"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at
14:49:51 on Sat, 13 Jul 2019, michael adams
remarked:

Mayor Sadiq Khan strengthened the scrutiny powers of Jacobs to reveal
problems with Crossrail and increase the project's transparency.

Is he trying to distance himself from the project's failings, despite
being in charge
the last three and a bit years?

Being in charge ?

Anyone capable of taking overall charge of the largest infrastructure
project in Europe would command a far higher salary and have far fewer
extraneous responsibilities, than does the elected Mayor of London.

You are confusing strategic and operational.

Or put the other way, as with most levels in politics anyone capable of
taking overall charge of the largest infrastructure project in Europe -
or any aspect therein come to that wouldn't touch any such elected
position with a bargepole.

The Mayor's entire role is to be in charge politically and
strategically. Otherwise he
simply disappears in a puff of logic.

But the reasons the project has been delayed are purely operational.

The strategy was to hire contractors capable - as far as anyone could
judge of fulfilling their particular contracts on time and within
budget.

If the contractors failed to fulfil their contract on time and within
budget this will have for purely operational reasons which they failed
to consider when tendering for the project.

Or are you suggesting Khan should have chosen different contractors ?

I'm suggesting he should have had people monitoring what the contractors
were doing, and more to the point monitoring how well the TfL people
supposed to be managing the contractors were doing.

If only because as in this instance with Kahn, they'd only lay
themselves open to ill-informed and tendentious criticism from craven
opportunists such as yourself.

I bet I'm more qualified than you to comment on this scenario,

So how many such major infrastructure projects have you been personally
involved in then Roland ?

Several. That's my original day-job.

infrastructure ?????

"Guy Gorton" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 13 Jul 2019 13:54:37 +0100, Robin wrote:

On 13/07/2019 11:22, tim... wrote:
the fallacy of the sunk costs

That (like loss aversion and status quo bias) is an issue with the
mental state of decision takers. It's not an argument against decisions
on whether or not to proceed based on objective assessments of the
options as they stand now - taking account of both work already done and
lessons from that work for the likely future costs.

I did not mention costs, merely inconvenience.

inconvenience *is* a cost

just not one borne by the developer

tim

In message , at 09:35:21 on Sun, 14 Jul
2019, tim... remarked:

I'm suggesting he should have had people monitoring what the
contractors were doing, and more to the point monitoring how well the
TfL people supposed to be managing the contractors were doing.
....
So how many such major infrastructure projects have you been personally
involved in then Roland ?

Several. That's my original day-job.

infrastructure ?????

There's more to infrastructure than people with muddy boots (hence
perhaps the meme "there's three kinds: good engineers, bad engineers,
and civil engineers").

To expand on Mark's example:

"This supermarket is opening next week, but you are clearly still
working on the car park, will it be ready for the Mayor to cut the
ribbon?"

Yes. The building itself was finished last month

And the shelving and fridges/feezers?

All installed and ready

What about the stock?

Arrives on Wednesday, because we need access across the car park
first. But we planned for that, and have drafted in extra
shelf-stocking staff, and it'll all be ready on time.

And the tills?

Yes, all installed and tested.

Anything else I should know?

Weeeell, it'll be cash-only the first six weeks.

"What!!"

Yes, the tills don't have connectivity for the credit card
transactions

But I thought you said the tills had been tested.

Yes, and that was when we discovered the existing broadband
wasn't adequate. But we've ordered it from BT. And their lead
time is six weeks. Partly because they'll need to dig a trench,
erm, across the new car park...

--
Roland Perry

On 13/07/2019 16:11, Guy Gorton wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jul 2019 13:54:37 +0100, Robin wrote:

On 13/07/2019 11:22, tim... wrote:
the fallacy of the sunk costs

That (like loss aversion and status quo bias) is an issue with the
mental state of decision takers. It's not an argument against decisions
on whether or not to proceed based on objective assessments of the
options as they stand now - taking account of both work already done and
lessons from that work for the likely future costs.

I did not mention costs, merely inconvenience. Costs there have
certainly been but not payable by the public purse but by those
inconvenienced. Roads closed, diversions in place (one road closed
for 9 years we are told - a road that I often used but now have a
significant detour).


I was commenting on "the fallacy of the sunk costs".

But I agree with tim... that inconvenience is a cost.



--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

On Sat, 13 Jul 2019 19:33:42 +0100, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 13/07/2019 14:49, michael adams wrote:
"Roland Perry" wrote in message ...
In message , at 14:00:38 on Sat, 13
Jul 2019, michael adams remarked:

"Roland Perry" wrote in message ...
In message , at 14:44:13 on Fri, 12 Jul
2019, Recliner remarked:

Mayor Sadiq Khan strengthened the scrutiny powers of Jacobs to reveal
problems with Crossrail and increase the project's transparency.

Is he trying to distance himself from the project's failings, despite being in charge
the last three and a bit years?

Being in charge ?

Anyone capable of taking overall charge of the largest infrastructure project in Europe
would command a far higher salary and have far fewer extraneous responsibilities, than
does the elected Mayor of London.

You are confusing strategic and operational.

Or put the other way, as with most levels in politics anyone capable of taking
overall charge of the largest infrastructure project in Europe - or any aspect
therein come to that wouldn't touch any such elected position with a bargepole.

The Mayor's entire role is to be in charge politically and strategically. Otherwise he
simply disappears in a puff of logic.

But the reasons the project has been delayed are purely operational.

The strategy was to hire contractors capable - as far as anyone could
judge of fulfilling their particular contracts on time and within
budget.

If the contractors failed to fulfil their contract on time and within
budget this will have for purely operational reasons which they failed
to consider when tendering for the project.

Or are you suggesting Khan should have chosen different contractors ?



How long has Khan been mayor?

When did Crossrail start?

When were the contractors appointed?

Exactly, he had nothing to do with appointing the contractors, and nor
did his predecessor. Would anyone *want* politicians choosing
contractors?

In message , at 12:42:53 on
Sun, 14 Jul 2019, Recliner remarked:

How long has Khan been mayor?

When did Crossrail start?

When were the contractors appointed?

Exactly, he had nothing to do with appointing the contractors, and nor
did his predecessor. Would anyone *want* politicians choosing
contractors?

No-one suggested politicians should choose Crossrail[1] contractors.

[But look on the bright side, having grasped the wrong end of the stick,
you are at least consistently and persistently waving it around, despite
all attempts to persuade you otherwise]

[1] Although when contractors are called "National Rail franchisees",
there's more than a suggestion that politicians called the SoS
have a say. Maybe he should leave it entirely to his civil servants?
Was it Adonis, who had previously meddled in the botched Academies
project, who started this trend with NXEC? Oh no, it was Prescott
who fast-tracked the Stagecoach involvement in Virgin West Coast,
when they'd so publicly and embarrassingly messed up the 1998 Labour
Conference in Blackpool.

Not sure why this story is filed under "Entertainment":

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e.../profile-john-
prescott-class-warrior-at-bay-1103851.html
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:42:53 on
Sun, 14 Jul 2019, Recliner remarked:

How long has Khan been mayor?

When did Crossrail start?

When were the contractors appointed?

Exactly, he had nothing to do with appointing the contractors, and nor
did his predecessor. Would anyone *want* politicians choosing
contractors?

No-one suggested politicians should choose Crossrail[1] contractors.

Didn't you just blame Khan for exactly that decision [in the section you
over-snipped]?


[But look on the bright side, having grasped the wrong end of the stick,
you are at least consistently and persistently waving it around, despite
all attempts to persuade you otherwise]

[1] Although when contractors are called "National Rail franchisees",
there's more than a suggestion that politicians called the SoS
have a say. Maybe he should leave it entirely to his civil servants?
Was it Adonis, who had previously meddled in the botched Academies
project, who started this trend with NXEC?

He had nothing to do with choosing TOCs. Civil servants choose them.

Oh no, it was Prescott
who fast-tracked the Stagecoach involvement in Virgin West Coast,
when they'd so publicly and embarrassingly messed up the 1998 Labour
Conference in Blackpool.

Rubbish, as discussed here ad nauseum. Prescott had absolutely nothing to
do with the deal between Souter and Branson. I don't understand why you
persist in this easily-disproved fantasy version of history you dreamed up?


And, BTW, Branson has just done it again, selling 49% of his sub-orbital
joy-ride company to another billionaire. It's his standard business model
with companies he starts (as opposed to ones he just licenses the brand
to).


Not sure why this story is filed under "Entertainment":

Because it involves Prezza.


https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e.../profile-john-
prescott-class-warrior-at-bay-1103851.html

No mention of Stagecoach in that article.

Recliner wrote:

When did Crossrail start?

When were the contractors appointed?

Exactly, he had nothing to do with appointing the contractors, and nor
did his predecessor. Would anyone *want* politicians choosing
contractors?


Amongst the present generation of Career politicians are there any who do
have the the right experience.

Earnest Marples used the laxer requirements of the era to take advantage of
his position to the benefit of the company he had created but at least did
actually deliver.

Since then with rules on expenses, conflicts of interest,shareholdings in
firms that may benefit from a government decision coming under scrutiny
being much more stringent such a suitably qualified person may
decide the risk of falling foul of any and end up in front of a committee
to answer questions or even face criminal charges just isn’t worth the
bother, remuneration in a political position may appear high by the
standards of many but compared to what high earners in business can
accumulate it isn’t that spectacular.

Ultimately though what would serve the public interest better. A roguish
Politicians from the business world who steers the public’s moneys into
interests he his known and associated with but delivers or the career
politicians many of whom seem to have progressed from top end public
school ,University,lightish jobs such as journalism until they get chosen
as an MP on personality rather than experience and then work their way up
into higher positions.

If a project costs the taxpayer £50 billion and the minister happens to
have have a few shares in the construction interests that built it does
that matter in the bigger picture if the project is achieved on time and in
budget compared to one where the the same £50 billion has been spent but
due to lack of suitable knowledge amongst the career politicians who have
to depend on what they are told by others the project doesn’t run smooth
and needs more taxpayers money to complete.

Perhaps the cost of a few duck houses or similar silly abuses of the system
would be worth paying if persons of the right calibre are attracted to
become decision makers in politics.


GH

Marland wrote:
Recliner wrote:

When did Crossrail start?

When were the contractors appointed?

Exactly, he had nothing to do with appointing the contractors, and nor
did his predecessor. Would anyone *want* politicians choosing
contractors?


Amongst the present generation of Career politicians are there any who do
have the the right experience.

Earnest Marples used the laxer requirements of the era to take advantage of
his position to the benefit of the company he had created but at least did
actually deliver.

Since then with rules on expenses, conflicts of interest,shareholdings in
firms that may benefit from a government decision coming under scrutiny
being much more stringent such a suitably qualified person may
decide the risk of falling foul of any and end up in front of a committee
to answer questions or even face criminal charges just isn’t worth the
bother, remuneration in a political position may appear high by the
standards of many but compared to what high earners in business can
accumulate it isn’t that spectacular.

Ultimately though what would serve the public interest better. A roguish
Politicians from the business world who steers the public’s moneys into
interests he his known and associated with but delivers or the career
politicians many of whom seem to have progressed from top end public
school ,University,lightish jobs such as journalism until they get chosen
as an MP on personality rather than experience and then work their way up
into higher positions.

If a project costs the taxpayer £50 billion and the minister happens to
have have a few shares in the construction interests that built it does
that matter in the bigger picture if the project is achieved on time and in
budget compared to one where the the same £50 billion has been spent but
due to lack of suitable knowledge amongst the career politicians who have
to depend on what they are told by others the project doesn’t run smooth
and needs more taxpayers money to complete.

Perhaps the cost of a few duck houses or similar silly abuses of the system
would be worth paying if persons of the right calibre are attracted to
become decision makers in politics.


Interestingly, if Boris wins, he'll be taking a pay cut of around £750,000
pa compared to what he was earning as a backbencher. Of course, in his
current position, the flat with a friendly neighbour might come in handy…

On 15/07/2019 10:30, Marland wrote:

Earnest Marples

I like it. Did your spell-checker do it?

--
Basil Jet recently enjoyed listening to
Black Affair - 2008 - It's Real