Cheaper to rip down parliament and start again

[egb_hibs]

I remember us debating the parliaments architecture many moons ago. My complaint at the time was that it wan example of the cringey parish cooncil mentality that Scottish politics needed to get over; the kind of third division thinking that concludes an avante garde building makes the nation look 'progressive, where in fact it would simply look hopelessly dated within 20 years, not to mention shit - with the effects of Scotland's rain / water staining destined to take a swift toll.

Even at my most curmudgeonly I would not have forecast this fiasco, so emblematic of state run projects;

‘Cheaper to tear down Scottish parliament by 2020’ - The Scotsman

It will be outlasted by the candidate buildings, dismissed by the pygmies of Scottish politics as being too old fashioned for them.

 

[PILTONSTANY]

Probs the same with the Infirmary and having that contract. Our politicians are clueless sometimes

 

[MixuDave]

Never mind the financial cost, on looks alone it deserve's flattened! An absolute eyesore of a building imo

 

[aggie]

I've hated it since day one. I'd love it to be pulled down, frankly.

 

[Brainwrong]

Tesco will be eyeing it up already for a wee flagship right royal Tesco Metro.

 

[Doc Shrink]

Why companies build buildings in Scotland with wooden bits on them (not the window frames before anyone says) I'll never know. With our crap weather, the wood is wrecked after only a short time and actually makes the building an eyesore.

The use of timber in construction in Scotland has many advantages, including sustainability and renewability, and many types of wood don't require much if any preservative treatment.
Many will 'grey out' or weather to a silver grey colour, but of course such external cladding can also be stained or painted in a variety of colours.
The wooden cladding can therefore be much more attractive than the traditional spalling brickwork or drab grey render of most scottish housebuilding.
It's an increasing trend to use wood as decorative cladding.

So there.
:glassraise:

But back on point.....

The Parliament Building is indeed an eyesore, and the design was always rubbish in my view. The cost of maintaining such a detailed fiddly faddly design (architect jargon there) was always going to be a nightmare, and the escalating costs of building the upturned Spanish Fishing Boat design were always going to be followed by equally escalating maintenance costs.

Pulling the whole thing down is a good idea. Perhaps some explosives followed by a doing with an old-fashioned wrecking ball.

In the interests of fairness however, I would allow the staff and some of the MSPs to leave the building before depressing the plunger on the Wile E Coyote explosive device.

 

[BurbankHibee]

An incredible pig headed exercise on a par with the trams. We struggle to keep facilities open in communities and yet throw money down the drain with abandon.

 

[Chester Perry]

The Parliament building, another reason to feel proud to be British.

 

[Jack]

The Parliament building, another reason to feel proud to be British.

Well it was built with Westminster money and they were responsible for it :-)

 

[Kurt]

I remember us debating the parliaments architecture many moons ago. My complaint at the time was that it wan example of the cringey parish cooncil mentality that Scottish politics needed to get over; the kind of third division thinking that concludes an avante garde building makes the nation look 'progressive, where in fact it would simply look hopelessly dated within 20 years, not to mention $#@! - with the effects of Scotland's rain / water staining destined to take a swift toll.

Even at my most curmudgeonly I would not have forecast this fiasco, so emblematic of state run projects;

‘Cheaper to tear down Scottish parliament by 2020’ - The Scotsman

It will be outlasted by the candidate buildings, dismissed by the pygmies of Scottish politics as being too old fashioned for them.

If only it had been PFI!

 

[MixuDave]

Well it was built with Westminster money and they were responsible for it :-)

Might have been Westminster money, but surely the rest was in the hands of the Labour government no?

 

[7 Hills]

I remember us debating the parliaments architecture many moons ago. My complaint at the time was that it wan example of the cringey parish cooncil mentality that Scottish politics needed to get over; the kind of third division thinking that concludes an avante garde building makes the nation look 'progressive, where in fact it would simply look hopelessly dated within 20 years, not to mention shit - with the effects of Scotland's rain / water staining destined to take a swift toll.

Even at my most curmudgeonly I would not have forecast this fiasco, so emblematic of state run projects;

‘Cheaper to tear down Scottish parliament by 2020’ - The Scotsman

It will be outlasted by the candidate buildings, dismissed by the pygmies of Scottish politics as being too old fashioned for them.

Black has made a career out of writing books slagging off the Scots Parliament building and advertises them through the Gunt News. Presumably he has another tome coming out soon. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/1322191.stm

- - - Updated - - -

I remember us debating the parliaments architecture many moons ago. My complaint at the time was that it wan example of the cringey parish cooncil mentality that Scottish politics needed to get over; the kind of third division thinking that concludes an avante garde building makes the nation look 'progressive, where in fact it would simply look hopelessly dated within 20 years, not to mention shit - with the effects of Scotland's rain / water staining destined to take a swift toll.

Even at my most curmudgeonly I would not have forecast this fiasco, so emblematic of state run projects;

‘Cheaper to tear down Scottish parliament by 2020’ - The Scotsman

It will be outlasted by the candidate buildings, dismissed by the pygmies of Scottish politics as being too old fashioned for them.

You realise that the candidate buildings of which you speak failed the access audit for disabled people, which is why they were rejected in the first place? Or should democracy only be accessible to the able-bodied?

EDIT: And you say the "candidate buildings" were dismissed by "pygmies" of Scottish politics. The only politician involved in the decision-making process was Donald Dewar. Even as a rampant Scottish Nationalist for most of my 45 years, I could never describe that Man as a "pygmy".

 

[Chester Perry]

Might have been Westminster money, but surely the rest was in the hands of the Labour government no?

Money that was spent by NuLab to piss the SNP off and not use their option of the place on Calton Hill. Same NuLab/Unionists who insisted we have the trams. Better Together..

 

[MixuDave]

Money that was spent by NuLab to piss the SNP off and not use their option of the place on Calton Hill. Same NuLab/Unionists who insisted we have the trams. Better Together..

Yip. The amount of people who still lay the blame of both fiasco's at the SNP's door too is staggering. I had a chat with a Labour MSP last year at the Leith festival thing at the links. Guy made a total tit of himself and walked away from me, all because I told him just how much shite he was talking when he laid into Salmond and co about both ventures!

 

[Jack]

Might have been Westminster money, but surely the rest was in the hands of the Labour government no?

Labour were Westminster at the time.

Civil Servants. If I recall rightly at the time the original 40m quoted was a misquote or misunderstanding. It was never, ever in for that amount. I think the proper original estimated cost was 4 or 5 times that.

Then while it was being built there was the huge increase in terrorist activity and it was all back to the drawing board to retro fit anti terrorist stuff and that along with some later fiddling out doubled the cost.

There's bits of it I like, I pass it half a dozen times each week and of course in a previous life visited while working.

Like it or not its there.

Its like takeaway fish and chips. I really couldn't give one for the wrapping its what's inside that's important. Its that that needs more scrutiny.

 

[Shades]

It would take some ripping down.

I worked in it when it was being built (yes it was my fault!) and the place is absolutely rock solid. They might have maintenance issues but the structural integrity of the building is without question.

If any terrorist ever did want to target the place they'd be wasting their time unless they had something nuclear to hand.

 

[Bofahibee]

The design was chosen by a panel of prominent worthies like Kirsty Wark or her Sevco supporting hubby was it not? I'm sure they thought it was awfully modern to choose a Spanish architect but actually what it actually said was 'we think all Scottish architects are crap'. Make them pay for its maintenance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[egb_hibs]

Black has made a career out of writing books slagging off the Scots Parliament building and advertises them through the Gunt News. Presumably he has another tome coming out soon. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/1322191.stm

- - - Updated - - -



You realise that the candidate buildings of which you speak failed the access audit for disabled people, which is why they were rejected in the first place? Or should democracy only be accessible to the able-bodied?

EDIT: And you say the "candidate buildings" were dismissed by "pygmies" of Scottish politics. The only politician involved in the decision-making process was Donald Dewar. Even as a rampant Scottish Nationalist for most of my 45 years, I could never describe that Man as a "pygmy".

You could install quite a few ramps and elevators for 400 million quid. Iseem to remember Dewar dismissing one option because the building 'looked fascist' ffs

 

[Jack]

The design was chosen by a panel of prominent worthies like Kirsty Wark or her Sevco supporting hubby was it not? I'm sure they thought it was awfully modern to choose a Spanish architect but actually what it actually said was 'we think all Scottish architects are crap'. Make them pay for its maintenance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree.

I'd go further and say that the EC rules around competition are a piece of nonsense when it comes to nationally recognised buildings that will be an iconic, if you know what I mean. Not that many countries go about building parliaments on a regular basis.

With regard to the old Royal High I seem to recall it was knocked back because it was never going to be big enough and would have had to have been virtually destroyed and rebuilt.

St Andrews House, across the road from the Royal High, was also considered. However, however impressive and substantial that building looks it is in fact pretty flimsy by impressive and substantial standards - all girders and cladding, done before they quite got it right. A fascinating building all the same and worth a wee visit on their annual open day.

 

[7 Hills]

You could install quite a few ramps and elevators for 400 million quid. Iseem to remember Dewar dismissing one option because the building 'looked fascist' ffs

Aye - if the ramps etc. can be fitted onto a listed building with the permission of the likes of Historic Scotland, then money is no object! Or not, as the case may be. :yell

I DON'T seem to remember Dewar dismissing a building because of it's "fascist" stylings? Happy to be proved wrong though.

I remember Dewar dismissing The Royal High School; he declaimed it as a "Nationalist Shibboleth" - but that's something else entirely to what you're saying!