The defence of the ditched Garden Bridge by Paul Finch was interesting to read and hear the other side of the story.
However the key missing piece is how could about £40m be spent of anyone’s money on drawing, designs and consultants on a concept, without a brick being laid?
How did the trustees of the project allow this to happen without the necessary legal commitment of whatever public bodies were needed?
A full transparent breakdown of costs with explanation from those leading the project is needed, so taxpayers can understand who has benefited so significantly, for producing apparently nothing at our expense.
What was the competitive procurement process to ensure fair value? There has been surprisingly few demands for this information. If millions of private funding was pledged, why are they being allowed to walk away?
Something doesn’t smell right.