1 Thursday, 5 October 2017 23 MR MACKENZIE: My Lord, the next witness is Mr Jim Harries. 24 We certainly won't finish him today, but we can deal 25 with the preliminaries. 197 1 CHAIR OF THE INQUIRY: Yes, I understand he's keen to get 2 started. 3 MR JIM HARRIES (affirmed) 4 CHAIR OF THE INQUIRY: Could I ask you to speak clearly into 5 the microphone so everyone can hear you, and also 6 relatively slowly so the shorthand writer can keep up 7 with you, and to answer the question as directly as 8 possible before adding any qualifications. 9 Examination by MR MACKENZIE 10 MR MACKENZIE: Good afternoon, Mr Harries. Thank you for 11 waiting. Can you state your full name, please. 12 A. James Richard Harries. 13 Q. And your current occupation? 14 A. I'm the Director of a company called Mondalus. 15 Q. Now, you have provided a helpful CV to the Inquiry. 16 I would like to go to that. It's CVS00000045. If we 17 can please go to page 3, we can see in the left-hand 18 column, you set out that you have an engineering degree 19 and you're a chartered engineer and your membership of 20 various professional bodies. 21 Then just starting then at the right of the page and 22 working up, we can see you have experience with 23 British Rail, with Freightliner in Manchester, and then 24 up we see Greater Manchester Metro, you were Engineering 25 Director and Engineering Manager between 1990 and 1996. 198 1 We can then go to page 2, please, to continue this. 2 We can see you were then the Managing Director for the 3 Greater Manchester metro between 1996 and May 1998. We 4 can see one of the bullet points under that, if I may. 5 We can see third bullet from the bottom, you delivered 6 the tender for the fund, design, build, operation and 7 maintenance of the extended Metrolink system. 8 If we then go up the page, we can see John Mowlem & 9 Co London. You were Assistant Director for railways 10 between May 1998 and August 1999. We can see the first 11 bullet point there states you were responsible for 12 commissioning the Lewisham extension of the Docklands 13 Light Railway and it opened early. Then one up, we see 14 in Nottingham for Bombardier Transportation, you were 15 the Operations Manager for the Nottingham tram system 16 between August 1999 and November 2004. 17 We see the first bullet point, you were responsible 18 for the commissioning and acceptance of the tram system. 19 So clearly you have considerable experience in light 20 rail and trams; is that correct, Mr Harries? 21 A. I believe so. 22 Q. Then one up we see your involvement in the Edinburgh 23 problem for a company called Transdev. You were Project 24 Engineer between November 2004 and February 2008, and 25 I'll come back to your role in that shortly. 199 1 On page 1 we can see under "Metrolink Transport for 2 Greater Manchester", you were Engineering Manager 3 between February 2008 and June 2014. We can see the 4 text states you led the engineering team with 5 responsibility for the rapidly changing and developing 6 Metrolink system. Changes include tripling the size of 7 the system, procuring a fleet of 104 new trams, 8 replacing the signalling, et cetera. 9 Then one up, please, under your current role as 10 Director of Mondalus Limited from June 2014 to present, 11 we can see involvement in various rail matters, 12 including the first bullet point, Network Rail, 13 supporting the Sheffield tram-train project, and down 14 below that, Balfour Beatty, in the commissioning of the 15 extension to the Midland Metro system in Birmingham. 16 Then third from the bottom, Nottingham Trams 17 Limited, et cetera. Are there any UK tram schemes you 18 have not been involved with, Mr Harries? 19 A. Oh, yes. 20 Q. There are some others not on the list? 21 A. Oh, yes, there are, plenty. 22 Q. Thank you. So that's your CV. 23 You have also provided a statement to the Inquiry. 24 I think you should have a hard copy before you and 25 a copy will also come up on the screen. The reference 200 1 is TRI00000128. I should just formally ask you to go to 2 the last page of the statement at page 26. Page 26 will 3 come up on the screen in a second. We can see 4 a signature dated 25 July 2017. Could I ask you to 5 confirm, please, that is your signature and this is the 6 written statement you have provided to the Inquiry? 7 A. It is. 8 Q. Thank you. So, Mr Harries, your evidence to the Inquiry 9 will comprise both that written statement and the 10 evidence you give at the hearings. 11 If I could now please go to page 2 of the statement, 12 to look at the role of Transdev. 13 So on page 2 of the statement, towards the bottom, 14 on question 2, we stated that: 15 "On 20 April 2004 the TIE Board endorsed the 16 recommendation to approve Transdev plc as the preferred 17 bidder and tram operator under the Developing Partnering 18 and Operating Franchising Agreement ..." 19 We asked: 20 "What was the role of Transdev in the Edinburgh tram 21 project?" 22 You answered: 23 "To provide TIE with operational and technical 24 advice in the development of the system, and then to act 25 as the operator of the system once built." 201 1 We then asked you: 2 "Do you know why Transdev's contract was terminated 3 in August 2009?" 4 You say: 5 "Yes. I left Transdev and the Edinburgh tram 6 project in February 2008, so I have no direct knowledge 7 on this matter. My understanding from discussing the 8 matter with others is that TIE felt that they could 9 operate the system at a lower price by using alternative 10 arrangements with Lothian Bus." 11 It may be helpful here just to jump to page 22, 12 please. We can see in question 33 we state: 13 "By letter dated 21 August 2009 TIE gave Transdev 14 plc notice of their intention to terminate the DPOFA." 15 And we give a reference for that. We can leave 16 that, thank you. 17 If we can go back to page 5 of the statement, 18 please, on the question of design. 19 About 5(c), halfway down the page, we asked: 20 "What was your understanding of the main 21 difficulties in carrying out the design work ..." 22 For the tram project, and you replied: 23 "It was challenging to meet the 24 requirements/aspirations of all the parties involved. 25 Edinburgh as a city is the most challenging environment 202 1 that I have experienced. A core issue here was the lack 2 of an integrated approach from both TIE and Edinburgh 3 CEC/Lothian Bus. This was compounded by the 4 difficulties presented by the multiple stakeholders who 5 tended to be very demanding." 6 When you say "Edinburgh as a city [was] the most 7 challenging environment that I have experienced", why do 8 you say that? 9 A. There were several factors to that. First of all, 10 Edinburgh is a -- it's a wonderful historic city and it 11 wasn't laid out with trams in mind. 12 So putting a tram system through narrow streets in 13 a very densely populated area will be challenging. 14 It's also a very historic city, with lots of 15 wonderful buildings and heritage that we do not wish to 16 disturb. 17 The people of Edinburgh, compared with a lot of 18 other cities, are probably more demanding and overall 19 perhaps more educated than perhaps is elsewhere. 20 When you put those factors together, and it results 21 in very challenging environment for a tram project. 22 Q. You also referred in this answer to a core issue being 23 the lack of an integrated approach from both tie and 24 Edinburgh CEC/Lothian Bus. What did you mean by that 25 sentence? 203 1 A. In other projects I've been involved with, the ultimate 2 client and the contract chain are all absolutely behind 3 the delivery of the project. 4 I did not feel that either CEC or Lothian Bus were 5 pushing for the delivery of the project as I believed 6 they -- well, I had hoped they would. 7 There were tensions between tie and Edinburgh CEC, 8 even though one organisation is a subsidiary of the 9 other. 10 Q. Just the last sentence, for the avoidance of doubt, you 11 refer to multiple stakeholders who tended to be very 12 demanding. Who did you have in mind there? 13 A. Almost everybody. Pressure groups. I went to several 14 public meetings, and it was -- it was hard work to 15 convince everybody that we were doing the right thing. 16 Q. Did you also mean by that a reference to multiple 17 stakeholders, third parties with an interest in the 18 project. I'm thinking of Forth Ports, the SRU, 19 Edinburgh Airport Authority, these sorts of bodies? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. And also the utility companies? 22 A. I didn't have any direct understanding of the utilities 23 companies' input to the project. 24 Q. Thank you. 25 Going back to your statement, please, in the next 204 1 question and answer, (d), we asked: 2 "What steps were taken to address these 3 difficulties?" 4 You say: 5 "Transdev attempted to escalate these concerns, but 6 there were no easy answers and ownership of these issues 7 within TIE was variable." 8 What do you mean by saying "ownership of these 9 issues within tie was variable"? 10 A. I say elsewhere that tie was a large organisation and 11 ownership of issues within tie was something that I had 12 difficulty understanding. 13 I suppose the apparent lack of structure and 14 ownership was what I was trying to get at in my answer. 15 Q. Finally, in terms of a last general question I would 16 like to ask today, if I may, on page 7, please, page 7 17 is headed "Risk", and in question 7(d), we had asked: 18 "Do you consider that risk management was effective 19 and can you give the reasons for your view?" 20 You replied: 21 "The cost increases seem to indicate that the risk 22 management process did not work effectively. TIE lacked 23 the will to accept that the emerging costs and risks 24 should be recognised." 25 Can you explain that last sentence, please? 205 1 A. Whilst I was there, it was clear that there were 2 problems with the delivery of the project and that costs 3 and risks would escalate in my personal view. 4 I did attempt to escalate those concerns within tie 5 and within my own involvement with Transdev. 6 Q. Now, in terms of your attempt to escalate these matters 7 within tie, between the period 2004 to February 2008, 8 when you stopped being involved, can you remember when 9 during that period did you attempt to escalate these 10 matters within tie? 11 A. I cannot remember, but the documentation, particularly 12 the monthly reports that were in the pack of the 13 documentation, shows what was done there. 14 Q. What do you mean by monthly reports? Monthly reports by 15 Transdev or -- 16 A. Yes. The contractual arrangements between Transdev and 17 tie were we provided a monthly progress report, and some 18 of those reports are in the evidence pack. 19 Q. I see. So if we go to these monthly progress reports, 20 that's where we will find you trying to escalate your 21 concerns? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Who were these reports sent to within tie? 24 A. These reports were formally issued to tie's Transdev 25 Contract Manager who was their Operations and 206 1 Maintenance Director. 2 Q. Do you remember the name of that individual over the 3 period 2004 to February 2008? 4 A. Alastair Richards. 5 Q. Thank you. My Lord, I'm about to move on to 6 a particular document. This may be an appropriate time 7 to stop for the day? 8 CHAIR OF THE INQUIRY: Well, Mr Harries, sorry you've been 9 kept waiting, but we'll adjourn until tomorrow at 9.30. 10 Ms Fraser will speak to you about arrangements for 11 coming to enable us to start at that time. 12 We will adjourn until tomorrow morning. 13 (4.31 pm) 14 (The hearing adjourned until Friday, 6 October 2017 at 15 9.30 am) 16 207 1 INDEX 2 PAGE 3 MR TONY GLAZEBROOK (continued) .......................1 4 5 Examination by MR MACKENZIE (continued) .......1 6 7 MR DAMIAN SHARP (affirmed) ..........................40 8 9 Examination by MR LAKE .......................40 10 11 Examination by MR MACKENZIE ..................74 12 13 Questions by CHAIR OF THE INQUIRY ...........196 14 15 MR JIM HARRIES (affirmed) ..........................198 16 17 Examination by MR MACKENZIE .................198 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 208