At a meeting of the Isle of Wight Council’s Corporate Scrutiny Committee last night (Tuesday), the leader of the Isle of Wight Council Leader, Dave Stewart, admitted that Floating Bridge No.6 is not fit for purpose and confirmed the Council’s intention to make a ‘substantial claim’.
Councillor Stewart outlined to the committee how the Conservative administration had inherited a vessel with many issues, which has led to the Council deciding to take forward the steps necessary to recover what it has cost to deal with the vessel.
The Isle of Wight Council is now engaged in contract mediation with Burness Corlett Three Quays (BCTQ) of Southampton and Mainstay Marine Solutions Limited (MMSL) of Wales but if this is unsuccessful then the local authority will issue proceedings to recover losses that have been experienced.
Councillor Stewart has said:
“Was the council ‘sold a pup’ with Floating Bridge 6? I am certainly inclined to the view that this vessel was not and is not ‘fit for purpose’.
“Our case for litigation is based on the premise that Floating Bridge 6 can be fixed to a standard that ensures a ‘good and reliable’ service. But that in order to do so, and as a result of all the costs incurred in dealing with the emerging issues, a substantial claim has been put on the table”.
Putting distance between the current administration and the disastrous situation, just weeks before the local elections, Cllr Stewart made clear that the decision to replace the former Floating Bridge No.5 and procure the new one was made by the previous Independent Administration, led by Councillor Ian Stephens. Cllr Stephens was praised for his work in securing £3.8million of funding from Solent LEP and it was noted that he was replaced by Councillor Jonathan Bacon before the Floating Bridge was commissioned.
The Leader has reaffirmed the Council’s commitment to providing and maintaining the link between the people of East and West Cowes, despite the problems experienced with the new Floating Bridge and despite the increasingly challenging financial position.
Moving forward, Cllr Stewart confirmed that there is no hope of bringing back Floating Bridge No.5, which is currently home to rust and seagulls in Portsmouth Harbour.
On the flip side, a fixed link has not been ruled out completely with the Council leader saying that it is not for him to comment on such proposals at this time due to the ongoing legal action. However, he said he is listening to all proposals, understands their motivation and has said they will be properly considered in due course.
Key steps moving forward:
- Make full use of all of the legal avenues available to have any design and build failures put right once and for all.
- Commitment to communities of East and West Cowes to have a good and reliable service for the future
- Continue to learn the lessons from the contract management member oversight to ensure the wider Island receives value for money for all contracts and investments made on their behalf
- Meet the requirements and expectations of the Solent Local Enterprise.
When they finally sort this fiasco out. Will they refund council tax payers money taken every year to cover losses?
No they will spend it their fleet of electric cars !!!!!
And no doubt find another dead duck to waste our money on .
I am quite relieved to see that Councillor Stewart has admitted “the vessel was not and is not ‘fit for purpose” and
“to recover what it has cost to deal with the vessel.”
I hope that includes the cost of buying the floating bridge as well?
so they agree the floating bridge does not fit the bill about time is it because election time ?
you got it in a nut shell
It should have been a condition of the funding being provided that the vehicle run in an environmentally friendly way, instead a conventional oil burner was chosen – with consequent air pollution for residents and travellers.
The floating bridge only needs to travel a short distance before an extended halt, whilst it unloads and reloads, which is ideal as a battery recharging or electric flywheel system.
Perhaps there is some kind of justice in how this poor decision has turned out..
Ian Ward, September 2018.
“This is a reliable craft as it stands. All people hear is negativity, but otherwise, it’s doing pretty well.”
Think he’d better have a chat with his boss!
This council should be taken to court for misuse of public funds
“Cllr Stephens was praised for his work in securing £3.8million of funding from Solent LEP and it was noted that he was replaced by Councillor Jonathan Bacon before the Floating Bridge was commissioned.”
Remember that in May. Cllr Stephens (who still does a fine job in Ryde) got the money. Jonathan Bacon spaffed it on a pig in a poke. And Bacon has the temerity to think the electorate wont remember he then jumped ship before the last election. Streaky Bacon – don’t let him fool you again.
Cllr Bacon’s administration continued the replacement process and, as the report confirmed, correctly followed the purchasing procedure.
He “jumped ship” because he was prevented (by a certain other grouping) from carrying out the actions (other than FB replacement) that his group believed were needed.
Disastrous Dave’s Tory admin had at its disposal a highly-competent (he says) engineer in Cllr Ward. An essential skill of an engineer is to recognise when he is out of his depth and ask for help. Did Ward do that? Er, no. Hence the mess.
They were told, by more than one source, the replacement can’t have a longer length, wider beam, or deeper draught. So they built one longer, wider and deeper. It was never going to work, yet they still commissioned it.
and 28tons heavierand no new chains
We all know what is not fit for purpose the I W Council
Why didn’t the council have it built by an island company?
They wanted it cheap, but forgot the old adage: buy cheap, buy twice.
Dave Stewart is not fit for purpose.
Just KNOWS that an election is coming up so ‘playing to the baying crowd’ pretending he is listening and ‘doing something about it’
ONCE election over, nothing will happen.
Watch and learn.
this council is not fit for purpose never mind the not so floating bridge