Crossrail: Report finds not enough money to finish project

Crossrail: Report finds not enough money to finish project


Count Bin Face promised to complete it


Please. We're dying on the central line. Save us


Don't worry any minute now someone will set up a GoFundMe


Jubilee line stay winning 💅


At what point does it become an insult to the Queen that it was named after her? 😅


Maybe she can help fund it.


Probably the only person that can afford to


Dunno, there are some billionaires spaffing money up their rockets’ walls in their personal space race, they might be able, too. Imagine if they paid proper taxes and didn’t take the NHS to court over lost profits. But I digress.


JRM could probably finance it twice over if he wasn't hiding his wealth offshore...


Who's JRM? James Rolly Morrison? I really dislike this Americanised trend of giving acronyms for everyone's names. EDIT - Oh is it Jonathan Rhys Meyers? I can't believe he earned that much from Bend It Like Beckham.


Jacob Rees-Mogg


I never realised he was considered especially wealthy. He comes across as how a caricature of a posh person, rather than actually being posh.


He’s monumentally wealthy - he set up Somerset Capital, and his wife is a wealthy heiress too.


£150 million - is that monumentally wealthy in 2021?


I agree it's quite confusing and requires a google on the regular.






Children ride free!


Children also get free train tickets! It’s a two for one bargain.


All the way to Cockfosters!


If its Andrew surely it's ride children free


I didn't get it at first, but u/Lozpetts162 's comment was perfect in relation to that, as "Children ride free!" can be taken different ways. > Children ride free! > ... > Children also get free train tickets! It’s a two for one bargain.


It's 12 years old now so probably popping up on his pedar now.


Maybe this is a crafty ploy to make her fund the rest of the project...Can't have an unfinished infrastructure project named after you, even Central Asian dictators manage to finish massive statues of themselves in their lifetime.


Maybe we should offer to rename it after the first Middle Eastern oil prince to offer to bail it out


Taking the piss lol, this was supposed to open when I was in school. I've been to uni and finished and have started working now lol


One of my friends bought place in a shithole expecting to be able to commute into work quickly with Crossrail. It's not open yet and he doesn't even have to commute for the foreseeable future, but he's still stuck in a shithole. Have to laugh really.


Probably paid an inflated price for it too, based on the future cross rail. I almost made the same choice. Moved to a different shithole instead.


Some of us have lived our whole lives in said shitholes m8


Apologies mate, I wasn't meaning to be a prick.


U fokin w0t m8?


Abbey Wood?


Abbey Wood? Woolwich? I have friends who have bought there urging me to buy there too because it's a good investment but I really don't fancy living somewhere terrible with bad transport links when Crossrail is showing no signs of actually opening.


I have an ex who bought property in *Reading*. Cheaper than London, and he'd get a sweet deal once Crossrail drove the prices up and he could move back to London. In the meantime he's been commuting on the train, and it turns out the Reading - London commute [is the third most expensive commute in the UK](https://www.readingchronicle.co.uk/news/18088914.reading-london-train-commute-third-expensive-journey/) (I used to have to pay £30 every weekend for a return!) so it was a false economy.




Reading's... ok. You've got all the chain restaurants you could want in The Oracle, but in general it's a bit dead. Probably a nice place to raise kids, but we weren't at that stage in life.


There are some good indie restaurants in Reading these days, a great lido, a pretty decent arts scene (though it would really be helped if they could get a new arts centre/get rid of the current one). It's terrible for independent shops though.


Uuuuuh… Even outside of London train prices would never be that cheap to confuse it with per year. It’s clearly per month. Derby to Matlock cost me £117 a month about 6 years ago, bet that’s risen at least 15%.


Can you not get a railcard of some sort?


I remember when they knocked the Astoria down in 2009 and thinking that the 2018 opening date was so far away.


> I remember when they knocked the Astoria down in 2009 I was living just outside of Reading at the time. Went to Astoria a few times and I used it as a bit of a landmark to get my bearings in the Big Smoke. I got so confused when it was pulled down!


Gosh! I remember drinking at the fountains outside and having such great times there and at the mean fiddler! So many of London’s gems have been taken because of this project.


I got see megadeth there for the first time when they were touring for cryptic writeings. soulfly and slayer in 98 and other bands over the years.


Well at least your life’s on track. Great job on managing that, reality considered!


You won't believe what opens up the day you retire


Just in time to qualify for free travel on it


“The National Audit Office (NAO) estimates the cost of the new rail link will be between £30m and £218m above the current funding.” £30m to £218m, that is quite a jump. It feels a bit like someone just made up the numbers, or is still looking for a way to skim £188m off the top. Lol Edit: Added a “lol” so I’m not taken too seriously. :D


It'll be a probabilistic model that ranges from 5% likely to 95% likely, or something like that (20% and 80% are common). Having a range makes me think they've actually done some thinking around it, rather than slap a single figure on it and not anticipating risks.


But, let's face it, it's all guess-work. If they were able to accurately predict these things we wouldn't be in this position in the first place. I worked in an agency where we billed 1000s of hours to our biggest clients. Our billing process was to set a floor of the lowest we'd possibly go, double it, then add or subtract a totally random amount so that it sounded like we came to the number through careful budgeting. We'd produce an invoice with whatever line-items were necessary to make it match plausibly. The client would then complain it was too high, and we'd settle on some random discount that made them happy. Though never having worked in such an industry, I imagine all budgeting processes work roughly like that once they reach 7 figures.


It is an estimate but its normally our 'best estimate' so we have to provide our workings. I work and have worked on multi billion pound/dollar/euro projects. I know you're likely joking but in projects I've been on your billing would likely be classed as fraud.


> I imagine all budgeting processes work roughly like that once they reach 7 figures A friend of mine is an accountant for ~~an oil company~~ Shell (don't know why I'm trying to be cryptic) - their rounding errors are in the hundreds of thousands of pounds. They just write off 200, 300,000 here and there, money means nothing.


Reporting and invoicing are different things. When your materiality is in the tens of millions, a £200k error is a meaningless rounding error that doesn't merit a correction. That doesn't mean they would accepting invoicing £200k less and suffering an economic loss as a result.


Which, to me, is even more bonkers - happy to lose 200k via a rounding, but not happy to lose 200k on an invoice? Makes no sense to me. The world of business is far beyond my tiny brain.


You're not losing anything though by reporting a "slightly wrong" number. For example: * Your salary is £100,500 * You report your salary as £100,000 * This is an error of -£500 (or -0.5%) * This doesn't change your actual income; you are just slightly understating your income. * Someone looking at your finances is going to classify you as a high earner, regardless of whether you stated your income as being £100,500 or £100,000. * If there are no consequences for slightly incorrectly reporting you wouldn't really care about which number you report. However, you would care if you were actually underpaid by £500.


Ah OK, yeah, that kinda makes sense :)


In construction budgeting can get reasonably accurate, its certainly not pick a figure and double it. Personnel costs are normally a minor part of a budget, with installation, plant and materiel cost being dominant. Costs can be built up from base principles. E.g., if you know a tunneling machine costs £x/day and can do Ym/day and you have Zm to drill, you can easily work out a cost for that aspect, same with materiel (hedging on cost fluctuations). A major project on brownfield sites like CrossRail will spend a fortune (10s of millions) on pre-construction surveys, geotech/phys, archaeological, etc to reduce contingency as much as possible but there is always risk. This project will likely have a whole planning, budgetary and cost control team focusing on both developing initial cost estimates as well as continually revising this, this process having begun maybe a decade before construction. Its also worth noting that a lot of the costs here are due to delays in systems integration and final handover. You have both asset cost and overheads, delays in commissioning and completions don't increase asset cost but mean you have to pay for more staff, compounds, offices, equipment, etc. Its highly likely that these are due to badly contracts and screwups on the systems supplier and integrator end with costs being pushed to Project rather than being eaten by the contractors who have caused problems. Source: At senior leadership level having just completed one 10 figure construction project and in early phase for an (almost) 11 figure construction project. EDIT: to add, projects of this complexity and magnitude are virtually impossible to deliver on initial budget. You have no established precedent for a lot of the integration costs so you always miss a bunch of integration and design change cost that sit across package/contractor. Its loosely the same principle as not accounting for service at a restaurant. You can easily work out what the fixed price is for each item, however integrating and delivering it is difficult. You can budget for a flat % but what happens if its bad? Or good?


I agree with you. What annoys me here is not the overrun, but the disingenuity of those who are shocked by the overrun, pretending there must have been a way to have estimated it more accurately. The only way to accurately estimate is to build it first, then tell you much it cost.


Sort of. Massive questions should be asked about budgetary process and cost control, not about the cost. The cost is the cost, but were errors made initially in the budgetary process, were costs not controlled, or was this always going to happen due to the complexity and they didn't put enough contingency in. Morons in the press conflate all 3 when they are separate questions.


I can understand that when you start digging, you never know what you're going to find. It could be the archeological find of the century or a plague pit from the Black Death. Or that the ground is softer,harder, wetter than expected, causing the going to he slower. There's also usually the problem of Swampy, his friends and the NIMBYs protesting the plan. Let's not forget that Extinction Rebellion a couple of years tried to blockade an East London underground station early one Winter morning a couple of years ago. By climbing on to the top of the tube train at a surface station and glueing themselves to the exterior of the train. The largely working class passengers many of them who were builders etc. based on the number of high vis jackets that the passengers were wearing. Who were trying to get the tune to work. Had to be stopped from kicking them to death. But I can understand that signals are complicated. However there's thousands of different train systems around the world and somebody mist have come up with the same problems and solutions before hand. There's been an optional Euro wide standard for signalling since the 1980s. Which has evolved with technology.


Yeah, that’s a good way of putting it.


Or…it was estimated reasonably accurately, and “the minister” (whomsoever that happened to be at the time) didn’t like the number…. This may or may not also have been the case on other high profile infrastructure projects that may or may not be “Y” shaped


I absolutely know the scope for that job is accurate How do you know that? The scope is never accurate! I wrote it 3 months after we’d built it…


“This project will be delivered on time and on budget, no matter how long it takes or how much it costs”


Yeah they definitely don't all work in that. Worked in a few that had proper budgets that were carefully thought out and were often in the 7-8 figure range. In fact almost everywhere I have worked would have questioned a random budget.


How accurate is the budget? How much do they stick to it? I'm used to seeing things like "after the completion of phase 1 we discovered that water is wet, so have had to double anticipated expenditure on decomwetulators, thus causing a budget overrun".


Water is actually not wet; It makes other materials/objects wet. Wetness is the state of a non-liquid when a liquid adheres to, and/or permeates its substance while maintaining chemically distinct structures. So if we say something is wet we mean the liquid is sticking to the object.


Bad bot. That's like, your, definition.


> consisting of, containing, covered with, or soaked with liquid (such as water) https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/wet I believe water consists of water, and therefore would consider it wet.


> I worked in an agency where we billed 1000s of hours to our biggest clients. Our billing process was to set a floor of the lowest we'd possibly go, double it, then add or subtract a totally random amount so that it sounded like we came to the number through careful budgeting. We'd produce an invoice with whatever line-items were necessary to make it match plausibly. The client would then complain it was too high, and we'd settle on some random discount that made them happy. You should have reported this to the Police or SFO.


Why? Everybody was happy - the client got value (which is why they stayed a client), the agency made a profit. Nobody was being conned or coerced. The alternative would have been going Sarbanes-Oxley style accounting which might have been slightly more accurate, but would also have been more expensive and less flexible. Who exactly was the victim here?


> Nobody was being conned The client was, they got value but it was likely to be significantly less value than an accurate accounting would produce. Otherwise, why would your company use this system? > Who exactly was the victim here? The taxman and your clients. It's completely unethical.


You want to see unethical, look at how the big accountancy firms behaved pushing for and then implementing Sarbanes Oxley, which was ostensibly to stop the kind of behaviour you're complainign about. It was a bureaucratic nightmare that served nobody's interests but the Big Four - not tax collectors, not clients, not agencies, not firms. Agency life is impossible to track down to the kind of level you're fantasizing about here. Say we're in a meeting about project x, but someone brings up project y. Which project do you bill that to? And, one afternoon, I spend the whole afternoon trying but failing to fix a problem for the client because I'm distracted by other client work. When I get home, I have a lightbulb moment, SSH in and fix the problem. How much do I do bill the client? If we tried to become more accurate, it would have meant being less flexible ("No! We can't talk about that project in this meeting!") and more expensive because 100 hours per month would be billed for the time we spent calculating their bill. The client had a ballpark figure in mind, and we met it. Some months they might overbilled, others underbilled, but it all added up in the end. There is nothing unethical about that. And how on earth does the taxman lose out of this?


> The client had a ballpark figure in mind, and we met it. Some months they might overbilled, others underbilled, but it all added up in the end. You've absolutely zero idea it adds up, because you're not accounting for it. In fact you specifically describe the process of inventing invoice items and presenting them to the clients. This is outright fraud, no two ways about it. You can't falsify invoices and claim oh it's totally fine. The taxman may lose out if your company is misusing incentives. They certainly would want to audit your records after admitting such fraud. > False accounting. > (1)Where a person dishonestly, with a view to gain for himself or another or with intent to cause loss to another,— > (a)destroys, defaces, conceals or falsifies any account or any record or document made or required for any accounting purpose; or > (b)in furnishing information for any purpose produces or makes use of any account, or any such record or document as aforesaid, which to his knowledge is or may be misleading, false or deceptive in a material particular; > he shall, on conviction on indictment, be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years.


If it makes you feel better believing we were carrying out mass fraud, I’m not going to convince you otherwise. Just bear in mind that, by your high-minded definition, the whole world is engaged in mass fraud every single day. And I’m never going to give a shit about such definitions because they’re silly and unrealistic.


'high-minded definition' being the 50 year old theft act? You stated quite clearly that invoice items were invented. That is never ethical under any circumstance. You obviously don't give a shit about this fraud I can see that, but that is not something to be proud of.


Is there not a possibility where the top estimate enables further inflation? Basically guaranteeing it's not the bottom estimate "because the news said they're good for it"?


For a £20bn project it's not that much




That's the initial budget, £18.77bn is the latest


£200million is 1% of £20billion. That's pretty minor given the complexity of the project. As someone else has pointed out, the discrepancy is probably probabilistic range when estimating cost.


About 20 years ago I project managed a 400 million project, when I took over from the previous guy, it was meant to be a zero sum game. I looked at his numbers and projections and blinked twice, it was clear the whole thing was running at nearly -10% (40 million) already, and the trajectory suggested -25% (100 million) after the whole 2 years the project was meant to last. We lucked out and got additional orders within the project that we could price better and it all ended at -10% I took over at. Now extrapolate the numbers for the length of time and budget of crossrail, and the gap isn’t that astonishing really. If shit goes wrong, it tends to spiral.


It must be miserable to work for the NAO. "I told you so", over and over again. They should just turn the civil service over to em and let them purge away all the dead weight IMO.


So how does this happen, is it simply down to contractors being shit with the quotes they give TfL or is it something more malicious whereby contractors stand to gain more if they overrun?


So I can't speak for the whole route, but I've been working as a contractor for the Liverpool Street to Abby Wood section since about Jan 2020, and the problem was that the previous contractors underquoted to get the work, and the project was very mismanaged from about 2014 - 2019.


Genuine question because I'm not great on crossrail ins and outs. If they made mess ups that huge can't we take them to court and claim?


Depends on the contract wording (or how bad it is). Variations are often hotly contested and the fault of any delay or error may not be correctly attributed because of bad wording, bad contract managers (or good, depending on your perspective).


Thank you for your response. I just think if they underquoted that bad then surely they should hold some responsibility


Not necessarily. Any contract will have a long list of exclusions or caveats which make it clear who pays in the event of an issue. Very often, it comes down to negotiation and horse trading if the overall cost has over run, especially if there is a good relationship between the two parties. One party eats X cost, the other eats Y and they are both happy. However, the level of contractual competency varies massively and sometimes you have massive costs being pushed to a client because they weren't smart enough to allow it to be excluded or pushed to contractor. The simple concept is, if X agrees to buy Y dinner, but doesn't specify where or max cost, Y can pick anywhere and X has to pay. X should have specified any limitations in the agreement (e.g. max £30/head) but if they didn't they are ultimately screwed if Y picks a 3\* restaurant at £1000/head.


I know this is an old thread but I wanted to add I did an internship with Crossrail and some of the engineers told me that the company had misled the government about how much the project would cost so the government wouldn’t be put off doing it. They seemed to suggest that is how every major infrastructure project gets done in the UK.


Work in the industry. It’s a bit of both. Mainly contractors massively under bid for work and win because they’re the cheapest. (Upper management is VERY short sighted) then we’re hit with a bunch of variations. Each costing a ridiculous amount of money (with a few extra 0’s thrown in for good measure) and because the state isn’t commercially/business minded with some deep pockets the contractors get the full amount of money they’re after Source: 10 years in the industry


I really wish that the government would do something to counter underbidding. Make it a part of any contract that any overruns over a certain % will come out of any profits they make and will count against them in future projects, like a credit score.


This actually sounds like an excellent idea.


Its not a public sector problem. I work in major projects for energy and its a problem wherever you have contractors bidding against each other. The key is to know when someone is spinning you a yarn; which most procurement departments aren't savvy enough to see. Hell, you even have it if you ring round for a quote to put a conservatory in.


Our problem is that we aren’t allowed to use ‘prior knowledge’ and everything has clarity. We can ONLY go on the paper in front of us. For example (and this has happened). We marked a previously awful contractor really highly because they knew exactly what to say on the bid. Once they were selected, once again they fucked things up in the exact same way as before. They’ll probably get the next contract as well because they’re very bid oriented and know how to win the clients. Having the accountability like that is so frustrating. Especially when the government doesn’t even have accountability…


So the public sector uses an NEC3 contract. There are several different types that all come with advantages and disadvantages. Basically we (state run- arms length government entities) have minimal commercial staff. The money making companies have amazing commercial resources. Everything always works in their interest and they usually always win. It doesn’t help that upper-upper manager probably have hands in a few pies thereby kicking back some of that profit into personal pockets. I’ve heard lots of rumours about it. Again it just falls down to a lack of trying to prevent corruption.


One of my mates was working on the Canary Wharf station back in 2019 which was over running at the time and his wages went from £300 a day to £450 just due to the fact it was over running and his contract was due to end.


That's insane. Lucky cunt.


My very limited understanding is that everyone understands that the contract tenders are massively lowballed except for the public. Decision makers like it to be lowballed so they can pretend they are cost-efficient, contractors like it as they are more likely to win the tender. Only the public doesn't understand what is really going on, so every project looks like a major embarrassment.


There’s a surprise!


Looks like we're a couple months early for the annual: "Crossrail is delayed and over budget" press release. They normally do it in September. At least they're on time when it comes to announcing further delays.


Why does this not surprise me.


Whitechapel station is now forecast to cost £831m, up by £184m since Dec 2018 and massively more than the £110m cost in original budget


Makes £200 for Marylebone seem like a bargain!


Yeah Whitechapel should only cost £60 they went way over budget.


Infrastructure costs in the country are pretty bad. A billion for Whitechapel. Even relatively simple things like a pedestrian/cycle Thames crossing was quoted at £600m. Whenever looking at a project like a bridge here and then looking at similar bridges elsewhere(same length and height and stuff) it's always like 2-4x more expensive here. Even the new Thames tunnel crossing is supposed to cost £7bn but that's before its started so its going of course going to be £10bn+ for a tunnel. HS2 latest predictions are £110bn+ now up from £40bn or so. Stuff here changes at a snails pace.


Wtf, almost a bil for Whitechapel station? Fucking hell. It's just incompetent planning. But nobody will be held responsible


Someone get Dido Harding so she can bring down the spiralling costs.


\*shocked pikachu face\*




That's why promotions and bonuses are awarded at 90% complete and everyone moves off to their swanky new role, before the shit hits the fan. Snagging and initial O&M is the hardest part and also where there is no resource as its not 'sexy'.


Not heard this one before


Drop this news just after all the planning permissions for all the huge towers to be built around the west London stations has been completed. Cheeky.


“between £30m and £218m above the current funding.” That estimate seems to have an extremely huge range. Knowing crossrail I’d hazard a guess and think it will hit the upper end of that estimate.


Perhaps your grandchildren will enjoy it. Probably not you though (you'll be long dead by the time it opens). Not to mention the amount of debt the govt has to repay, where will they get funds to fund Crossrail from? Minting more money?


From the £350million a week we saved from brexit


Nah we’ve already earmarked that for the nurses’ pay


Did you intend for this post to be a spot-on parody of a typical boomer response?


Nah, I just wanted to crack a small joke. But personally, I don't want to jinx away the opening.


The magic money tree!


Despite the increased cost CrossRail will pay for itself in increased economic return.


Maybe before the pandemic when passenger numbers were higher and forecast to keep rising. Now? Who knows.


Queen help them to finish their project bcoz she have enough money to help them out


Anyone that thinks the cost of HS2 is even remotely accurate is delusional. It’s going to be a even bigger shitshow than Crossrail.


Say what you want about the Chinese but they would have had this finished a long time ago. The absolute farce and mismanagement that happens in this country with such expensive projects is a joke.




I dunno why it has to be like that though. The fact that they've done what they have shows its physically possible so if the workers were given decent pay and an hours break in the middle of shift and whatever rights that are missing then you can have new rail lines within a couple of years without the whole rights issue. I'm not sure how bad workers are treated in China rail lines but I doubt the modern infrastructure worker treatment can be that bad. There's a B1M video about china's high speed rail. I think they said there's 35,000km now which is mainly all from the past 25 years and they plan on doubling it to 70,000km by 2035. Our 1 current line, HS2, isn't even fully due to be done by then and that's like 200km maybe? There's gotta be some middle ground between whatever they're doing and whatever we're doing. I'm sure their rail prices are much cheaper at the same time.


the notoriously secretive chinese wouldn't have allowed problems like this to become public. and they have a tendency to cut corners e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenzhou\_train\_collision#Investigation


Look I am not going to defend the Chinese, I spend most of my time when discussing them being highly critical of them, horrible regime but your link proves nothing. Not as if there have not been accidents for a variety of reasons on British rails. Potters Bar being one example.


you're right my link doesn't prove anything, it's a caveat your original comment left out


All aboard the gravy train! I wonder how much of the funding actually goes into the project?


Crossrail: Only 6 months away from completion since 2014.




Definitely not getting crossrail 2


Why cant they just get this money from quantitative easing as a single isolated project shouldn't affect the greater economy?


This whole thing has been an absolute fucking disaster


In the great race of which can be delayed the most, it looks like Crossrail has just edged it against NASA's James Webb space telescope. Well done, it's not easy to be behind something that was meant to launch in 2007.


To be honest one has to be engineered for a cold inhospitable environment and the other is in space.




Nah, no need - you can launder money in the open by entering the London property carousel - or indeed trading fine art with the Conservative Party's own treasurer.


It'd be interesting to know where the money goes and which workstreams produced tangible benefits. I imagine a project of this magnitude attracts a lot of flab.


I met someone who just bought in woolwich because of crossrail. That was 3 years ago. Soon! Soon!


OK but please remember London is the most subsidized transport network in the country and Londoners have loudest voices. Try talking to Northerners about their train networks


wat? TfL runs operational expenditure entirely on fares and loondoners contribute by far the most tax per person.


With respect that's nonsense. TfL have been bailed out by Government to the tune of billions and more than once. Furthermore I traveled cross rail to Paddington yesterday, the trains were designed for capacity not comfort and were 20% full or so. I would guess that post pandemic with wfh more common the business case is now flaky at best


Did someone say subsidised? Like the [£1bn free money](https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/transport/northern-and-transpennine-set-get-ps1bn-subsidy-start-pandemic-keep-rail-services) for Northern & TPE Or the always [subsidised](https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/northern-rail-on-verge-of-being-taken-back-by-state-2x6frgstw) Northern rail that was nationalised?


Government has given 4bn+ in 3 bailouts just to keep TfL going


During a pandemic - where the government has essentially [nationalised](https://www.ons.gov.uk/news/news/theonsclassifiestrainoperatingcompaniesnowrunningunderemergencymeasuresagreements) all railway companies, and give them a blank cheque, to the tune of [£12bn+](https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/rail-fares-prices-rise-12bn-pounds-network-running-covid-b936216.html) The government wants you to get angry at TfL as if it is TfL's fault that the North is stuck with Pacers and Sprinters


Was this catastrophe run by TfL and ultimately under Mike Brown? Considering he stepped down and is now in charge of restoring the Houses of Parliament, we can already predict how that will go. It's becoming pretty apparent in the last few years, that when you hold a leading position in a public entity it's pretty impossible to fail and you just keep on falling upwards.


No, the previous mayor and national government of the time set up Crossrail ltd with a large degree of independence. The reviews since then have called that a mistake because the sponsors/funders didn’t get to know what’s going on from middle management.


Got it - good to have that context.


Reminds me of the James Webb Telescope – the costs and delays just keep going on, and on, and on, and on...


How much did they pay the "Consultant" to tell them that. I bet it's more than the money they would need to finish the project.


So when do we get to see where all the money went? As all transactions are made public knowledge so we can scrutinise every penny spent? Oh wait we don't so that so they can funnel money...