Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We use cookies to personalise your experience; learn more in our Privacy and Cookie Policy. You can opt out of some cookies by adjusting your browser settings; see the cookie policy for details. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies.

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.
By submitting your information you agree to our Privacy & Cookie Policy.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.

Headline

Garden Bridge faces four separate inquiries

Comment

For Paul Finch - Irony? I - for one - am not using the procurement issue as cover for my dislike of the project - you surely aren't taking an 'Emperor's New Clothes' attitude to the procurement issue, are you? Isn't Transport for London supposed to be responsible for what its title says, and not for a politician's pork-barrel antics in favour of his public image and his friends? The scoring for the bridge design experience was quite outrageously weighted in favour of Heatherwick and against far more experienced firms, and the initial TfL review of process has quite correctly been described as a whitewash. Either there were senior staff within TfL happy to 'bend the rules' at the Mayor's bidding, or this organisation perhaps has an integrity problem like that within the Metropolitan Police. I share your dislike of the OJEU rules, but isn't high-level 'fiddling' within public authorities that have enormous powers of patronage exactly the sort of problem that breeds a proliferation of tedious rules? The Garden Bridge affair isn't the only TfL procurement controversy of recent years. Perhaps you could give us your opinion of the reason why there doesn't seem to have been much in the way of public objection from the architects who were pretty obviously shafted in the design procurement process? Concern about upsetting the wrong people? Some sort of informal understanding that the winning bidder was pre-determined? And, returning to the 'idea of the project', just how can such a major intervention on the Thames in Central London have been subjected only to local authority planning approval? What's going on in London, and the Westminster government? - London's not a separate city-state like Singapore, yet.

Posted date

1 July, 2016

Posted time

8:50 pm

required
required
required
required