Scottish Parliament Building

The Scottish Parliament Building is now the home of the Scottish Parliament at Holyrood, within the UNESCO World Heritage Site in Edinburgh. The Members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) held their first debate in the building on Tuesday, September 7, 2004. The formal opening by Queen Elizabeth II took place on October 9, 2004.

Construction

The construction of the Parliament Building proved controversial in a number of respects: the decision to construct a new building, the choice of site, the selection of a non-Scottish architect, the selection of Bovis as construction manager after having earlier been excluded from the shortlist, and serious cost and time overruns.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The then Secretary of State for Scotland Donald Dewar was adamant that a new building should be provided for the new Parliament. Work commenced in late 1997 with the demolition of a brewery on the chosen site. The alternative site of the Royal High School was rejected on grounds of size and location.

Related Topics:
Secretary of State for Scotland - Donald Dewar - 1997

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In January 1998 an international competition was announced by the Scottish Office to find an architect to build the Parliament, and in early 1999 the Catalan Enric Miralles was chosen, with the design work being awarded to EMBT/RMJM (Scotland) Ltd, a Spanish-Scottish joint venture design company created for the project.

Related Topics:
1998 - Scottish Office - Architect - 1999 - Catalan - Enric Miralles

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Miralles' design was radical and highly complex, involving a series of towers and an open-plan debating chamber. The most distinctive external feature was a roof in the shape of upturned boats. After the Scottish Parliament came into existence in June 1999, the size of the building was increased by 47%. The September 11, 2001 attacks in New York meant that further costly security measures were added to the designs.

Related Topics:
September 11, 2001 attacks - New York

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The project was also complicated by the deaths in 2000 of Miralles and Dewar, and existence of a multi-headed client (consisting of the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body, the Presiding Officer, and an architectural advisor), who took over the project from the Scottish Executive (formerly the Scottish Office) while it was already under construction.

Related Topics:
2000 - Presiding Officer - Scottish Executive

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

By March 2004 the architects had issued around 18,000 orders for changes in the design, and the cost had reached the sum of 430 million pounds (compared to an original budget of 55 million in July 1998 when the architects were appointed). This equates to 85 pounds for each of the five million people in Scotland http://www.gro-scotland.gov.uk/grosweb/grosweb.nsf/pages/poprep1. Final costs are expected to come in around £470 million once teething problems have been ironed out in the building's first year.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Fraser Inquiry

In May 2003 First Minister Jack McConnell announced a major public inquiry into the handling of the building project, headed by Lord Fraser of Carmyllie. The inquiry was held at the Land Court in Edinburgh and took evidence from architects, civil servants, politicians and the building companies.

Related Topics:
Jack McConnell - Public inquiry - Lord Fraser of Carmyllie

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In presenting his report in September 2004, Lord Fraser stated that he was astonished that year after year the ministers who were in charge were kept so much in the dark over the increases in cost estimates. He also stated that the building could never have been built for 50 million pounds, and that he was amazed that the belief that it could be was perpetuated for so long. He believed that from at least April 2000, when MSPs commissioned the Spencely

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Report to decide whether the building should continue, it should have been realised that the building was bound to cost in excess of 200 million pounds. Furthermore, approximately 150 million pounds of the final cost was wasted as a result of design delays, over-optimistic programming and uncertain authority.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Among the criticisms were:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• Despite having only an outline design, the designers RMJM/EMBT (Scotland) Ltd stated without foundation that the building could be completed within a 50 million pound budget. Despite that, they were apparently believed by officials. The two architectural practices in the RMJM and EMBT joint venture operated dysfunctionally, and failed to communicate effectively with each other and the project manager. The death of Miralles also gave rise to a substantial period of disharmony.
• The Brief emphasised the importance of design and quality over quality and programme, and was not updated despite considerable evolution of the design.
• Ministers were not informed of grave concerns within the Scottish Office over the cost of the project, and officials failed to take the advice of the cost consultants.
• The Scottish Office decided to let the construction work as a "construction management contract", rather than under the Private Finance Initiative in order to speed construction, but without properly evaluating the financial risks of doing so, and - in a decision that Fraser stated "beggers belief" - without asking Ministers to approve it. This was one of the two most flawed decisions.
• The second most flawed decision was the insistence on a rigid programme. Officials decided that rapid delivery of the new building was to be the priority, but that quality should be maintained. It was therefore inevitable that the cost would suffer. The client was obsessed with early completion and failed to understand the impact on cost and completion date if high-quality work and a complex building were required. In attempting to achieve early completion, the management contractor produced optimistic programmes, to which the architects were unwise to commit. The main causes of the slippage were delays in designing a challenging project that was to be delivered against a tight timetable using an unusual procurement route.

Reaction to the report

Following the report Jack McConnell stated that the Fraser recommendations would be fully implemented, and that

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

fundamental reform of the Civil Service was already underway, with trained professionals being recruited to handle such projects in future. John Elvidge, the top civil servant in Scotland, admitted that best practice had not been followed and apologised for the way the project had been handled. He did not rule out the possibility of taking disciplinary action against civil service staff.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Fraser recommendations

In his report, Lord Fraser set out a number of recommendations stemming from his inquiry. The recommendations cover the:

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

• Selection of designers, consultants or contractors
• Use of international architects
• Use of "construction management" contracts
• Importance of following European Union procurement rules
• Use of independent professional advisers
• Project governance
• Amendments to Scottish legislation
• Security measures
• Amendment of the procedures of the Scottish Parliament
• Importance of contracts, bonds and guarantees.