Councillors have accidentally voted to support £95 million of extra borrowing towards Shrewsbury’s North West Relief Road after the figure was mistakenly included in a report.

The vote took place at a meeting of the full council on Thursday and, despite not committing the authority to taking out the loan, has sparked a backlash from critics who have questioned why such a glaring error was not picked up.

It has also raised concern over whether the true cost of the scheme has more than doubled from previous estimates of £87m to £182m.

The council has said, however, that the “holding” figure quoted in the report was not a true estimate, meaning it has not formally approved the additional borrowing. It has been asked to clarify where the amount came from.

At the meeting at Shirehall, councillors were asked to approve changes to this year’s capital strategy – a list of one-off projects and infrastructure schemes that are funded separately from day-to-day services, usually through sale of assets, grants and borrowing.

Included in the list of projects appended to the report, though not referenced in the report itself, was £95.3m of borrowing to plug a “funding gap” in the cost of the North West Relief Road.

This was queried by councillors who said they had not been given any new information about why more money was needed on top of that which had been previously agreed.

Get in touch

Share your views on this story by sending a letter to the editor. To get in touch email news@bordercountiesadvertizer.co.uk, or fill in the form on this section of our website.

Liberal Democrat group leader Councillor Roger Evans said: “It is time to stop, review the project and really look at this and how the council is doing it.”

Labour group leader Councillor Julia Buckley said: “We are being asked to find an extra £95m with no information.

“Basically they don’t know the details or the costs, but you are being asked today to find £95.3m.”

Councillor Buckley said repaying the loan at current interest rates would mean another £5m of service cutbacks every year to fund the repayments.

She said: “This means cutting our basic services to the bone so that we can find some money to pay off a debt for a road that nobody wants.”

Councillor Dan Morris, cabinet member for highways, said claims that nobody supports the road were “baloney” and accused opposition councillors of being “anti-democratic”.

He said the full business case would be prepared if and when planning approval is granted, with a decision expected next month.

But it was only after councillors voted through the changes to the capital strategy that the blunder was picked up.

In an email to Green group leader Councillor Julian Dean, director of finance James Walton admitted he was “confused” when the figure was mentioned in the debate as he was not aware it was on the list.

He said: “This row should have been deleted, it was missed, and I apologise.

“Early drafts of the spreadsheets apparently included holding figures for a number of items that were considered for inclusion in the report.

“This one should have been deleted and is clearly not referred to in the report as it was left in erroneously – hence the confusion.”

He added that the figure was “not an estimate of cost”.

Councillor Evans said he would ask for an emergency meeting to be called so the matter could be discussed again.

Campaign group Better Shrewsbury Transport (BeST), which wrote to the council earlier this week to request a formal investigation into the project, said the debacle was further evidence for abandoning the scheme.