Press and flyers 

Press release - Balfour Beatty pulls out of Oxpens River Bridge contract 

15/4/24

Plans for the Oxpens River Bridge have been thrown into chaos after it emerged last week that notorious building company Balfour Beatty have withdrawn from the construction contract. 

A previous Freedom of Information request had revealed that Balfour Beatty were “pre-procured” for the project and that the Council had “appointed an experienced team through Balfour Beatty as the lead contractor who are appropriate for the project”. Oxfordshire County Council’s ‘Statement of Reasons’ on the bridge had also noted that “Oxford City Council are due to deliver the scheme through their delivery partner Balfour Beatty.” As recently as the City Council Cabinet meeting on 13th August 2025, the Council had written that “the favoured route to deliver the bridge is with Balfour Beatty” and that “the project needs to move to a position where a Delivery Agreement can be signed with Balfour Beatty” (see paragraphs 14 and 21 here - OxCityCouncil Cabinet report) 

However, a notice published last week on the government’s tendering website stated that Balfour Beatty had withdrawn from the project, an outcome that “The Council could not have foreseen.” The Council are desperate to appoint a new contractor within the next month in order to keep to their planned timescale of constructing the bridge next September. Contingency plans have had to be put in place to award the steel company Briton a £600,000 contract to purchase the steel necessary for the bridge if a new contractor is not in place by then. (The Council cannot purchase the steel themselves as they do not know how much is needed - this information is held by Briton, the subcontractors appointed by Balfour Beatty, who maintain copyright over them. The Council will therefore have to appoint Briton to supply the steel.) 

The Hands Off Grandpont Nature Park campaign had addressed both the Council Cabinet and the full Council with their concerns over the use of Balfour Beatty for the project, noting their recent $49million fine for fraud, their neglect of safety requirements leading to the death and serious injury of workers in Britain, and the recent evacuation of student accommodation in Bethnal Green due to defects in their building work. 

A spokesperson for the group said “It is great news that Balfour Beatty will not be awarded the contract for the Oxpens Bridge; their notorious track record speaks for itself. However, the Council now has some serious questions to answer: if the Council’s ethical procurement framework means anything at all, how were they ever contracted in the first place? Why did they pull out? Has the latest £14million price tag for the bridge been affected by this move? How far have the Council got in their plans to get the University and Homes England to cough up the extra £3.7million they say they need? And are they really willing to spend money diverted from the housing maintenance budget if they do not achieve this? We have said from the start that this bridge - which would simply duplicate the two existing cycle bridges in the area without addressing the need for floodproof access to Osney Mead - is an outrageous misuse of housing funds to serve the private commercial interests of Oxford University. It is time to end this extortionate white elephant project once and for all.” 

interview with BBC Radio Oxford, Sophie Law show, 19/12/25 

Oxford: Uncertainty as contractor pulls out of £14m bridge | Oxford Mail - 18/12/25 

Oxford: Calls to rethink £14m bridge after contractor leaves | Oxford Mail - 18/12/25

Calls to rethink Oxpens River Bridge after contractor pulls out - BBC News  - 18/12/25 

Oxford Clarion - Clarion Weekend 19/12/25 

• A “fresh look at the financial case” is needed at the Oxpens Bridge project, says the city’s Liberal Democrat group, following the news (reported in Tuesday’s Clarion) that contractors Balfour Beatty have pulled out. The party says the £14m cost could be spent on other city cycling infrastructure. Cllr Chris Smowton said: “It is deeply concerning that Balfour has abruptly abandoned the project. We must look with fresh eyes at the financial case for a bridge that only cuts 300m off a trip compared to the nearby gasworks rail bridge.” He said the Oxpens bridge was “severely behind schedule”. Among the alternatives they propose are upgrades to cycling facilities on Woodstock and Banbury roads, a bridge across the A40 at Barton Park, and a bridge across the Thames at Jackdaw Lane, “giving cyclists an alternative to going round the Plain”. 

Clarion Weekend, 19 December 2025 

Oxford Clarion, 16/12/25 

• The new Oxpens Bridge is still on track despite the contractor pulling out, says Oxford City Council.

Balfour Beatty had been appointed lead contractors to build the walking and cycling bridge across the Thames, but have unexpectedly pulled out. The project is running to a tight timescale due to the need to install the main span over the river in September, before the flooding season; this means that the steel order must be placed no later than mid-January. Oxford City Council has now been forced to place a ‘direct award’ with Nottingham-based steel suppliers Briton Fabricators to ensure it remains on track.

The Hands Off Grandpont Nature Park campaign, which opposes the bridge, said they were pleased to see Balfour Beatty quit following ethical concerns around the company, but asked: “Has the latest £14m price tag for the bridge been affected by this move? We have said from the start that this bridge, which would simply duplicate the two existing bridges in the area, is an outrageous misuse of housing funds to serve the private commercial interests of Oxford University.”

For the City Council, Cllr Alex Hollingsworth said: “The Council has been out to tender for a contractor to deliver the Oxpens River Bridge, following the decision by Balfour Beatty not to take forward the project. Submitted tender returns are currently being assessed and it remains the intention to deliver the bridge in 2026. The bridge will provide an attractive walking and cycling route enhancing connectivity between the south and west of the city and the city centre.”

The Clarion, 16 December 2025 

Interview with That's TV, July 2025. 

PRESS RELEASE 28/7/25 - Homes England refuse to explain why funding granted to bridge that breaches criteria 

Homes England have failed to respond to local residents’ concerns about the City Council’s misuse of housing funds more than two months after being told by the agency that they would receive a response within ten days. 

Members of Friends of Grandpont Nature Park wrote to Homes England on May 15th with concerns that £1.5million provided by the agency for a floodproof path out of Osney Mead has instead been siphoned off by Oxford City Council to go towards the controversial Oxpens River Bridge project. 

Oxpens River Bridge, which is opposed by almost two thousand local residents, is set to be built using  £10.3 million in public funds from two schemes designed to facilitate affordable housing, despite not enabling a single home to be built. 

£1.5million of this money has been allocated by the City Council for a new path through the Nature Park to the bridge. This money is to come from Homes England’s Housing Infrastructure Fund (HIF). 

The HIF criteria specifies that the funds can only be used for infrastructure which is “necessary to unlock new homes” (FoI Response p.30). The City Council applied to Homes England for HIF funds to build a new floodproof path out of Osney Mead on the grounds that it was “critical to the delivery of housing at Osney Mead” (FoI Response, p.76). This is because a dry flood route out of Osney Mead is required in order for residential development there to be granted planning permission. The application concluded that the paths would “provide… a safe dry route to Osney Mead at times of flood.” (FOI Response P.77)

However, this is not what the City Council are now planning to spend the money on. Instead of using the money to create a floodproof path out of Osney Mead, as per their funding bid, they have instead diverted it to a path which would run from the planned new bridge to the end of Grandpont Nature Park, stopping short of Osney Mead. To reach Osney Mead, users would still need to cross a section of towpath which regularly floods (see picture below), even after the bridge and its connecting paths have been built. The path on which the City Council now plans to spend the money will therefore not help deliver housing at all and does not provide any additional floodproofing measures; the Nature Park is already safe from flooding, as it is at a much higher elevation than the river; once users are in the Nature Park they are already on a safe dry route. The problem is reaching the Nature Park from Osney Mead, and this problem remains unresolved under the current proposals.

The residents’ letter raising these concerns, sent on May 15th, triggered an automatic response promising a response within ten days. On May 30th Homes England replied that they required an additional ten days. The residents have heard nothing from the agency since then. 

A spokesperson for Friends of Grandpont Nature Park said: “The Oxpens bridge project would destroy the only woodland on the main path through the Nature Park, the most used and most loved section of the site. It is a misuse of over £10million of public funds which are supposed to facilitate affordable housing. But on top of that, it does not even meet its own basic stated purpose, to provide a floodproof route out of Osney Mead. 

“We now know that £1.5million of the money for the project was awarded by Homes England solely to provide such a floodproof route, which the bridge and its connecting paths utterly fail to do. The use of this money for the bridge is therefore in breach of the Housing Infrastructure Fund’s criteria and should be returned immediately so that it can be used for its intended purpose of addressing the housing crisis. Despite being told we would receive a reply within ten days, it is now over two months since we raised these concerns with Homes England. We hope they hold the Council to account and do not overlook this flagrant misuse of vital housing funds.”