Fleur Anderson Raises Hammersmith Bridge Issue in Commons
Debate held on reforming the way London's bridges are funded
Fleur Anderson with campaigners calling for the full reopening of the bridge
November 17, 2023
A debate was held in the House of Commons this week led by Fleur Anderson on the issue of reforming how London’s bridges are funded.
The Putney MP was aiming to restart discussion in Parliament of how the full reopening of Hammersmith Bridge will be funded. She has been campaigning for this to happen over the last four years, ever since the bridge was unexpectedly shut to traffic.
The reopening of the bridge has reached an impasse, with the Government asking Hammersmith and Fulham Council to foot a large part of the bill for the repair of the bridge. The council says its budget would be overwhelmed if it was forced to pay the huge sums involved.
Ms Anderson criticised the Government's response, pointing out the delays and the lack of funding for the full restoration of Hammersmith Bridge. She called attention to the inflated costs, in part due to the war in Ukraine, now standing at £250 million, emphasizing that the government must take immediate action to secure the necessary funds and expedite the restoration process.
Addressing the Conservative Minister for Roads and Local Transport, Guy Opperman MP, she asked him why restoration was taking so long, when will funding be confirmed, when can residents expect the bridge to reopen to traffic and what measures are being taken to prevent a recurrence of similar issues.
The Putney MP said, “London’s bridges are not only iconic heritage landmarks – they are crucial pieces of infrastructure in our transport network, and vital in our journey to making London the greenest city in the world. I called this debate to convince the Government that London’s city planning has a huge hole in it – we need a new strategy for protecting and maintaining our bridges. The Government are insisting that Hammersmith and Fulham Council pay over £80 of the cost of restoring the bridge in the full knowledge that the annual budget for all the services that Hammersmith and Fulham Council provide is £132 million. It is absurd and cynical politics by the Government, which has no real desire to see this bridge restored and instead would prefer to use the issue as a political point scorer.
“In Putney, the closure of Hammersmith Bridge has meant increased air pollution and commuter misery, with enormous congestion running across Putney Bridge, down Putney High Street and out across the constituency, including on the Upper Richmond Road. We need a solution – we need the Government to step up and fund the repairs that this iconic, Grade II listed landmark desperately needs.
“Everyone I talk to as I go around Putney, go to any event, or when I knock on doors wants to know what is happening with Hammersmith Bridge. There is a huge lack of information, and many residents aren’t aware that the reopening of the Bridge may well take a decade or more and that the costs are rocketing. That’s why we need to secure the funding and get the project started with absolutely urgency.
“I have surveyed residents on the impact that the closure of Hammersmith Bridge has had on their lives. The closure has led to increased pollution, congestion, and disruptions, affecting businesses and individuals alike. Enough is enough – we need this conversation to be reopened and for the Government to listen.”
During the debate, the Minister responded, “With no disrespect either to the hon. Member for Putney, who seemed to suggest there was nothing the Government have done and that it was all down to the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham, the £10 million has been paid over a series of years to get to the hurdles that we have necessarily got to, and an agreement was entered into at an earlier stage. I do not believe I can add anything further, other than to congratulate her on securing the debate and highlighting the issue, which clearly affects her constituents and others in west London. I continue to assure her that the Department will provide support to both the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham and to TfL on the bridge project as it goes ahead.”
The Labour MP responded that £10 million pounds, in a project estimated to cost £250 million, was a ‘laughably small’ contribution from the Government.
She received support from neighbouring MP Andy Slaughter who represents Hammersmith. He said, “More than a year ago I asked the then roads Minister, the hon. Member for North West Durham (Mr Holden), for a meeting to discuss the repair of Hammersmith bridge. I followed up that request on at least six occasions, but he had not replied by the time he was reshuffled yesterday. I did, however, receive a reply to my letter to the Secretary of State for Transport after the cancellation of the future stages of HS2. I had asked for a little of the £36 billion to be redirected to Hammersmith bridge, given that 0.5% of that would pay the full cost, and we know that the Department for Transport typically pays between 80% and 90% for strategic road schemes. Does my hon. Friend agree that the only reason the bridge has not been repaired is that the Government refuse to pay more than a third of the cost, and cash-strapped local authorities cannot meet a bill running into hundreds of millions of pounds?”
Ms Anderson stressed the need for a comprehensive review of the ownership and funding of all London bridges, citing the disorganized and outdated system established in 1985. She argued for a new approach that ensures the long-term maintenance and safety of these vital infrastructure assets.
In her call to action during the debate, she stated, "My ask to the Government is very straightforward. To do everything in its power to urgently fund the restoration and reopening of Hammersmith Bridge at the earliest opportunity. We clearly need a new approach that safeguards our bridges for generations to come."
The debate on the funding of London’s bridges is the second debate that Fleur Anderson MP has called on the future of Hammersmith Bridge, having won an adjournment debate in June of 2022.
Like Reading Articles Like This? Help Us Produce More This site remains committed to providing local community news and public interest journalism. Articles such as the one above are integral to what we do. We aim to feature as much as possible on local societies, charities based in the area, fundraising efforts by residents, community-based initiatives and even helping people find missing pets. We've always done that and won't be changing, in fact we'd like to do more. However, the readership that these stories generates is often below that needed to cover the cost of producing them. Our financial resources are limited and the local media environment is intensely competitive so there is a constraint on what we can do. We are therefore asking our readers to consider offering financial support to these efforts. Any money given will help support community and public interest news and the expansion of our coverage in this area. A suggested monthly payment is £8 but we would be grateful for any amount for instance if you think this site offers the equivalent value of a subscription to a daily printed newspaper you may wish to consider £20 per month. If neither of these amounts is suitable for you then contact info@neighbournet.com and we can set up an alternative. All payments are made through a secure web site. One-off donations are also appreciated. Choose The Amount You Wish To Contribute. If you do support us in this way we'd be interested to hear what kind of articles you would like to see more of on the site – send your suggestions to the editor. For businesses we offer the chance to be a corporate sponsor of community content on the site. For £30 plus VAT per month you will be the designated sponsor of at least one article a month with your logo appearing if supplied. If there is a specific community group or initiative you'd like to support we can make sure your sponsorship is featured on related content for a one off payment of £50 plus VAT. All payments are made through a secure web site. |