The cost of a rail line linking Edinburgh with the Borders could be more than twice the original estimate.

The cost of a rail line linking Edinburgh with the Borders could be more than twice the original estimate.

MSPs have been warned the proposed Waverely line could now cost £295 million and the completion date has fallen back from 2011 to 2013.

The disclosure came in a statement by transport minister Stewart Stevenson to Parliament where he insisted the SNP administration was not to blame.

"Not a single day's delay has derived from any action of this goverment," said Mr Stevenson, who accused the previous administration of "dither and delay".

But he came under fire from Labour, Tory and Liberal Democrat MSPs.

Labour's Des McNulty said: "Ministers have taken nine months to reinstate this project.

"Costs are up - and the Borders are still waiting."

Announcing the latest timescale and costs, Mr Stevenson said the budget had to take account of an additional station at Stow requested by Parliament and rising land values in the Borders.

"We will deliver a railway that strengthens some of Scotland's poorest communities, spreads wealth to the regions, and provides a real, sustainable, integrated, and cost-effective public transport alternative to the car," said the minister.

He went on to tell MSPs: "The previously stated completion date of December 2011 was never achievable given the decisions taken by the previous administation and the requirement to ensure the project met key tests set by that administration."

Construction work on the rail link was originally expected to start in 2009 and the route was to have become operational in 2011.

But that was based on an "over-optimistic" assessment, and Transport Scotland now expects work to start by 2010 and the line to be operational by the end of 2013.

Latest cost estimates are between £235 million and £295 million at 2012 prices, compared to original estimates of £129 million at 2002 prices.

Mr Stevenson told Parliament: "Today we know that we start construction in the life of this Parliament with a two-and-a-half-year project to completion."

The project would be financed by a "non-profit distributing vehicle" (NPD) along similar lines to the financial structure of Network Rail, said the minister.

"We believe that this approach offers a reliable route to achieve delivery to the time and cost targets we have set."

He told the MSPs that to give an exact figure for the expected final cost could harm commercial negotiations.

But he said: "I can indicate that at this stage in the development of the project, capital costs are indicated to be in the range of £235-£295 million.

"The actual price will be negotiated during procurement."

The project specification had increased, and costs had risen, as a result of commitments made during the passage through Parliament of legislation giving the go-ahead to the rail link.

Under the NPD financing method, capital would be borrowed from financial markets and repaid by annual charges met from the budgets of Transport Scotland, and with contributions from councils.

"NPD funding models are a cost-effective borrowing mechanism avoid the high-interest rates of PFI and leave ownership of the asset in public hands throughout," said the minister.

And detailing the benefits the new line would bring, he said the local economy would benefit, public transport would improve, road accidents could be reduced on the A7 and A68 and some 450,000 tones of carbon would be saved over 60 years.

"At the heart of this project is the need to build a dynamic and growing economy, providing prosperity and opportunities for all," he said.

"The railway will help provide these social inclusion benefits, strengthening some of Scotland's poorest communities and spreading Scotland's wealth to the regions in line with the government economic strategy."

But Labour's Des McNulty said the NPD funding mechanism had no proven track record.

"How much longer must we wait for market soundings, for clarification over borrowing powers, and a competitive procurement process to be put in place?" he demanded.

He also questioned who would pay for the increased specification of the project.

"Who is to pay the £60-£110 million gap between the minister's contribution and the contribution from elsewhere - and what's the impact on the Transport Scotland budget.

"When, minister, will the first train run on Borders rail?"

But the minister insisted there had been no delay caused by actions of the present administration.

"In March 2007 the then transport minister put into play the process we have now completed," he said.

"We to the letter, to the spirit and to the timetable pursued what was put in place by the previous administration"

But the Tories' David Brownlee told MSPs: "There will be disappointment - but probably not much surprise - in the Borders at this announcement of further delay and cost increases."

He too suggested there was a funding gap of between £50 million and £110 million - the difference between the final estimate of £235-£295 million, and an estimated £155 million that would come from the government along with £30 million from local authorities.

The Liberal Democrats' Jeremy Purvis told MSPs: "People in the Borders will be aghast that after reviewing this scheme for a year, the SNP government will only commit to starting the project some time before 2011 - and will also be deeply concerned that the way the government intends to fund this project has not even been written yet."

And he said there should be a full debate in Parliament on issues raised by the minister's statement.

But Christine Grahame, SNP MSP for South of Scotland region told MSPs: "It's a bit rich to hear Jeremy Purvis and Des McNulty say when are you going to start building it, when they had eight years to lay track.

"I welcome the end to the speculation."

But Rhona Brankin, Labour MSP for Midlothian, demanded: "Can the minister explain to my constituents why, after nearly a year, we have gone from a completion date of 2011 promised by the previous Labour and Liberal Democrat Executive to now not even having definite start date, let alone a definite completion date?"