Stormont Canteen Refurbishment Costs Exceed Initial Budget
The refurbishment of the Stormont assembly canteen, known as the Blue Flax, resulted in costs nearly £200,000 above the original budget.
The project included the selection of more premium design options such as fitted booth seating and "reeded timber panelling," despite the increase in expenditure.
Approximately half a million pounds was spent on the canteen, which serves assembly members, staff, and visitors, during its renovation last summer.
Critics have accused Stormont of "taking the taxpayer for a ride," while the Northern Ireland Assembly stated it aimed to achieve the "best balance of quality and economy".
The details of the costs were revealed in documents obtained by NI.
The Assembly explained that the increased spending was due to "factors, including inflationary pressures and rising material costs."
It also noted that it "chose the lowest-cost bidder" and that "within that bid, there were a number of finish options."
The final cost for the canteen refurbishment at Parliament Buildings was £530,532.
This sum covered builders' work as well as doors, floor finishes, joinery, furniture, appliances, light fixtures, and mechanical and electrical installations.
The initial budget was approximately £350,000 when the project was agreed upon in 2022, according to an internal assembly document.
The document, dated May 2025, revised the estimate to £441,000.
A new tender process seeking a "valued engineered design" was conducted, with contractors requested to provide several finish options due to "budget constraints."
Officials recommended selecting more premium fit-out design and wall finishes from the options presented by the chosen contractor.
These included opting for new fitted booth seating and "reeded timber panelling" instead of more basic alternatives.
The costs of the different options were redacted from the document, which was released through a Freedom of Information request.
NI contacted the contractor to inquire about the price differences between options, but the firm stated it could not discuss the matter without permission from the client.
Political Reactions and Calls for Transparency
Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV) assembly member Timothy Gaston called for a "clear and transparent explanation."
"These documents reveal that the project didn't just cost significantly more than its original budget but that this happened despite officials explicitly recognising the need to control spending," he said.
"This is not simply about a refurbishment. It is about priorities, judgement and a culture within Stormont of entitlement and willingness to take the taxpayer for a ride."
People Before Profit assembly member Gerry Carroll commented that the canteen "needed a lick of paint and a bit more" but raised "huge questions" over the level of spending.
"Obviously every workplace including Stormont should have facilities that are comfortable, modern and fit for purpose," he said.
"At a time of significant pressures on public services we're seeing £200,000 being spent when it doesn't need to be spent."
Assembly Commission's Oversight and Response
The Assembly Commission, the Stormont body responsible for overseeing the running of Parliament Buildings and composed of representatives from the five main parties, discussed the refurbishment last December when the overall cost was first published.
According to the minutes, the commission was "advised" of the initial £350,000 cost estimate in February 2022 and approved a business case in October of that year.
The estimate was increased in May 2025 to £463,000 and "approved" by senior officials.
It was noted that the commission "had not been previously advised of the increase compared to the original business case."
Members agreed that "communications around the project could have been stronger and that this should be reviewed for future projects."
In a statement, the Stormont assembly said the commission "understands concerns about the costs."
It stated that "a number of factors, including inflationary pressures and rising material costs increased the price of the project."
The assembly was asked why more premium design options were chosen when the project was already over budget.
It responded: "In terms of supplier selection, the assembly chose the lowest-cost bidder and within that bid, there were a number of finish options."
The statement continued: "A competitive procurement process was carried out to select the most appropriate supplier to carry out the refurbishment project, guaranteeing the best balance of quality and economy.
This procurement process was carried out in line with public sector procurement principles."
It added that the restaurant "received a minor refresh in 2008 but has not been updated substantially since 1998."
"Our new engagement strategy aims to increase understanding and enable participation in the work of the assembly, including bringing more people to Parliament Buildings," it said.
"This requires us to maximise the use of our space and having modern, fit-for-purpose facilities is an important part of that."
