Gateshead Council leader speaks on flyover demolition, failed funding bids and calls to resign

Six weeks on from the sudden closure of the Gateshead Flyover, major questions remain over what went wrong and what comes next.

The elevated section of the A167 was shut to traffic on December 13, as well as the road beneath it due to concerns that crumbling concrete on the 1960s structure put it at risk of collapsing. It is expected that Gateshead Council will now demolish the flyover and seek to have the area redeveloped, though what that will look like and where the money will come from is still unclear.

This week, council leader Martin Gannon sat down with the Local Democracy Reporting Service for a detailed interview about the closure and the ongoing disruption it is causing on Tyneside. Read what he had to say below on key points – including what happened in the run up to the closure, why regeneration plans have stalled for more than 15 years, and his own future as the town’s political leader.

What are the next steps in propping up the flyover and its planned demolition?

Gateshead Council announced earlier this month that work would soon begin on a new phase of strengthening works on two pillars of concern, to encase them with more concrete. Coun Gannon said this would happen in the next “couple of weeks” but could not give an exact timeframe. While saying that the prospect of reopening the flyover was not entirely off the table, it is expected that the council will proceed with its demolition without traffic ever returning.

He added: “I cannot give a definite timeframe on demolition because a report is being prepared at the moment. There are a number of things we need to consider. One of the options might be to reopen the higher level – if the structural engineers say ‘we have secured that, you can reopen the upper level of the flyover’. [But] if we manage to finalise the plans in terms of demolition and the costings of those, which I think is the most likely scenario, I don’t think it is feasible to reopen the upper level only to then start demolishing it which would cause further disruption.”

How long will demolition take?

Having previously predicted that a demolition might take two years, Coun Gannon now says the work could be done in half that time – but warned that it will be “really complex, difficult piece of work”, joking that social media users had told him "Fred Dibnah could do it in a weekend or the lads from Auf Wiedersehen, Pet".

He added: “I was initially told it could take up to two years to demolish. I have subsequently been told it is probably a year. Let’s see what comes from that [plan] and I will be pushing really hard on that because what we want is to start as quickly as possible and have the least possible disruption.

“It will be, I think, less than a year. But it will be a really complex, difficult piece of work which will have to have some really intensive communications around advising people what will happen in the various phases.”

What happened in the run up to the flyover’s sudden closure?

Coun Gannon said it “was not anticipated” that the concerns about crumbling concrete on the flyover would become so serious as to necessitate its immediate closure on Friday, December 13. But he added: “That is not to say it was not being properly maintained. That is not to say it was not being properly inspected. The fact this was discovered is indicative of the fact that it was being properly maintained and inspected.

“It was costing us a substantial amount to maintain that flyover. It was, on a weekly if not daily basis, being inspected for spalling concrete and in the evening teams were removing it to make sure it didn’t fall on cars.”

The council leader revealed that a more detailed inspection of the flyover’s condition, similar to the work being done now on Newcastle’s Central Motorway, at the cost of more than £1 million was due to take place in spring this year. That was before ongoing checks on it in December identified the problems with one of the pillars which holds up the structure, and then subsequently on a second.

He added: “Of course it is regrettable, of course we apologise for the inconvenience caused by it. But it was properly maintained, it was expertly inspected regularly, and as a consequence of that diligence catastrophic consequences were avoided. That is not just fantasy, it has happened elsewhere in the world and elsewhere in this country.

“It is due to the good stewardship and management of the engineers within Gateshead Council and our contractors brought in for that purpose that injury, and potentially fatalities, were avoided.”

How could the flyover go from being fully open and considered safe to being completely shut down so quickly?

Coun Gannon said that inspections carried out previously had shown “no need” for weight limits or lane restrictions to be imposed as interim safety measures short of a closure, and that such options were thought of as potential outcomes of the detailed spring 2025 inspection which had been planned.

He said: “Depending on the results of that inspection there may have been restrictions. The fact is that we found something immediate. Ideally, what we would have liked to have done is have a really good comms strategy in place like we did with the Tyne Bridge… This is not a criticism of our comms team or anyone inside Gateshead Council, but we did lose control of the communications on December 13 because we had to do something without any strategy in place.

“People ask why we didn't have a contingency plan. Of course we did, it kicked in at 4pm on December 13. There is a contingency plan for every single road in Gateshead, if you had to close whichever where you would divert the traffic to and what alternatives are available. People were not sat twiddling their thumbs and wondering what to do on December 13, the contingency plan was put in place. What happened was that we had not been able to communicate it for six months beforehand.”

How can a redevelopment plan considered so important have gone unfunded since 2008?

It is more than 15 years since Gateshead Council first unveiled its plans to knock down the flyover and redevelop the area with a tree-lined boulevard and new homes, costing tens of millions of pounds. Those proposals have never progressed – something that Coun Gannon insists is simply “because it needs Government support and we just have not had that support”, criticising the “beauty parade” bidding competitions that left many councils spending substantial sums on funding submissions that ultimately produced no results.

But a Freedom of Information request to the Department for Transport requesting all correspondence with North East authorities regarding the flyover since 2008 has produced just one document – an unsuccessful funding bid from 2019 for an £18 million removal of the flyover and improvement works beneath it. The council has also said that it sought to have the scheme included in a package of bids submitted through Transport for the North that same year, which ultimately led to the money for the Tyne Bridge’s restoration, but failed.

While Coun Gannon argued that local council funding has been “hollowed out” since that 2008 plan first emerged, the LDRS questioned why the flyover scheme had stalled compared to other major transport and regeneration visions that did progress in that time – like the building of Sunderland’s Northern Spire bridge, the opening of the second Tyne Tunnel, and the transformation of the former Scottish and Newcastle brewery into the Helix. He replied: “It is impossible for me to answer why the Government hasn’t. Yes, we have shouted loud enough.”

He added: “All local authorities have become hugely dependent on this bidding war, constantly, for central government resources. The government will publish criteria by which they are selected – I think it was Richmond that somehow managed to qualify for support to regenerate its high street when places like South Shields and Sunderland don’t. I don’t know how they develop that selection criteria. People talk about pork barrel politics or whatever, I don’t know.

“The needs of Gateshead are great. We make the demands, we make them vociferously, we make them repeatedly, but we have been unsuccessful.” Coun Gannon said the removal of the flyover remains “key to the regeneration of the area” and that it has "divided Gateshead in half since the 1960s”.

Has the council looked at borrowing money or other funding sources for the plans?

Coun Gannon has said that the council will pay for the demolition work if the Government refuses to help, as has been the case so far. North East mayor Kim McGuinness has also offered to supply regional funding for that if necessary, though she has warned that a larger redevelopment will rely on Government support.

The council leader said: “Ultimately without securing funds from central government, Gateshead Council would of course have to do something about that flyover. We have made provision for doing that. I am not keen to spend £20 million of Gateshead taxpayers’ money when I think it should be funded by central government. But the provision is made and if we have to then we will do that.

“There are discussions taking place at the present time with central government and the mayor’s office. We have been fortunate enough to have a meeting with the transport secretary and one of the ministers [Lilian Greenwood] came up – both have said there is no contingency in the department budget for this. There is contingency in government, of course there is… I am not advocating that I want £700 billion, but we managed to find £700 billion to fund the costs of Covid. Of course the government has contingency.”

Is there a realistic prospect of the Labour government providing any money?

Frustration on Tyneside is already mounting over Labour ministers’ refusal to commit to providing the final £6 million of funding required for the restoration of the Tyne Bridge. In that context and the government’s repeated complaints of an alleged £22 billion “black hole” in the public finances, which has also led to the dualling of the A1 in Northumberland being scrapped, attracting much larger investment for a redevelopment of the area around the flyover may seem unlikely at the present moment.

Coun Gannon said: “Yes the government is under huge pressure and yes the previous government committed to things without funding them, the A1 [dualling in Northumberland] and other projects needed to be funded. But at the same time the government’s aim is to grow the economy. If they can grow the economy, they generate additional income which helps the public finances.”

He admitted, however, that it was “difficult” to make a business case that would involve £20 million simply to demolish a road. Past estimates have suggested that regeneration plans for the area could cost more than £70 million in total.

Does he take personal responsibility and has he considered resigning over the flyover situation?

Coun Gannon said: “It is my responsibility – and it is my responsibility to make sure this is delivered. I have never lost focus on the redevelopment of Gateshead, the future of that flyover. It is something that has been constantly on my mind over the last 10 years and I will continue to be focused on it until we resolve that problem.”

More than 300 people have signed a petition calling for Coun Gannon’s resignation because of the “chronic neglect” of the flyover and “grave underinvestment” in the town’s transport infrastructure. As well as serving as council leader since 2016, Coun Gannon is also the deputy mayor of the North East and has been the region’s political lead on transport issues for several years.

Asked if he was considering stepping down, he told the LDRS: “No, I’m not planning to do so. I acknowledge all of the issues and the complexities of them, and the inconvenience – we are truly sorry. But I will continue as leader of the council while I have the confidence of the members of Gateshead Council.”

He added: “I am not arrogant to say I am the best person [for the job], I am just the person. It is my responsibility, that is it. I take the responsibility really seriously, I am elected to carry out this role.”