The Overview and Scrutiny Committee of Newham Council met on 24 July 2024 to review a Cabinet decision regarding the allocation of £13.2 million from the capital programme for the Royal Victoria Docks Bridge. After extensive deliberation, the committee decided to refer the matter back to the Cabinet for reconsideration, citing concerns over the project's financial implications and the perceived lack of a robust business case.

Royal Victoria Docks Bridge Funding Allocation

The primary focus of the meeting was the call in of a Cabinet decision made on 4 June 2024, which approved a capital budget allocation of £13.2 million, funded by borrowing, towards the construction of the Royal Victoria Docks Bridge. The Cabinet had recommended this allocation to contribute to the bridge's total estimated cost of £41 million, with the remaining £27.8 million to be funded by the Silvertown Partnership (TSP), the developer of the Silvertown Quays site.

Members of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee expressed significant concerns regarding the financial viability and necessity of this expenditure, particularly in light of the council's projected budget gap of £110 million over the next three years. Councillor Lester Hudson, Councillor Rita Chadha, and Councillor Elizabeth Booker, who requested the call-in, argued that the £1 million annual cost of servicing the borrowing for the bridge would place an unsustainable burden on the council's revenue budget, which is already facing significant overspending. They also questioned the necessity of the bridge's increased width, which they argued was not adequately justified by a clear business case demonstrating tangible economic benefits.

The executive, represented by Mayor Rokhsana Fiaz OBE and Paul Kitson, Corporate Director of Inclusive Economy and Housing, defended the decision. They argued that the bridge is a vital piece of infrastructure essential for the regeneration of the Royal Docks and Silvertown Quays, which is expected to create thousands of jobs and homes. They stated that the increased width was a strategic decision to future-proof the area for anticipated growth and to promote sustainable travel, aligning with the council's policies and the Mayor of London's transport objectives. Officers explained that while the developer, TSP, would fund the portion of the bridge directly attributable to their development, the council's contribution was necessary to cover the costs associated with the wider community benefits and future-proofing.

However, councillors remained unconvinced. They highlighted a perceived lack of transparency and detail in the reports presented to Cabinet, with several members noting discrepancies between the written reports and the verbal explanations provided by officers. Concerns were raised about the council subsidising a developer and the potential for this decision to set a precedent for future funding requests. The absence of a detailed business plan that clearly outlined the economic benefits and return on investment for the council was a recurring point of contention.

Ultimately, the committee resolved to refer the matter back to the Cabinet for reconsideration. Their key concerns centred on the significant financial commitment in the current economic climate, the lack of a robust business case to justify the expenditure and the perceived over-engineering of the project. The committee also expressed a need for greater clarity and detail in reports presented to Cabinet and scrutiny committees.