Scottish Futures Trust hit back at Fraser’s “errors”
December 10 2010
Pointing out “many errors” in Frasers critique of SFT’s hub procurement initiative O’Hare stressed that they held: “…no monopoly over public building” whilst pointing out that: “…the South East area does not include Fife.”
This riposte followed an earlier public letter issued by hub programme manager Neil Grice, which rebutted several other of Fraser’s points.
In the letter Grice clarifies that the hub was not “devised by SFT” as stated by Fraser but rather: “The Scottish Government invited SFT to lead and manage the programme on its behalf in 2009.”
Grice also took the opportunity to challenge Fraser’s assertion that contracts awarded by the hub were heading south, pointing out that Scottish companies including Morrison Construction and Davis Langdon have both won commissions.
Further, Grice stressed that more than 100 local suppliers have been brought on board in the north of Scotland alone and that: “Local builders, architects, tradespeople and SMEs are all encouraged to join the hub supply chains in all the hub company territories.”
Finally Grice points out that European legislation “is not a choice”, as all public sector bodies are required to apply the law.
3 Comments
#2 Posted by Mickey on 14 Dec 2010 at 19:23 PM
But do the ruas care about creating jobs or helping the profession? No for Xmas they do a card competition and a wee journal to promote their pals!
While we keep building little wee perfect Disneyland communities in Scotland that do not work in greenfield land and golf courses for trumpet Tramps. Interesting article by the Guardian about the failures of the perfect communities http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/13/celebration-death-of-a-dream?cat=world&type=article
While we keep building little wee perfect Disneyland communities in Scotland that do not work in greenfield land and golf courses for trumpet Tramps. Interesting article by the Guardian about the failures of the perfect communities http://m.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/13/celebration-death-of-a-dream?cat=world&type=article
#3 Posted by Christopher Dinnis Architect on 17 Dec 2010 at 16:42 PM
Why is there not the system that the old PSA used, which was that all Architects whatever size of practice they were, could be registered on the PSA schedule who in turn would interview them on an annual rotary basis and award work to the respective practices based on their work capacity and experience. Thus the entire profession was able to be used efficiently and effectively. The present system locks out all small practices and thus they have no bread and butter work, which means they cannot take on young students. Small practices are the best for students as they get early experience at the coal face of work the environment. The culture of forming a large consortium should not be encouraged as this leads to very bad practice and great inefficiency and a shocking waste of public funds. If it worked in the past why have these methods of work practice been abolished? Me thinks this is political control completely out of control and it should be brought to account as soon as possible. I therefore support Malcolm Fraser is his attack on the whole system whether it is PFI or SFT.
Post your comments
Read next: Ryder unveil Bonhill Primary
Read previous: Angus Council approves £55m golf development
Back to December 2010
Like us on Facebook
Become a fan and share
News Archive
Search News
Features & Reports
For more information from the industry visit our Features & Reports section.
Local procuremant and supply chains will suffer under this government boffin. We are achieving very competive traditional tender returns in the current climate. This is just going to hurt locals job in the regions. The incrediably slow set of this initiative is delaying real work that could be happening now- saving more jobs. RIAS needs to do more. Mr Grice should come and meet my family and the other who will invariably be displaced by a poorly thought out programme.