THURROCK Council's botched, overspent and much delayed Stanford rail station redevelopment process is in disarray again and could be on the cusp of collapse.

A meeting of the authority's planning, transport and regeneration overview committee was told the council and its selected contractors to carry out the work have now parted company - and millions of pounds of government money that has been allocated to the project is now at risk.

In March the council announced it had finally made progress on the project and had appointed contractors to build stage one - the actual station buildings and a new bridge.

Engineering and construction company Volker Fitzpatrick won the contract for the job – but it has now failed to agree terms with the council.

A shocking report on the project was presented by the council's assistant director for regeneration and place delivery, Kevin Munnelly.

He told members that Volker Fitzpatrick had proposed alternative or changed terms and conditions to execute stage one of the project which Thurrock Council had to reject as they are outside the procurement rules.

In September the council and Volker Fitzpatrick developed a proposal that 'could allow the parties to execute the contract and manage the risks step by step and incrementally within the existing contract terms and conditions'.

It was 'planned to execute the contract by 31 October, subject to further clarifications such as the treatment of inflation, possession availability and increased costs'.

However, Mr Munnelly said: "The parties have not been able to agree terms and conditions on the detailed elements and Thurrock Council are currently considering the next steps, with alternative procurement strategies being considered and developed concurrently.

"We have not been able to move things forward. Volker Fitzpatrick and the council have now discontinued negotiations."

Mr Munnelly also said there were further cost and delivery implications with stage two which included design failures, financing and engineering problems.

The whole shambolic process means that some of the funding for the project, which now has a cost estimate approaching £30 million, is at risk.

To secure the promised funding of £7.5 million from the South East Local Enterprise Partnership (SELEP) the council is required to complete the design for stage two and complete a revised business case for the whole of the project for consideration by the SELEP Accountability Board at their June 2023 meeting.

That now seems an almost impossible deadline to meet.

To date the project has cost £13,459,181 and the remaining budget - including the SELEP money is £29,090,000. Leading Thurrock Conservative councillors, including leader Cllr Mark Coxshall, made a promise to residents that the project would not exceed that 'budget envelope', which was already more than £10 million over the estimated initial projected cost for the whole project.

So far, the money has been spent as follows: £6,613,022 on demolition and intermediate work carried out; £4,288,336 to buy the Daybreak Windows site (a figure exclusively predicted by Nub News when councillors said it would be around £3 million); and design and advisory companies AECOM and Mace have picked up £778,730 and £666,571 respectively. Other costs including legal fees and forecast liabilities make up the total spent to date.

And, if the project is ever to be completed, it looks like the current remaining proposed expenditure of £15,630,819 will not be enough – even if the council managed to secure the £7.5 million from SELEP.

Mr Munnelly's report is quite clear. He says: "Remaining budget may not be sufficient. Since budget was last reviewed and increased - major inflationary pressures have existed impacting construction costs.

"This is combined with national procurement issues affecting time and cost of manufactured elements which form a large part of the new modular railway station.

"Subject to the completion of the outstanding design work further funding may be required to deliver the full project benefits. Alternative and additional funding sources are being investigated."

Somewhat embarrassingly, Mr Munnelly, when answering detailed questions, couldn't even get the name of Daybreak Windows right, repeatedly referring to it as Days Windows.

Observers wondered how, if he couldn't get such a simple detail right, his opinion and judgement on far more important matters was questionable.

Committee chair Cllr Alex Anderson pressed Mr Munnelly on how realistic the chances were of getting the SELEP money, but he declined to give any assurances, simply saying it was 'ragged red' and 'at risk'.

Mr Munnelly said the council was looking to re-engage and appoint Aecom, who "did the previous design work, they have all the prior knowledge so we don't anticipate there would be a lag in bringing their staff members on to. They could take up the scheme's design."

However, that cut little ice with Cllr Shane Hebb who asked bluntly: "Why do we keep using Aecom?

Mr Munnelly responded: "It's a practical response in terms of where we are. It's a practical response in terms of where we are. Aecom are a large, respected consultancy firm

"In terms of this we need to be able to set them very clear parameters in terms of design and what we expect from them. And probably more effective management of their outputs and what they can achieve.

Cllr Shane Hebb responded by saying: "I don't get what that answer is. Aecom have been through this process for many years now and I am just not seeing anything different.

"It's not going to surprise anyone to hear me say that anyone who has had any involvement with this or lives anywhere near it is absolutely sick to the back teeth with the lack of delivery on this project.

"I listened to your presentation and I feel sorry for anyone who takes this over but I have heard once too often about how things are being looked at and it will go to directors board and if it needs to go to other people then it will do.

"I think there needs to be something more weighty, more frequent."

Cllr Hebb recalled a series of broken promises from officers to ward members (Cllr Hebb represents Stanford West). He said: "I have not seen anything that is in the report and I want to make that very clear.

"I have heard this conversation for a thousand days and we need to do something different.

"We need to get round a table with partners, more members a bit quicker and make sure this is delivered."

Councillors on the committee then piled in with criticism.

Cllr Lee Watson said: "It's transparent enough to see how bad it's going, Thanks for that. it's not like the A13.

"I do not think you can deliver in time to get the SELEP money. You mention you have additional sources that may be available. What are they?"

Mr Munnelly was forced to concede: "We have identified there is a requirement, we haven't identified anyone.

"One thing I would add, we have been on a long process with this scheme. Where we are now, we are in a better place in terms of design.

"We can make the tendering process more effective than it has been. We are in a position to get a better outcome."

Mr Munnelly added: "If we lose the SELEP funding the scheme is significantly challenged. Delivery within the current budget envelope is going to be a challenge."

Cllr Hebb then challenged Mr Munnelly about the future and asked about the progress of stage two, saying: "It transpires there are no plans in place for a planning application. It went to a pre app, hit the buffers and then the focus was on stage 1."

Mr Munnelly then stepped up and, in uncharacteristically forthright language said: "The scheme that was submitted was to build on a flood plain, on stilts and frankly it was ridiculous. And had cost implications that would have blown the budget anyway."

Cllr Hebb said: "I have heard this conversation for a thousand days and we need to do something different.

"We need to get round a table with partners, more members a bit quicker and make sure this is delivered." 

The committee is to seek ways of bringing the scheme under more scrutiny, possibly creating a task and finish group to increase monitoring and ensure progress."