Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Nearly ?3m of taxpayers cash spent on Anglesey archaeological dig

OH no, not again!

Nearly ?3m of taxpayers cash spent on Anglesey archaeological dig

screams the headline

Quote:NEARLY ?3m in public cash has been spent on an archaeological dig on Anglesey.

The Welsh Government spent the money at the Parc Cybi site in Holyhead after Bronze Age discoveries were made during the construction of a new industrial park.

To date the dig has cost taxpayers ?2.93m but that bill will rise, as more work still needs to be done.
Critics say they are ?flabbergasted? at the public cost and that the money would have been better spent on services at a time when police officers, nurses and civil servants are losing their jobs.

But the Gwynedd Archaeological Trust and Welsh Government said the finds were of ?international significance?.
The site has now been covered by the industrial estate but the Trust said the items excavated would go on display on Anglesey in the future.

Parc Cybi, which was an ?11m project to bring in investment, remains empty.

(ah..... er... so could the headline say Nearly ?7m of taxpayers cash spent on Anglesey empty business park?)

and 3million on a dig! hmmm? I would have done it for half that Wink
Half? Hell I'd do it for a quarter!

I love it when they say things like "critics say they were flabbergasted..." with no reference to who the critics are. Critics clearly = the tubby author of the article at the daily mail slobbering over a bag of crisps and pint of a starbucks frap...
Quote:Half? Hell I'd do it for a quarter!

Usually these virtual race to the bottom threads include someone saying that they'd do it for free, just for the love of the archaeology.

Its only news if the cost was unexpected. It the LA knew it was going to cost ?3m, maybe they should have put their white elephant somewhere else.
Well put there Oxbeast.

It can't have been too unexpected, due to the fierce bidding wars that go on. Wink

So who agreed the costs?
No problem finding somewhere to store the finds, anyway....
Huum cannot help thinking that this is a bit of a red herring ie . "look at all this expensive totally wastful archaeology" when it should be saying why the hell was this industrial park built if it cannot be occupied. I would not question the cost of the archaology I would question the development. If the Govenment has its way will see more of these expensive inappropriate developments that spend 10 years plus vacant until they are knocked down to build something else equally as useless. Bet they had European money to do it. I have lived in my area for over twenty years and there are still offices built when I moved here that are vacant.
who did the work and who were the curators?

not the same people surely
Reason: your past is my past
Makes my ?1.6m bill seem a bargain..... but the M6Toll road had a ?2.2m bill if I recall correctly, but that was private money so that's ok!
I was on that excavation and we did find some amazing stuff, but before the main excavation there was two or maybe three periods of trenching i was only on the last part of the trench but we found loads of stuff, there was also a standing stone and a three chambered Neolithic tomb with are under the care of CADW. After the trenching we didn't hear anything for ages and most of us local diggers where surprised when the go a head was given for development.

The main excavation was all strip and map and the first week we found a stone built round house village with over a meter high walls when this village was found the site stopped just before Christmas, and we where told we couldn't be given a start date in Jan because it was going to consultation again.

My point is the powers that be had plenty of opportunity to stop the site and not build there they had there own consultants as well as the county archaeologist and the local trust (who carried out the work) advice as well as three seasons of archaeological evaluation and years to think about it.

There is an industrial and shopping estate across the road which already had vacant building and there are areas of Holyhead high street that could have also done with the money, which local people had pointed out to there Assembly member, PM as well as the consultant and developers.

The main archaeological phase stated in 2005 at least 2 years before the credit crunch hit, so there wasn't the big press coverage of cut as there is now,( although there where many cuts happening in rural North Wales) it just wasn't fashionable to talk about it as it is now. This story is complete lazy band jumping on the band wagon, the main excavation went on for nearly two years and apart from some positive story's based on site open days there was no other press, so well done Daily Post reporter really up to date there.
Archaeology is the peeping Tom of the sciences It is the sandbox of men who care not where they are going; they merely want to know where everyone else has been.
Good post, Drunky. I know nothing about the specifics of the site, but my first impression on reading the story was that there would probably have been several points at which the project could have been halted if the developer (who I presume was the Welsh government) had felt that the archaeological costs were too great, the most obvious being following initial evaluation. The story is presented as if the evil archaeologists simply ploughed on spending taxpayer money, and presented a huge bill at the end, without telling anyone at any point prior to this what the cost was likely to be, and before anyone had the opportunity to stop them. In practise, the evaluation results should have given an indication of the quality of material present, and how extensive it was, which would in turn allow some indication of the likely cost of dealing with it. At that point, the developer would have the opportunity of to look at the likely archaeology costs, and could decide to walk away from the site if they felt that these were too high (which would also have preserved the material). Instead, they decided to press ahead with the development. It's also likely that the contractor would have had to submit regular invoices and keep the developer up to date on any projected charges to the cost, so the final bill shouldn't really have come as a surprise.

The whole thing smacks of an attempt to save face for a cock-up in building an industrial park that nobody wants by using archaeology as a convenient scapegoat.
You know Marcus. He once got lost in his own museum

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Gwynedd Archaeological Trust changes... BAJR 5 5,421 18th March 2016, 02:46 PM
Last Post: GnomeKing
  10 best Archaeological Walks in the UK? Joey 12 8,276 12th July 2014, 04:18 PM
Last Post: Dinosaur
  Co-Creation, the Public, and the Archaeological Record BAJR 17 11,188 22nd April 2014, 02:17 PM
Last Post: Boxoffrogs
  Landscape Perspectives: new approaches in archaeological survey BAJR 1 3,459 4th April 2014, 06:18 PM
Last Post: BAJR
  Archaeological Research Framework for Wales. BAJR 1 2,031 3rd April 2014, 10:24 AM
Last Post: BAJR
  Archaeological bloggers - blog carnival Martin Locock 5 5,250 6th February 2014, 08:45 PM
Last Post: Doug
  Our own personal archaeological archives.....Any ideas? kevin wooldridge 21 12,396 30th November 2013, 08:05 PM
Last Post: kevin wooldridge
  Archaeological Oddities series BAJR 2 2,760 11th October 2013, 12:33 PM
Last Post: Jeff S
  Atlas of Hillforts ? 1 million well spent? BAJR 27 12,337 14th July 2013, 07:08 PM
Last Post: BAJR
  Derrywoone Castle Archaeological Excavation 2013 BAJR 1 2,234 21st May 2013, 09:55 PM
Last Post: BAJR

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)