Silbury Hill 180
Image by Paul C
Silbury Hill

Silbury extra!

nigelswift wrote:
"We were told the primary mission was repair not research (though some of us had and have huge doubts about that) yet here we are more than five weeks into the project and how much have any of us been told about the state of the hill, the number of collapses, the cubic metres of material involved etc etc etc etc etc.
Perhaps you should be bugging Skanska for updates then? The updates you are getting are from the archaeologists, not the engineers.

"Perhaps you should be bugging Skanska for updates then? The updates you are getting are from the archaeologists, not the engineers."

Well I suppose Skanska aren't at liberty to discuss anything unless their clients authorise it. But anyway, its a bit much we should be forced to nag them for information that we've all paid for but hasn't been forthcoming from the official body. I haven't asked questions direct to the archaeologists on the job as it seems they're busy enough without having had that extra burden put on them. But I have asked questions of those who are truly responsible to the public (and crucially, on all matters relating to policy decisions) , the Project Team. I haven't even had an acknowledgement. Has anyone?