). The Labour administration of the council at the time refused my request for a referendum on this issue in the city because they knew exactly what the outcome would be. So sorry, Nigel, it won't work. Your attempt to distance yourself from the tram project is ill-fated and far, far too late

Steve Cardownie, SNP group leader, Edinburgh City Council, City Chambers

Exchange rate is at the root of dispute

AFTER reading your article on TIE and the dispute with Bilfinger Berger over cost of doing tram work, I find it incredible that when they had been given the contract that a fixed exchange rate had not been agreed. This must be the reason they have now demanded extra money – their profit margin has decreased.

The exchange rate is now about one to one with the euro and therefore when a fixed price was negotiated, the pound to the euro was high. It is like giving contracts to all foreign companies – an exchange rate should be negotiated on and penalties for late delivery of construction.

The parliament building would not have had been such a high cost if the contracts had been negotiated correctly.

Arthur Thompson, retired mechanical/ electrical consultant engineer, Niddrie Mains Drive, Edinburgh

No wonder it's now a ghost town

I KNEW about the traffic disruption expected in the city centre, but had no qualms about walking there to shop for new shoes. However, as I approached Princes Street from The Mound, the only way through was West Princes Street Gardens.

Myself and other pedestrians, bemused thanks to the lack of signage, followed this route, hoping to exit from the first gate, but it was blocked, and so on, and so on.

I finally exited ten minutes later at South Charlotte Street, and had to walk back after another ten minutes to The Mound.

A full 20 minutes to cross the road. No wonder Princes Street is like a ghost town.

Gary McKenzie, Webster's Land, Grassmarket, Edinburgh

Sexy bus? Thanks, I'll take the car

I REFER to your article by Neil Greig (February 18) who said: "Providing a really attractive public transport alternative is also the city's ultimate weapon. The best way to stop cars clogging up the streets of Edinburgh is not to try and tax them into oblivion but make buses cheaper, faster, safer an as sexy as a BMW."

Well, someone ought to tell Lothian Buses. My long-standing, and frequently used 21 bus service to and from work has just been changed from a double-decker to a single-decker format.

In peak periods the bus is overly busy. The morning journeys are just bearable, the evening ones an ordeal.

The seats are not large enough to get two normal adults on without the inner passenger being perched on the edge.

And once you get people standing in the isles, the squeezing of passengers back and forth is ridiculous.

It is plainly evident that a great many of the passengers are irritated when it's like this. With double-deckers you had a choice. Up or down. You also had much more personal space.

Lothian Buses quoted commercial reasons for the change, the seating on double deckers being under utilised. They seem to have completely ignored passenger comfort and convenience.

Oh, and let's not forget the recent massive hike in fare costs – 20 per cent or thereabouts.

Thanks to Lothian Buses, after 17 years I'm now back in the market for a car. Unbelievable.

M Burnett, Leith