Meanwhile in Scotland...

Granny 23

How refreshing to get your post. It was not necessary and I genuinely have an interest . I am interested to hear other posters views.

I tried to point posters in the direction of the Steel Industry woes and listening to the horses mouth speak by saying The Welsh Leader was making a Statement live on t.v re Steel and TaTa recently if anybody was interested but all I got was abuse! . Why, because I said 'truly' interested and some took it to be a personal attack. They also ignored the fact a Statement precedes a question and answer time by saying Carwyn Jones is Labour and will have left wing thoughts, some sort of rubbish like that. I am a tad boring and listen to debates from Holyrood and Cardiff often although I am English, it's surprising what nuggets you remember isn't it.

The steel industry is on it's knees in the UK at the moment and it needs as much help as possible and it takes adult debate and political will to keep it going , on that point I am sure we can agree.

I apologise wholeheartedly POGS for grasping the wrong end of the stick. Defending the SG and its Ministers against unfounded criticisms and deliberately provocative misinformation in the MSM has become my default position, especially when it concerns one of my good friends (Keith Brown).

Biased? - mea culpa

www.transport.gov.scot/news/statement-behalf-minister-transport-keith-brown-and-tata-steel

This is where I got the quotes from for info.

Granny 23

I most certainly was not suggesting any such thing.

I remember being interested at the time and watching debates from Holyrood. I know there was much anger in the Scottish papers and by the Unions who called on Alex Salmond to revisit the contract at the time.

I am thinking of the Statement made on behalf of , the then, Minister for Transport Keith Brown and TaTa Steel. He said.

"Scottish Ministers have made sure that contractual arrangements for the Forth Replacement Crossing provide all possible opportunities for Scotland's firms and workforce to benefit from the huge public investment being made in this essential infrastructure project. The procurement of sub contractors and 'suppliers' in a way that adheres to these contractual requirements is , however , quite rightly a commercial matter for the Forth Crossing Bridge Constructors.". A later comment followed in the Statement.

" We have stipulated that FCBC must advertise that work so 'Scottish' firms are fully aware of opportunities to bid. How FCBC procure those services and 'materials' is NOT a public procurement process and is entirely a commercial matter for them and NOT Transport Scotland, or any other part of the Scottish Government. It is for FCBC to manage ALL it's suppliers and subcontractors and the risks associated with that to deliver the project".

I think that point could be the reason there was so much anger at the time . The Scottish Government chose the consortium and agreed the contract terms. Who knows what might have happened if the other consortium were chosen. Instead of 'Scottish' firms being protected the Scottish governmnet widened it to UK firms and or indeed the contract would only be signed off if steel was supplied by the UK Steel Industry as much as possible.

What's done is done but I am playing devils advocate in mentioning certain points as the matter was raised in the thread and I had a slightly different view that's all. I have no doubt the Scottish Government acted in all good faith.

Further to my last post. I can see what POGS is getting at. However, the contract to which she refers is for the construction of the Bridge; this doesn't appear to include any agreement about where the steel for the contract is to be sourced. That must have been a separate contract.

The item I saw on TV about the new bridge, didn't say that NO British steel was used, but only a small percentage. This may explain the contract mentioned by POGS.

It's very easy for folks who accept as gospel the extremely biased 'facts' broadcast by msm. The Scottish government has had, and still has a consistently negative media to contend with. No news credit given for progress and considerable achievements thus far.

Sorry but I do not understand what point you are making POGS. Are you trying to suggest that there was some jiggery poker around the awarding of the contracts? Your link seems to confirm that everything was done according to the rules. Perhaps you know something that I don't?

Granny 23

I have a different take on the Queensferry Crossing/ Forth Replacement Crossing Project. My understanding is there were tenders by 2 construction consortiums . I am genuinely happy to be informed where I have mistaken the facts.

Consortium 1. FORTHSPAN
Balfour Beatty. UK
BAM Nuttal. UK
Morgan Est ( now Morgan Sindall) UK
Vinci. UK. (now MT Hojgaard )

Consortium 2. Forth Crossing Bridge Constructors
Dragados USA based
Hochtief. UK
American Bridge International. USA
Morrison Scotland.

The Forth Crossing Bridge Constructors consortium won the contract by the Scottish Government .

www.transport.gov.scot/road/forth-replacement-crossing/procurement.

Before Easter oxgangs kids were spread out across other schools and the P1s were in a community centre! In some cases the kids weren't allowed to mix with the host schools kids and the P1s were not able to access hot food or outdoor play. Those contingency plans clearly are not going to work for 19 schools and after the article I read today it will not be confined to edinburgh as this cowboy construction company have built public buildings all over the UK! We as parents and carers are very angry.

Try this link EW for a fairly full report:

www.heraldscotland.com/news/14417168.Scottish_councils_told_to_check_school_building_safety_after_shock_Edinburgh_closures/?ref=rss

It appears that only schools built by the PPP Consortium are at risk. There has been, historically, over capacity in the school estate in Edinburgh (I.E. they built more new schools than were needed - Why??) so many pupils can be absorbed into under used schools nearby. At this time of year many senior pupils will be starting study leave anyway, to prepare for their exams and I am sure that the Churches (there are 100s in Edinburgh) will offer their halls etc. but it remains a logistical nightmare.

So where are the children being sent? Home for the rest of the year, or is provision being made?

I can see why the council don't want a meeting. It wouldn't be about constructive suggestions how to deploy the children, it would be a lot of shouting about today's politics and a quest for someone to blame.

I didn't say the story is closed Jane

Sorry Anya the story is not closed. Deflecting the story of Sturgeons deal with the Chinese to one about the new Forth Bridge doesn't cover the issue.
I gather that the proposed projects for the Chinese deal include a housing development, a biomass plant and an unspecified rail project. The Scottish govt are under pressure to release minutes of the meeting. I would direct people to yesterday's 'Scotsman' for fuller details. These projects are according to Sir Richard Heygate ,UK rep of the Chinese consortium , due to commence within a year. Why the untypical secrecy?

Last week Cameron issued a statement saying he wants new hospitals, schools etc to use British steel

These school closures started with my granddaughters school when the gable end blew down during a storm in January. Thankfully it happened overnight & no one was hurt. It has been a complete farce since! We were told the school was safe and the kids returned after a few days. Then before the Easter break it was deemed unsafe & the work began. On Thursday we had word it would be open from Monday. Then Friday at 6.30pm another message to say actually they've found more issues and it's definitely NOT SAFE! There are now serious doubts about all the ppp1 schools built hence the other closures. I don't have an exact figure but thousands of kids are left without a safe school in which to get an education! There are no contingency plans in place for all these kids. Who passed these schools in the first instance as safe when the outer walls were not tied!! Somebody must have taken a huge back hander and heads should roll. It isn't helped by the council refusing to meet parents and carers to answer questions. We are being treated like mushrooms ?

Well done Granny23. I would say the debate is closed. You have supplied a detailed answer to the doubting Thomases out there.

Thanks for your factual input Granny23

I too was wondering why we were importing 'cheap' Chinese steel and this explains a lot.

So why the secrecy? Not like the SNP to avoid the limelight? Its clearly a very sore point for them hence the defensive responses. Why didn't they know what the Norwegians obviously did?

Didn't need to do a lot of research Roses it was all explained by the SG at the time. It only became confusing later when the Labour Party started attacking the SG for using Chinese steel. Either they had not checked out the facts or they were being deliberately obtuse.

This link is to the official press release as to the results of the Trade Mission to China in July 2015

news.scotland.gov.uk/News/50-Scottish-businesses-received-support-on-China-trade-mission-1ba2.aspx

This steel matter is all very confusing, but you have obviously done your homework on this matter G23 let us hope that the Chinese steel is of good quality and will not be a problem in time to come.

I take no interest at all in football and therefore never check the results of matches. This does not mean that the results are 'secret' just not reported on the TV that I watch or in the papers that I read.

Not inferior at all, Roses just the wrong type of steel. When we lost most of our heavy industries (and whose fault was that?) the remaining plants concentrated on high end specialist steels. As Tizliz says there were no British Companies able to tender for the bridge contract because none of them had furnaces capable of producing the required heavy steel in large quantities.

Jane10 How can you call a thing secret when many people, including myself, who take an interest, were well aware of Nicola's trade mission and the outcome thereof?

Secret deals with dodgy Chinese companies are always suspicious.

I understood that NO British companies tended (is that the correct word?) for the steel for the new bridge so they had to go to China.