Edinburgh North-South tramline: Row as transport convener fails to attend public meeting
Edinburgh’s transport convener Stephen Jenkinson has come under fire after he failed to attend a public meeting about the proposed new tramline at which he was billed as the speaker.
Around 40 people turned up for the meeting, organised by Drylaw and Telford community council, on Tuesday evening to discuss the plans for a North-South line between Granton and the Royal Infirmary.
But Cllr Jenkinson, who says he was originally invited to speak just to the community council, was not there.
Mhairi Curran, interim chair of the community council, said he had only told them the previous day he would not be attending. She said he had made a distinction between an open meeting and a public meeting and expressed concerns about safety.
She said: “Community councils are always open - anyone can come if you live in the area - but apparently there’s a difference between an open meeting and a public meeting, the reason being better safety.”
She said council officials who had also agreed to attend had withdrawn as well. “Just to tell us at the last minute that they’re not coming really isn’t very helpful.”
And she said people in Drylaw felt disenfranchised because there had been no drop-in session on the trams in the area, although there were such sessions in neighbouring areas.
Inverleith SNP councillor Vicky Nicolson, who chaired the meeting, said: “Two months ago you invited the transport convener to this meeting and two months ago he said yes, and since then I’ve seen him at various council meetings and spoken to him about this meeting, and only yesterday he decided he wouldn’t attend.
“This is the best attended meeting we've ever had in Drylaw and Telford community council.”
She said they now planned to press for a drop-in session to be held in the area.
Ms Curran was asked if Cllr Jenkinson had said he would not attend because he was worried about his safety. She said: “It was one of the reasons, yes. He said a public meeting was different from an open meeting and it requires a different kind of security.
“I can understand - councillors, and politicians in general, are being targeted quite a lot just now. But I don't think we are a violent community. I don't see anyone causing any riots.”
The most controversial aspect of the tramline proposal is the choice of route between Ferry Road and the city centre - going by the Roseburn Path, a popular walking and cycling route, or by Crewe Road South and Orchard Brae, then over Dean Bridge, which is seen as a major engineering challenge.
At the meeting, concerns were raised over the plan, under the Roseburn Path option, for a walking and cycling path alongside the tram track, separated by a barrier, and whether the width was really enough to accommodate people walking and cycling.
One member of the audience asked how fast the trams would be going and another voiced concern about the crossings planned over the line. “Someone was killed out at Edinburgh Park in an incident with a tram. That’s what we’re introducing to this place, potentially dangerous level crossings with fast trams. What’s going to be done about making sure these crossing points are safe?”
One man said he had been commuting by bike through town for the past two years and using the Roseburn Path. But he said: “If I get pushed back onto the roads I'll go back to my car.”
And a woman who lives near the Roseburn Path, asked how long it would take to build the tramline. “Are we going to have a building site at the end of our gardens for years? I have lived here for 17 years. I will definitely move if that's how long it's going to take or they can’t give a timescale.”
Another woman asked about access during the construction. “If it’s the Roseburn Parth, is the whole area going to be sealed off for the duration or will they do it in sections and open it up as they go along?”
Former Labour councillor Lesley Hinds said she did not think the Orchard Brae route was a serious option. And a member of the audience claimed it was included in the consultation as a “false choice”.
Cllr Jenkinson defended his absence from the meeting at Drylaw Neighbourhood Centre. “I agreed to meet with the community council, not to attend a public meeting.
“There are risks associated with a public meeting that need to be fully addressed well in advance. I was only given notice it was a public meeting on Monday for a meeting that was happening on Tuesday.
“If there were to be a public meeting where officers and councillors were going to be present I would want to be assured that the safety of both the people attending but also the officials and councillors had been fully considered.”
He also said it would not have been fair to attend a public meeting in one part of the city when there were not public meetings in other parts of the city.
“As part of the tram consultation process, it was agreed that drop in sessions would be organised across the city to allow residents to engage with the process, find out about the proposals and ask any questions of officers. That’s the standard engagement process for this consultation. I’m now trying to organise an additional drop in session for the Drylaw area and I’m fairly confident that’s going to happen in the next week or two.”