Newsletter - Links - Advertise - Contact Us - Privacy

Scottish Parliament still hoovering up taxpayer cash

February 16 2011

Scottish Parliament still hoovering up taxpayer cash
Taxpayers have been hit with a £2.5m bill for continued series of alterations and upgrades to the Scottish Parliament building over the past year – on top of annual running costs of £5m since 2006.

The princely sum was released under a freedom of information request which showed that the budget busting building is still sucking up cash, including an additional £1m which had to be forked out in 2009.

Expensive tinkering to the Parliaments real estate is the root cause of the expenditure, including £412,000 on swipe card turnstiles as an added security precaution.

Other items on MSP’s shopping lists were £1m of streetscape works, a £233k vehicle entry system and a £232k concrete chicane.

A Scottish Parliament spokeswoman said: “The figures reflect spend on security measures at the Scottish Parliament over the last two years and also long-term maintenance planning.”

The Parliament building, designed by Enric Miralles and RMJM, cost £414m and was completed in 2004.

Image © Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body - 2011


andy mc
#1 Posted by andy mc on 18 Feb 2011 at 14:11 PM
same old same old
leave it alone and let the public get to love it.
who knows it might lead to some confidence in architects... jinx
anyone checked out the costs of a cruise missile
same old same old
still waiting for someone in the press to be proud that we have a building developed from concept to delivery by a world leading architect in scotland
jinx look at all that pseudo georgian malarky ..whats going on in edinburgh
each time i walk the streets of Barcelona, take a cofee at el marcat de Santa Caterina i find a little bit of pride in the fact we ran with that.... and amidst a sea of presbyterian guilt hired a Catalan.. a poet
maybe we just dont deserve it
fact remains that when that Competition was run and the proposals started to flow there was not a contender.
whether you like rmjm and their trans world Fred goodwin allegiances or not
the team that delivered that have flowered from the experience of working on it.
david nimmo
#2 Posted by david nimmo on 18 Feb 2011 at 15:33 PM
The maintenance liabilities seem to be such that it is very unlikely to lead to confidence in architects. Quite the reverse I imagine.
David Malley
#3 Posted by David Malley on 18 Feb 2011 at 17:58 PM
I think the 1st commentator has been visiting the coffee bars in Amsterdam not Barca which I suppose partly explains his ramblings and why the Scottish public gain the impression all architects are pompous asses when people involved in the profession know that this is only true for 50% of them! For the record the client and other stakeholders were the people calling the shots not the project architects in this case.
We all have our opinions about the finished building but let us now move on.
#4 Posted by SAndals on 21 Feb 2011 at 13:39 PM
According to the article, this additional cost is down to client alterations and improvements in secturity etc. Nothing to do with architects, poor detailing, or ongoing maintenance...Of course a large public building has running costs and requires maintenace - at around one half of 1% - or less than 50p per person - it doesn't seeem that unreasonable to me.
As the above post says, let's celebrate the positive qualities of the indulgent work of art and move on!
#5 Posted by brian on 13 Jun 2011 at 14:19 PM
Edinburgh seems to be a bit of a basket case ,

Post your comments


All comments are pre-moderated and
must obey our house rules.


Back to February 2011

Search News
Subscribe to Urban Realm Magazine
Features & Reports
For more information from the industry visit our Features & Reports section.