advertisement


A thread to catalogue the eloquence, dignity, diplomacy and wisdom of Boris Johnson

Status
Not open for further replies.
Garden bridge charity spent £53.5m with no construction, TfL finds
Review finds £43m of public money went on abandoned Thames bridge scheme

The charity behind a plan to build a garden bridge across the Thames in London spent £53.5m without even beginning full construction, final figures for the abandoned scheme have revealed.

Of the total spent by the Garden Bridge Trust, £43m was public money – £24m from Transport for London and £19m from the Department for Transport, TfL said on Wednesday.

The rest of the money came from donations to the trust, or fundraising activities.

More > https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...ity-spent-535m-with-no-construction-tfl-finds

Not a single word of apology from de piffle.

What he said previously, "Feck Business."

Indeed.

How can £53m be spent with no construction whatsoever? And no one will be held accountable for it either. And 52% of the population want us governed solely by people who let this sort of thing happen day in day out!
 
How can £53m be spent with no construction whatsoever? And no one will be held accountable for it either. And 52% of the population want us governed solely by people who let this sort of thing happen day in day out!

You don't just rock up on day one with a few builders called Dave and start laying brick courses along a very long plumb line. You have to design the thing - which is a bit new and weird as it has to have the soil depth and irrigation to support mature trees - so not a normal bridge design. Different materials and permeability. It's almost more like an aqueduct filled with soil. So different properties and behaviour in all weathers. Hence you spend a bit of time designing it. Stress testing it. Wind loading. And the normal civil engineers have to spend time with ecologists to create something sustainable that won't die off.

Services, maintenance - all very different from your ordinary bridge, Need designing from scratch with the infrastructure built in to water the grass in drought and remove the excess in flood.

Then you have the planning permission. Which was vehemently opposed by lots of local councils. Because it became political. So that is a lot of money to lawyers in the pay of the Mayor, Lambeth and the charity that was set up to fund the bridge.

Consulting engineers are a bit cheaper than high court silks - but you can rack up some big bills designing. Unless you want it to fall down.

How much was spent designing HS2 before anything was built? Cross-rail? Queensferry crossing?

The latter cost £1.4 billion vs the final estimate of £200M for Garden Bridge. The answer for Queensferry is hundreds of millions.
 
You don't just rock up on day one with a few builders called Dave and start laying brick courses along a very long plumb line. You have to design the thing - which is a bit new and weird as it has to have the soil depth and irrigation to support mature trees - so not a normal bridge design. Different materials and permeability. It's almost more like an aqueduct filled with soil. So different properties and behaviour in all weathers. Hence you spend a bit of time designing it. Stress testing it. Wind loading. And the normal civil engineers have to spend time with ecologists to create something sustainable that won't die off.

Services, maintenance - all very different from your ordinary bridge, Need designing from scratch with the infrastructure built in to water the grass in drought and remove the excess in flood.

All of which can be modelled using computer technology for a relatively small cost. - £2.7m as it happens.

Then you have the planning permission. Which was vehemently opposed by lots of local councils. Because it became political. So that is a lot of money to lawyers in the pay of the Mayor, Lambeth and the charity that was set up to fund the bridge.

Nope, just a 'mere' £2.3m on legal costs.

Consulting engineers are a bit cheaper than high court silks - but you can rack up some big bills designing. Unless you want it to fall down.

Part of the £2.7m above.

Other costs as follows:

£2.16m consultancy fees
£1.8m executive pay.
£1.3m marine surveys
£34.1m construction

Now, forgetting all the other overblown trumped up charges you're not going to convince me that a £34.1m figure paid to constructors for a project that never even got started is sensible or just!
 
All of which can be modelled using computer technology for a relatively small cost. - £2.7m as it happens.



Nope, just a 'mere' £2.3m on legal costs.



Part of the £2.7m above.

Other costs as follows:

£2.16m consultancy fees
£1.8m executive pay.
£1.3m marine surveys
£34.1m construction

Now, forgetting all the other overblown trumped up charges you're not going to convince me that a £34.1m figure paid to constructors for a project that never even got started is sensible or just!

I am utterly shocked that, a) The design cost that little. And b) that £34 million was actually spent on construction.

Have you got a source for that breakdown?

I can imagine £5m on an initial design - but if it was really going to be built I'd expect a lot more to be spent on a full design before actual construction - your are talking £500 a day, over £100K per year per person working on the full design. A project like that would be c100+ people or £10M+ for a one year full detailed design.
 
I am utterly shocked that, a) The design cost that little. And b) that £34 million was actually spent on construction.

Have you got a source for that breakdown?

I can imagine £5m on an initial design - but if it was really going to be built I'd expect a lot more to be spent on a full design before actual construction - your are talking £500 a day, over £100K per year per person working on the full design. A project like that would be c100+ people or £10M+ for a one year full detailed design.

Several reports online - one here:

https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk...-on-the-doomed-garden-bridge/10039976.article
 
^ Thanks for posting this.

So, when de piffle is questioned about the detail, he claims loss of memory.

A typical tory ploy, how did the maybot misplace or forgot what became of the file she was given wrt the pedo ring.

These people are public servants and should be held to account for mal-administration, imv.

No excuses.
 

Thanks - that's more like it. Look at the actual doc and that is over £20m in design and project management and £15m in shut down costs, £10m running the company and raising £60M.

It was obviously set up as if to mobilise and deliver, so all the pre-construction work has been done.

Shouldn't have been done like that given the uncertainty in the last year. Gung-Ho Boris.
 
His twatter. Great comments.

Dw5PyhTWkAAHeF5


:D
 
Boris Johnson under fire for failing to declare house in Somerset

Commons watchdog says MP broke rules by not declaring financial interest in time limit
Jessica Elgot

Boris Johnson has been accused of “an over-casual attitude towards obeying the rules of the House” after a Commons standards watchdog found he had failed to declare his share of a property in Somerset on time.

The Commons Standards Committee said the former foreign secretary had breached rules by failing to declare a financial interest within the required time limit.

The committee dismissed the former foreign secretary’s claim that he had not fully understood the rules. Johnson failed to register a 20% share of the ownership of the property within the 28-day timetable of acquiring it.

More> https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ling-declare-house-somerset-commons-standards

de piffle at it again!

He thinks rule just don't apply to him.

Arrogant sh*t, I hope they haul him over the coals, as they use to say.
 
Boris Johnson under fire for failing to declare house in Somerset

Commons watchdog says MP broke rules by not declaring financial interest in time limit
Jessica Elgot

Boris Johnson has been accused of “an over-casual attitude towards obeying the rules of the House” after a Commons standards watchdog found he had failed to declare his share of a property in Somerset on time.

The Commons Standards Committee said the former foreign secretary had breached rules by failing to declare a financial interest within the required time limit.

The committee dismissed the former foreign secretary’s claim that he had not fully understood the rules. Johnson failed to register a 20% share of the ownership of the property within the 28-day timetable of acquiring it.

More> https://www.theguardian.com/politic...ling-declare-house-somerset-commons-standards

de piffle at it again!

He thinks rule just don't apply to him.

Arrogant sh*t, I hope they haul him over the coals, as they use to say.
He’s showing real Conservative leadership qualities.
 
There now appear to be lies, damned lies, statistics and BoJo "facts", the latter actually being "clearly comically polemical" according to the Telegraph. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-47913555
But following a complaint that it was inaccurate, Ipso said the article, published on 7 January, failed to provide accurate information with "a basis in fact" and ordered a correction to be printed.

In its ruling, Ipso said that while columnists were free to use "hyperbole, melodrama and humour", they must take care "over the accuracy of any claims of fact".

It said the Telegraph had not provided data to back up the claims and had "construed the polls as signalling support for a no deal, when in fact, this was the result of the publication either amalgamating several findings together or interpreting an option beyond what was set out by the poll, as being a finding in support of a no-deal Brexit".

It found it was a "significant inaccuracy, because it misrepresented polling information" and upheld a complaint that it had breached clause 1 of the Editors' Code of Practice.
 
The Telegraph's defence appears to be that no-one should take anything Boris says seriously.

He's apparently “entitled to make sweeping generalisations based on his opinions”,

and his column "“was clearly comically polemical, and could not be reasonably read as a serious, empirical, in-depth analysis of hard factual matters”.

So they're entirely comfortable with him making up absolute lies.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top