twina49

I have to admit, I just don't get it. I especially found the puzzle-piece-like things on the outside of the building to be especially weird.

We sat in a pub with a few women from Scotland and they went on and on about how much of a waste of money the building was.

afterall

I don't get your post either.

You didn't like the building - that's your prerogative. And you sat in a pub and had a few conversations. Big Deal.

The real question is - what, if anything do you know about the history of Scotland and England?

Suspect not a lot, but look forward to your reply telling me otherise.

Josser

If you want help in "getting" it, go to http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/vl...rood/index.htm

and click on "external features" in the "Parliamentary Buildings" bit.

twina49

Thank you, afterall, for your polite and thoughtful response....

Yes, it's my prerogative to think the building is rather odd looking, and yes, I read about it online (Josser - I reviewed the site you posted after we got home from Scotland to see if I could find out the reasons behind the design), but I'm still puzzled. The shots from above are interesting with the overturned boat look, but the certain parts of the outside seem rather jarring with the rest of the surroundings.

Cholmondley_Warner

We sat in a pub with a few women from Scotland and they went on and on about how much of a waste of money the building was>>>>

I wouldn't mind if it were Scotchland's money that was spent on it. It wasn't. It was mine.

Craigellachie

The contracts for the Scottish Parliament buildinig were set up by the UK Government and went way, way over budget. So did their contracts for the new Inland Revenue HQ (they do to us what the IRS does to Americans), the Passport & Immigration Service, and almost every piece of equipment the Ministry of Defence has ever ordered.

Love or hate the building, bringing our Parliament home has been the catalyst for legislation that is bringing us back into the 21st century. Freedom of Information, clean air in pubs and restaurants, proportional representation in municipal elections, right of access to the countryside, free personal care for our old folk. The list goes on and on, and most of it would probably never have happened if we'd had to wait for Westminster to think it was worth spending time on.

The big worrry about the Scottish Parliament is that it's giving people in Scotland the crazy idea that we could run our country better than the UK government in London.

astein12

I thought the building was interesting, but looked more like a synagogue than a government building...

flanneruk

"it's giving people in Scotland the crazy idea that we could run our country better than the UK government in London".

So why do opinion polls keep on showing most English want to kick the Scotch out, while 70% of the Scotch still want us to subsidise them, wipe their noses and clean up after them?

And why does that proportion never grow, however hard the Salmon blusters?

Cholmondley_Warner

And why does that proportion never grow, however hard the Salmon blusters?>>>

Because whilst the scotch may be feckless drunks they aren't idiots.

If my next door neighbour kept posting £50 notes through my letter box I'd want that to continue too.

twina49

I assume everybody realizes my comment was not about the Scottish Parliament body, but rather the design of the building....

I like what Craigellachie has to say about the concept of the legislation.

For some of the others - I always thought the term was Scots, not Scotch, for the Scottish people. Surely you aren't doing this deliberately?

hanl

Have to agree about the building. I loathe it. I was born and brought up in Edinburgh and I think it's a complete eyesore. I didn't find it particularly impressive inside either.
I don't know why they couldn't have gone ahead and used the old Royal High school building, which was considered but eventually rejected as the site for the parliament.
Re. the money wasting question, however, I believe that the original quote/budget that was given for the building was wildly unrealistic so it was inevitable that it would go over. Just a shame that they went over budget on such a hideous construction!

lauralamb

Scotland to Chomondley_Warner and Flanneruk: Sod Off.

zippo

Please dont judge Fl_uk & CW too harshly. They believe Whitehall stats and the Daily Mail. All this suits the SNP.
Yes the building is horrendous. There are a few who defend it but most Scots regard it as a waste of money.

sheila

Actually, I love the building. I know the contract was a walking disaster, but no-one will care in 50 years and the building will still be fantastic.

The "Scotch" thing IS David's idea of funny.

And David, if you look at teh subsidies that go into London, those into Scotland don't seem so bad. You just don't think of them as subsidies.

Cholmondley_Warner

Sheila: I have been paying taxes for around 20 years now. That means you owe me:

20 x £1500 / 5,062,011 =£ 0.0059264983817696168578061169760398

And worth every penny no doubt.

I would still rather have kept my own £30,000 though.

Gardyloo

I think the interior of the building is far more attractive than the exterior. But I really didn't mind the old S&N brewery that was on the site before.

I have to disagree, however, with the claim made on the Parliament's website that <i>&quot;The arrival of the Parliament has increased the bio-diversity of the site.&quot;</i>

I don't know about that. There were some interesting subspecies of <i>h. sapiens</i> on display most evenings before it got built. Or were they?

Nonconformist

Perhaps the implication is that politicians are a species other than human.

alanRow

It could account for the First Minister - I wonder if he's a Cylon or a Pod

Cholmondley_Warner

Slitheen I'd guess - his skin doesn't fit.

StCirq

Am I missing something here (Probably!): I was taught that &quot;Scotch&quot; is not the proper way to refer to denizens of Scotland, and that only &quot;Scots&quot; was appropriate.

Is there a joke here I'm not getting?