Ambitious £35m redevelopment plan for George Street supported by councillors
An ambitious £35m redevelopment plan for George Street has been supported by councillors, as concerns were raised that securing funding for it might not be possible.
Edinburgh's transport convener said 'vast benefits', including improved safety, sustainability and accessibility, would result from the street's transformation.
A decision on the project was made in May of this year. But at a meeting on Thursday, councillors reaffirmed that support, and agreed on a preference for the most expansive – and expensive – version.
Coming in at an estimated £35 million, the project will see George Street transformed, with the street being completely closed to traffic for most of the day.
Planters, natural stone setts and eight trees will be installed, as will benches, in hopes of making the street a better place to congregate.
In addition, 'hostile vehicle mitigation' – in the case of George Street, retractable bollards – will be installed to help prevent vehicle attacks on the space.
They will also be used to close off the roadway to most traffic, with a small subset of vehicles only being allowed in at certain times.
Six of the 11 councillors in the Transport and Environment Committee voted to pursue the most ambitious plan.
The two Conservative members of the committee voted against funding any redevelopment, and instead wanted to see £10m put towards road maintenance on George Street, funded by road parking charges.
Earlier in the meeting, Conservative councillor for the City Centre ward Joanna Mowat addressed the committee, expressing concerns over the scheme's practicality.
Currently, the plan is to fund the bulk of the project's price tag through grants from various public bodies, and possibly use some money from the city's upcoming visitor levy.
She said: 'Here we are again, talking about George Street. We've been talking for nearly 11 years now.
'The elephant in the room is that we still don't have any money, and are reliant on applying to third parties and having this money granted to us before we can put a shovel in the ground.
'I think the position we've got to, looking at the wider financial situation across the council, Scotland, and the UK, is we've no money, and we need to look at what money we have, and what we can do.'
The committee's SNP group wanted to see more detailed information about the costs of the project presented to councillors, but their amendment was not supported.
Details of their amendment that asked for more frequent updates and for the committee to be provided with several options for traffic restrictions along the street were included in the final version of the motion.
In addition, the Green group's amendment, which requires that a two-way cycle route be included along the street during construction, and a Liberal Democrat amendment which asked councillors to ensure the hostile vehicle mitigation portion of the project was retained, were both passed.
If adequate external funding for the project cannot be found, councillors will be able to scale back to one of several less ambitious options for the project.
With the decision on Thursday, city officers will now start seeking the necessary traffic regulation orders required to enable construction to start.
If funding is found, work is set to begin in autumn 2027.
Labour councillor and Transport and Environment Committee convener Stephen Jenkinson said: 'I'm really pleased that we've taken the decision today to move forward with the George Street and First New Town project.
'The project is rooted in making the area safer, more sustainable and accessible for all.
'This is a unique opportunity to bring one of Edinburgh's most important streets into the modern world whilst still maintaining its unique history and features.
'The wider potential improvements are vast, from benefits to local residents and businesses to enhancing Edinburgh as a visitor destination, and beyond – we're on our way to delivering a bold new vision for George Street and our city centre.
'Whilst we're committed to this important project, we're also committed to making broader improvements across the city for the benefit of all our residents.'
By Joseph Sullivan Local Democracy Reporter
Like this:
Like
Related
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Edinburgh Live
an hour ago
- Edinburgh Live
Edinburgh Book Festival awarded £300k in taxpayer cash after Nicola Sturgeon ex-aide hired
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. More info The Edinburgh International Book Festival received £300,000 of taxpayer cash weeks after Nicola Sturgeon's ex-chief of staff was appointed as director. The former first minister, who is among the headliners for the event, will be promoting her new memoir - Frankly. Her former top adviser, Liz Lloyd, was hired as director of the festival in May, reports the Daily Record. A 'one-off' lifeline for the festival of £300,000 was announced by the Scottish Government in June. The event lost its chief sponsor Baillie Gifford last year, after campaigning from eco activists over fossil fuel ties. Lothian Tory MSP Sue Webber said: 'Taxpayers will be asking questions about how the SNP suddenly found this money a matter of weeks after Nicola Sturgeon's most senior former adviser was appointed a director of the festival. 'While the book festival is ultimately crucial for Scotland's culture and Edinburgh's economy, many will be thinking this is not a mere coincidence. The SNP was only scrambling to find this funding because Baillie Gifford was hounded out from its long-held sponsorship by climate activists. Sign up for Edinburgh Live newsletters for more headlines straight to your inbox "SNP ministers should come clean on how this funding was awarded and if there was any lobbying from former colleagues who were once at the heart of the nationalist government." Lloyd worked for the Scottish Government for nearly a decade as Sturgeon's top aide, working closely with current FM Swinney who was then deputy FM. Lloyd was Sturgeon's chief of staff from 2014 until 2021 then a strategic adviser until the ex-FM quit in 2023, when Lloyd also left her post. The book festival said it would be 'spurious' and 'misleading' to suggest any link between Lloyd's appointment and the announcement of the cash, which it said had been planned for months. The event's government funding has more than doubled in the past year to a record £820,000. Announcing the £300,000 grant on Wednesday, SNP Business Minister Richard Lochhead said it would help schoolkids continue to access free literary events. Join Edinburgh Live's Whatsapp Community here and get the latest news sent straight to your messages. The book festival had previously warned its ability to deliver a successful event had been 'severely compromised' by the ending of its relationship with finance firm Baillie Gifford. The deal was cancelled after activists with the Fossil Free Books campaign targeted book festivals across Britain. The Scottish Government said: 'The Edinburgh International Book Festival is one the country's most significant cultural institutions. Its schools programme has been crucial in fostering literacy and cultural engagement among young people. 'Supported by the increase in funding for festivals announced in the 2025-26 Scottish Budget, this funding secures those benefits for young readers across Edinburgh, helping schools that might otherwise struggle with travel costs' Glasgow's Aye Write literary festival had to cancel last year's event after its bid for funding from government quango Creative Scotland was turned down. It is set to be revived.
Spectator
4 hours ago
- Spectator
Brexit betrayal is driving Tory voters into Farage's arms
Since returning to the political front line during the middle of last year's election campaign, Nigel Farage has enjoyed remarkable success in his stated quest for Reform for replace the Conservatives as the principal party of the right in Britain. The latest British Social Attitudes (BSA) report, published this week, helps explain how and why he is succeeding. Boris Johnson rose to success in 2019 thanks to his ability to appeal to socially conservative Britain. These were the voters that provided the core vote for Leave in 2016 and which now voted to 'get Brexit done'. However, disenchanted with how Brexit has turned out and deeply distrustful of how the country is being governed, over the last twelve months these voters have been flocking to Reform in ever-growing numbers. Leave voters are decidedly unhappy about how Brexit has turned out In 2019, no less than two-thirds (66 per cent) of socially conservative Britons, who, apart from backing Brexit, tend to be concerned about immigration and to take an 'anti-woke' stance on so-called 'culture wars' issues, voted Conservative. Equally, 71 per cent of those who had voted Leave in 2016 were in the Conservative camp then too. But as the party slumped to its worst ever defeat last year, those numbers tumbled. Just 32 per cent of socially conservative Britain voted Conservative, as did just one in three (33 per cent) of those who had voted Leave. Most of this decline was occasioned by voters switching to Reform, who matched the Tories' tally among Leave voters (winning 34 per cent) and almost did so among social conservatives (28 per cent). Since the election, Tory losses among those central to Boris Johnson's election victory have simply continued apace. When respondents to BSA were recontacted in March, Reform, with 37 per cent support, were now clearly ahead among socially conservative voters, while the Conservatives were well behind on just 26 per cent. Indeed, social conservatives were now barely any more likely than those who are neither socially conservative nor liberal to say they would vote Conservative. Meanwhile, support for the Conservatives among Leave voters was now down to just 26 per cent, while Reform, with 45 per cent, was well ahead of all the competition. In contrast, just 5 per cent of Remain supporters were backing Reform. Reform's support is not simply a general protest vote; rather it is very distinctively a cry of disappointment and disenchantment by pro-Brexit Britain. Leave voters are decidedly unhappy about how Brexit has turned out. In the wake of record levels of immigration, no less than 62 per cent feel that immigration has been higher as a result of Brexit, the very opposite of what most of them had anticipated in 2016. Meanwhile, in an era of poor economic performance, 38 per cent have concluded that the economy has been made worse off by Brexit too. For a minority, these perceptions have been accompanied by a change of mind about Brexit. But for others, they have served to undermine their trust and confidence in how Britain is being governed. When it was first delivered, Brexit boosted trust and confidence among Leave voters. For example, in 2020 approaching half (46 per cent) felt that little or no improvement was needed to how Britain was being governed, almost twice the equivalent proportion among Remain supporters (24 per cent). Now, however, only 14 per cent of Leave voters take that view, even lower than the equivalent figure, 19 per cent, among those who backed Remain. And a low level of trust and confidence is a hallmark of Remain voters. In last year's election, just over a quarter (26 per cent) of those who think Britain's system of government is in need of improvement voted Reform, compared with just 5 per cent of those who feel the system needs little or no improvement. The party's name, 'Reform UK', encapsulates well the outlook of many of the party's supporters. Meanwhile, the rise of social media appears to have created something of a breeding ground for Reform support. Even though the party is backed predominantly by older voters, with those who primarily rely on social media to follow the news being predominantly young, support for the party was five points higher last year among social media users than it was among those reliant on other media for their political news. Nigel Farage's TikTok posts are, perhaps, not just reaching out to younger voters after all. In any event, the challenge posed by Reform to the future of the Conservative party is profound. Not only has it lost most of the pro-Brexit vote it won in 2019, but its grip on what has long been the core of its support – those on the right economically rather than culturally – is now under threat too. In our March survey, Reform (on 28 per cent) were only narrowly behind the Conservatives (31 per cent) among this group, something that Ukip never threatened to do. Command of the political right in Britain is up for grabs as never before.
Scotsman
4 hours ago
- Scotsman
The 'nothing' politicians who measure progress in 'likes' and victories in reposts
MPs like Maguire and Sultana are 'dopamine-chasers' who favour virtue-signalling provocation over reasoned persuasion Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... I think it highly unlikely there currently exists a politician who hasn't been subjected to online abuse. In days long since passed, it took effort to write a threatening letter to an MP. Now, one may fire off an endless stream of slurs and threats with ease. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Unsurprisingly, because a lot of men really hate women, the vitriol directed towards female members of parliament is especially threatening and degrading. For Women Scotland campaigners outside the Supreme Court in London after its ruling that, in law, sex is a matter of biology rather than feelings. Picture: Lucy North/PA Wire On occasion, police have acted (the case, in 2021, of Grant Karte, an SNP member who pleaded guilty to sending messages that were 'grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character' to then nationalist MP Joanna Cherry, springs to mind) but the problem continues and it grows worse. Politicians, of course, are not the only popular targets for online hate: Jews should expect to be denounced as baby-killers by righteous 'anti-Zionists'; feminists fighting to preserve the integrity of women's single-sex spaces have long since grown accustomed to accusations of transphobia, often accompanied by rape and/or death threats. With all of the above in mind, the behaviour of Liberal Democrat MP Ben Maguire is disturbing. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad During a Westminster debate last week the member for North Cornwall mocked JK Rowling's involvement in the campaign to defend women's rights against the demands of trans activists. The moment was bleakly entertaining, like a scene from a watch-through-your-fingers comedy. Maguire told fellow MPs Rowling was 'desperate for attention and relevance'. The pathos was almost unbearable. I cringed for the man. Had the Lib Dems' shadow attorney general – yes, really – left things at that, then we could comfortably have continued to ignore him. His words confirm him to be a default-setting sexist. In response to Maguire's pitiful bid for attention and relevance, Rowling evoked the words of the late Labour MP Denis Healey who once said debating Conservative Geoffrey Howe was like being savaged by a dead sheep. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad I fear the pain of Rowling's barb may have lingered for in the early hours of the following morning, Maguire was still smarting about those feminists and their demands. Following another positively masochistic engagement with Rowling, Maguire turned his ire on the feminist campaign group For Women Scotland. At 12.57 am on Wednesday, the MP responded on X to a post by the group – which brought the recent case that saw the Supreme Court rule, in law, sex is a matter of biology rather than feelings – claiming it had a 'fascist agenda'. Hours later, Maguire closed his X account. A non-apology followed. The MP said he regretted the comment which had been made in 'the heat of the moment'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'This whole debate,' added Maguire, 'has become quite toxic, so I felt it best to step away from X for a while.' Suggesting the problem was the tone of debate rather than his behaviour, Maguire was riffing on that old classic 'look what you made me do'. I struggle, even when squinting, to detect any difference between Maguire's behaviour and the behaviour of the sort of trolls who revel in making the lives of MPs as miserable as possible. At 12.57 am, Maguire was just another loser lashing out at women who dared to talk back. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Is it the place of an elected politician to make wildly defamatory claims about an organisation that's only crime is to have forced governments across the UK to meet their responsibilities when it comes to the protection of women's rights? Obviously not. Nor, if we wish to be cynical about this, is it at all wise for a politician who wishes to appeal to the all important reality-aligning demographic to attack an organisation whose objectives are supported by a clear majority of voters. A YouGov poll in the aftermath of the Supreme Court's April ruling found that 63 per cent thought it correct while just 18 per cent reckoned the wrong decision had been made. In Maguire, I see the archetype of the dopamine-hit politician. These caricatures of the radical, who see posting something provocative online as an act of leadership, who eschew such basics of politics as diplomacy, intellectual curiosity, and a grasp of the law, while chasing ultimately worthless plaudits from ideologues and social media users, enjoying their own dopamine-hits, with every like and re-post. The contemporary pseudo-iconoclast politician thrives both on the adoration of those who support their positions and the anger they provoke among those they don't. Driven by the need for another roar of approval from the cool kids, they state all-or-nothing positions that betray their failure to engage in the issues they proclaim to care about. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Ben Maguire does nothing for the case he wishes to advance by smearing his opponents. Rather, he helps reinforce the position of the majority which believes him to be on the wrong side of the argument over the impact on women's rights of the demands of trans activists. Labour MP Zarah Sultana is another dopamine-chaser who favours virtue-signalling provocation over reasoned persuasion. When it was announced, last week, that the group Palestine Action faced proscription as a terror group after members broke into RAF Brize Norton, Sultana posted on X the message: 'We are all Palestine Action'. A statement which was as provably wrong as it was needlessly offensive. Intentional damage to any part of the UK's defence hardware goes far beyond the principle of freedom of expression and into the serious realm of national security. Members of Palestine Action understood this when they broke into Brize Norton. That was the point. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Like Maguire, Sultana measures political progress in 'likes', sees victories in reposts, and gains validation from outrage. She cannot imagine the existence of someone who might feel sympathy for, even rage on behalf of, Palestinians while simultaneously believing the UK's national security is important.
