The chair of the Garden Bridge Trust has said it ‘cannot accept’ Dame Margaret Hodge’s conclusion that the project should be scrapped, and has complained of inaccuracies in the report.
Following the publication of Hodge’s independent report into the Garden Bridge project last week, Lord Mervyn Davies, chair of the charity responsible for delivering the project, has said that “it is a shame that Dame Margaret has shown disregard for the facts and been selective in her use of evidence to support her own opinions”.
He is concerned about Hodge’s conclusions on the public support and consultations processes of the project, signing of the construction contract, fundraising, and her scope and methodology.
Hodge had said that the Garden Bridge project, which is run by the Garden Bridge Trust, should be scrapped at a loss of over £46m to the taxpayer. The report had been commissioned by London mayor Sadiq Khan.
In a letter to Hodge, which was also sent to Khan, Davies said of the report: “To put it bluntly, it does in fact appear to be based almost entirely on your own opinion and the word of others who have expressed a view, rather than on the word of those with technical expertise in this field.”
‘Lack of respect unacceptable’
Davies was highly critical of Hodge’s process, and of the decision to publish the report without giving the trust any warning. He said that the trust found the “lack of respect and disregard for the impact of your findings unacceptable".
He described Hodge’s approach to publication of the report “discourteous”, particularly as the trust said it was a willing participant in the review.
He said: “I understand that some interested parties, including journalists, had early insight into publication, while those with responsibility for delivery of the project were not offered the same courtesy, having no warning of either the publication of your report or your decision to alter the scope of your recommendations.
“This put the trust in a position by which we were unable to provide timely briefing of our funders and key stakeholders. You will understand the importance of our relationships with such critical supporters of the project and, for someone with your extensive experience in the public sphere, I find the lack of respect and disregard for the impact of your findings unacceptable.”
Criticisms
In the letter, Davies criticised the lack of a “valid survey exercise” on the public support of the project, and accused Hodge of focusing on “almost entirely on speaking to known opponents of the project”. He said that the Trust must reject Hodge’s conclusions “in the face the evidence of work done by ComRes in July 2015 which shows over three quarters of Londoners support the bridge being built”.
Davies also raised Hodge’s scepticism over whether the trust will be successful in finding donors willing to fund the project, saying that “there is no evidence in your report to support this conclusion”. He said to Hodge that, “as we explained when we met, we simply cannot approach funders when we are coping with the uncertainties created by third party delays, including your own review”.
He criticised her further for not seeking to investigate the trust’s fundraising activities in any more detail, nor “take the opportunity to receive a presentation of the project, its design, its rationale and its potential to provide sources of income”.
Davies also called Hodge out for a lack of understanding of the project. He said that following a meeting with Hodge he had written to her to say this was a “huge and complicated task for one person and that you needed additional technical and other resource to master the complexity and scale of the project”. He added that it is “regrettable that no such resource was sought”.
The full letter in response to the report can be found here.
Related articles
