Meanwhile Tory Councillor Geoff Gollop is asking difficult questions (pdf) about the city’s latest money-pit, the Museum of Bristol, which is £7m overspent already in capital (ie. building) costs and has no obvious way of generating its revenue (ie. running) costs. So who pays?
Here at The Blogger, then, we’ll combine the two issues, considering how city development kingpin the Shifty Bishop, is allowed to do business on our behalf by shifting substantial pots of public money around to suit himself and his whims.
Here’s a section of a report from last week’s Resources Scrutiny Commission (pdf):
Front funding is required to deliver the public realm infrastructure associated with the Museum of Bristol project. The provision is secured through S106 agreement with developers of adjoining commercial development site, but this is now unlikely to be delivered in time for the opening of the museum.
Oh dear. No private money – as promised – to build “the public realm infrastructure” or the pavement outside as you and I might call it. So what now?
A co-ordinated approach to dealing with BRT, Cycle City and public realm for the Museum of Bristol is necessary in order to realise this aspect of the project through City Development.
Yep. You got it. Let’s pretend it’s a Cycling City project and then we can use a wedge of that money for the Museum of Bristol. Presumably on the basis that people might happen to cycle past the museum occasionally?
The fact that Cycling City is supposed to provide extra facilities for cyclists rather than fund long-planned for general improvements promised by the council’s beloved private partners will no doubt eventually be lost in some small print somewhere in a report nobody reads.