COMMENT: Trams watchdog with no bite 30 | 03 | 2011

YOU KNOW, there are time when the reality of the Edinburgh trams debacle just beggars belief. We all know about the soaring costs, constant delays and political and commercial wrangling, but this latest incident takes the biscuit.

You may – or may not — know there exists a watchdog (yes, there's always watchdog) which was set up by Edinburgh City Council to scrutinise the city's tram project. Amazingly, given the importance of the project, the council's tram sub-committee sat together yesterday for the first time in a year.

Now, given all the points I mentioned above (costs, delays etc), you'd think there would be plenty to fill the first agenda for 12 months; oh no.

Did they debate when the trams will finally run? Did they discuss the costs, or the political bickering which has resulted in the capital's city centre streets looking like a building site?

No. Instead they talked daintily about whether traffic diversions brought in for the trams will lead to higher levels of pollution for residents in the west end!

Now, like the next person, I'm aware of air quality and traffic's influence on it, but is this really the most pressing issue for the councillors to be talking about?

This is not the first time it's come under fire. Last year the committee was accused of failing to do its job properly after it emerged it had met just five times since it had been formed at the start of the project.

What is the business case for the trams — see our report

So, what was actually discussed? Well Professor Duncan Laxen, a leading expert in air quality management, concluded that, despite concerns from local residents, levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) in Great Stuart Street continued to be within safe limits.
It also heard from Dr Richard Othieno, a consultant in public health medicine and health protection with NHS Lothian, who said there was no evidence that traffic diversions had led to higher numbers of respiratory ailments in that part of the city.

Now I'm no expert in air quality, but those findings don't really come as any surprise. But, of course, Edinburgh City Council being as anti-car as it is will jump on any bandwagon to railroad against the automobile.

One of the objectors, Ashley Lloyd, said there had been a "phenomenal" rise in traffic in the west end in the past few years as diversions were introduced for the tram works.
"There's a compelling case for a rapid change in the approach being taken by the council," Lloyd said. "The council must re-open Shandwick Place and Princes Street to general traffic because people living in Edinburgh can't afford this pollution timebomb."

Pollution timebomb? Excuse me, but what a lot of tosh. And Prof Laxen was quick to highlight the fact pollution levels in the west end were still within EU guidelines.

Read our roadtest of the ultra-clean Fiat 500 TwinAir

Before we go any further, the Prof is a former scientific adviser to Defra on air quality who was responsible for helping draw up much of the policy underpinning the UK's air quality strategy. And just for good measure, he went on to criticise residents for "misrepresenting" the data that had been collected.

"It was reassuring to hear from independent expert witnesses who rejected the concerns raised by the residents and supported the approach taken by council officials," Councillor Gordon Mackenzie, the council's transport convener and chair of the tram sub-committee, said.

"It was always predicted that this area would see an increase in traffic, that's why we've already made some changes and are looking at others."

So, the council's tram sub-committee 'talkshop' adjourned until the next time; whenever that may be.

As to when work on Edinburgh's multi-million pound tram project will resume, and when the first trams will actually run, no one has a clue.

Keep up-to-date with all the latest news by following us on twitter.com/scotcars

Jim McGill