london

Hot water: Southampton Oceanography Centre was completed two years late, and over budget. Credit: TONY WELLER/BUILDING MAGAZINE

Britain's Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) has been accused of “parasitizing” taxpayers during the construction of a £49-million (US$80-million) oceanography research centre off the south coast of England. The centre was completed nearly two years behind schedule, and was £2.7 million over budget.

At a public hearing last week, members of the House of Commons' Public Accounts Committee described the construction of the Southampton Oceanography Centre as a “sorry tale” of scientists with little business experience losing control of the construction of a multi-million-pound facility.

One committee member, Charles Wardle (Conservative MP for Bexhill and Battle), said that, although he respected the council's scientific expertise, he felt it had used public funds unnecessarily and allowed itself in turn to be “parasitized” by the architects and builders. Another member, Phil Hope (Labour, Corby), castigated council members for “wasting taxpayers' money” and having “their heads in the clouds” when important decisions needed to be taken.

In response, John Krebs, NERC's chief executive, told the committee that the council had learnt its lessons from the affair, and that, since he had taken over in 1994, new guidelines had been adopted and past mistakes would not be repeated. He added that despite the difficult start, the centre had rapidly become a “world class facility”.

Andrew Love (Labour, Edmonton) asked how the centre could be described as a “world class” facility when it lacked a proper lecture theatre or auditorium. Krebs responded by saying that a measure of the centre's quality was its ability to attract “superstar” scientists from other countries, such as the United States, despite offering lower salaries.

The committee had summoned NERC officials for questioning following a government audit report last month on the centre's construction. The facility was designed to provide research and teaching in oceanography, as well as acting as a berth for research vessels.

The report criticized the council for not supervising the project properly. It revealed that the council failed to appoint an overall project manager, despite repeated advice. Sir John Knill, NERC's chairman at the time, jointly managed the project with the vice-chancellor of the University of Southampton.

According to the report, the council allowed builders and architects to make changes to the project without consulting NERC, leading to increased costs. The architects' fees doubled to £8.6 million. The construction company Wimpey claims it is still owed an additional £12.6 million. NERC is challenging the claim.

The report also states that the project had to be scaled down to meet these rising costs. Components of the original design — such as a conference centre and a facility to display the centre's research to the public — had to be omitted, it says, as NERC could not afford to build to the original specification.

But John Woods, who was NERC's director of marine sciences when the centre was constructed, denies this, describing the changes instead as a process of “continuous refinement”.

Woods, who is now dean of the graduate school of the environment at Imperial College, London, says that heads of departments were first asked to write down their “dream list” of facilities. “They all knew that they wouldn't get what they wanted. But it was a starting point.”

He argues that the conference room and public understanding centre were deliberately omitted as he felt they could be built with private finance. This would leave more of the public funds to be spent on ‘scientific’ facilities that would be potentially less attractive to a private donor.