Edinburgh Tram Inquiry Office Use Only Witness Name: Gordon Mackenzie Dated: The Edinburgh Tram Inquiry Witness Statement of Gordon Ferguson Mackenzie Statement taken by Duncan Begg. My full name is Gordon Ferguson Mackenzie. I am aged 53, my date of birth being -· My contact details are known to the Inquiry. My current occupation is as a Social Work Manager. My role in the tram project was as Councillor with the City of Edinburgh Council (CEC). In 2007, I was a Director of I Transport for Edinburgh Ltd (TEL) and, in 2009; I became a member of the Tram t I Project Board (TPB). I have provided a copy of my curriculum vitae [CVS00000024]. ~ I Statement: I Introduction I' 1. In May 2003, I was elected as a Councillor for the Ward of Prestonfield as a Scottish Liberal Democrat, and I served until May 2007. In May 2007, there was an electoral reorganisation, as a result of which I served as a Scottish Liberal Democratic Councillor for the Ward of Southside and Newington until May 2012. Between 2003 and 2007, I held a number of positions in opposition, mainly to do with housing. 2. Prior to 2007, I do not recall that I had any particular involvement or direct relationship with the tram project. From 2007 onwards, however, I was a member of the CEC administration. From May 2007 to June 2009, I was the Convenor of Finance. From June 2009 to May 2012, I was Convenor of Transport. As a result of holding the Convenor of Finance role, I was Page 1 of 1 TRI00000086 _ C_ 0001 nominated to be a Director of Transport Edinburgh Limited (TEL). I continued as a Director of TEL when I became Convenor of Transport in July 2010. I was a Director of TEL between 9 April 2008 and 27 September 2011; a Director of Transport Initiatives Edinburgh Limited (TIE), between 4 July 2007 and 27 September 2011, and a member of the Tram Project Board (TPB), following my move to becoming Convenor of the Transport Infrastructure and Environment Committee, from 27 July 2010 [CEC00245349], which considered various tram-related matters. I also became Convenor of the Tram Sub-Committee as a consequence of becoming Transport Convenor in July 2009 as well as being a member of various other committees that were not related to the tram project. 3. I do not consider that I had any specific qualifications or experience, in relation to large scale transport projects or project management that assisted when taking decisions relating to the Edinburgh Tram Project. CEC provided general training for CEC officials and Councillors who were to become Directors of CEC arms-length companies and I received some training in that regard; I think it was a couple of hours training. I had a half day of PRINCE2 project management training provided by CEC which I undertook in relation to my scrutiny role as a Councillor but this was not specific to the Tram Project. Although not provided in relation to the tram, it was helpful to me in giving a basic overview of project management principles. I think more training in project management would, generally, have been beneficial to me in my various roles. While there might, potentially, have been benefit in having additional training on the duties of a Director, none of this would have substituted for senior level experience in large scale projects. I have subsequently become more familiar with PRINCE2 and project management principles through unrelated work but, at the time, I had no project management training or experience at a relevant level. In relation to the complex judgments that needed to be made in the course of the tram project, I do not think that my background assisted me to contribute additional expertise and knowledge beyond those issues which were related to public affairs and party political relations. Page 2 of 2 TRI00000086_C_0002 4. I do not think that any of the Councillors on the relevant boards or committees could have had sufficient training to bring us up to a level of knowledge or expertise where we were able to provide the technical or project management related expertise which would have benefited the project, within the time frame we are considering. Our lack of experience or knowledge of large-scale projects and the associated risks and complexities was too great to overcome by training alone. We relied very heavily on the advice of CEC Officers and TIE officials within both the CEC and the TPB. Given what I now know about tram projects, I do not think that there is any substitute for the experience and skills that come from working in an environment with large-scale, complex, projects. I do not think, particularly in relation to my position on the TEL Board and the TPB, there could have been any training that would have helped substantially improve that position. 5. Prior to the 2007 local elections, the Labour Party had formed the ruling Administration of CEC during which time they had proposed a number of transport initiatives, including the tram. Over time, the idea of a Tram network gained support from Liberal Democrat and Conservative Councillors as well. At the start of the 2003 to 2007 (Labour) Administration there were no SNP Councillors on CEC. A single Labour Councillor defected to the SNP Councillor, during that period and publicly opposed the Tram project when he became an SNP Councillor. This reflected the SNP position at a national level. After the 2007 local elections, the Labour Party, the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats remained in favour and were joined in this by the Green Councillors who had been elected in 2007. The SNP group on the Council (which had grown to 12) opposed the tram project. Prior to the 2007 election, the project had been politically contentious but with the Scottish Executive backing the project there was a political support for the project at local and national level. Following the 2007 elections, to both CEC and the Scottish Parliament, that position changed and the project became even more politically contentious. We do not know how many voters were swayed by the tram project but it was clear it could have bearing on people's views and as a result it became the subject of intense political debate and division. Page 3 of 3 TRI00000086_C_0003 6. The problems or difficulties caused by the fact that political parties were divided in their position regarding the tram project had impacts in a range of ways. Within CEC, the fact that the SNP opposed the tram, whether they were in administration or opposition, was always going to generate political debate and division. The change in CEC political administration, in 2007, from Labour to a Liberal Democrat/SNP coalition had the effect that parties who were opposed to each other across the Council chamber had to work together to progress the tram project. I do not think that the differences between the Lib Dems and the SNP, the ruling Administration coalition, on the Tram project weakened the project or materially affected the decisions that were taken. The voting evidence, up until the very latter stages of the project, evidences that the pro-Tram parties were able to work together to get the required political support for key decisions. For background, this was anticipated and provided for at the time of the Lib Dem I SNP coalition administration being formed; there were discussions held between representatives of the SNP Group and the Lib Dem Councillors, which included Jenny Dawe, Phil Wheeler and Robert Aldridge, the outcome of which was that the SNP Group, at local level, would have freedom as part of the coalition agreement to vote their own way on the Tram project. I understand that the SNP Group had discussions with their colleagues in the Scottish Parliament about going into administration with the Lib Dems. 7. The Labour group were very unhappy that the Lib Dems went into coalition with the SNP. I took view was that this related to the fact they were no longer part of the CEC administration. They had been the political leadership of the Council for, I think, 20 plus years. The Lib Dem Councillors took the view that there would be sufficient support for the project, when you added in the support of Labour, Conservatives and the Greens to have a majority within the Council. The votes of the Liberal Democrats, Conservatives, Labour, and Greens totalled in excess of 40 in favour of the tram; the SNP had 12 Councillors at the time. There was therefore a large majority in favour of the tram. There was also a belief that the tram would be most politically contentious up to the point contracts were signed, after which the SNP would, potentially, lower their level of opposition. However there was no agreement Page 4 of 4 TRI00000086_C_0004 to that effect and although the SNP Councillors did, at one point, vote to ratify CEC's signing of the tram contract, their active political opposition to the project continued. 8. Towards the end of summer 2011, support for the project within the 'pro-tram' parties broke down to the extent that they were no longer able to work effectively together to progress the project. I believe this was largely in response to the major difficulties the project was causing those parties in terms of voter intentions. The tram was considered politically 'toxic' and political parties wanted to distance themselves from the project for electoral reasons. It is difficult to say what difference that made to the project overall; it certainly made little difference to the key CEC political decisions that had gone before.