Opinion by Mail columnist Angus Young.
Today marks the public opening of the £7m footbridge over the River Hull.
I hesitate to use the word "new" in connection with the crossing as it's largely been in place for the past two years, with little sign of swinging into action.
The project's delays have been well-documented but I thought a Freedom of Information request seeking the full reasons behind the hold-up was in order.
This week, I duly received a raft of documentation charting correspondence between the Homes and Communities Agency (the funders) and Hull City Council (the operators) over the past 12 months.
Included in the bundle was the following gem: "Because it is over a river in a seaside environment, the bridge is painted with special coatings that could not dry in poor weather and given the last two winters we have had this was an issue."
Seaside environment? In Costa del Hull?
It reminded me of the Government's attempt to turn Hull into a seaside resort back in the early 1990s when ministers tried to dodge a new European directive on sewage being discharged into urban rivers.
Enthusiastically supported by Yorkshire Water, they argued Hull was on the coast thanks to the tidal nature of the Humber and, as such, the company should be allowed to continue dumping untreated raw sewage into the estuary.
They even produced a map showing the coastline as far as Hessle Foreshore.
To cut a long story short, Europe won and Yorkshire Water ended up having to fork out £200m on a new treatment works at Saltend, which still smells to this day.
At the time, the Mail decided to illustrate Hull's new-found status by sending a colleague of mine down to Queen Victoria Square armed with a deck chair, a knotted hankie and a bucket and spade for a photo opportunity.
He took it in good spirit and even rolled his trousers up for the shot.
Another recent Freedom of Information request to East Riding Council produced an unusual reply.
Refusing to release what I was asking for, the council said the Act allowed it to say it was in the "public interest" to neither confirm or deny it even held any information relating to my request even though it involved a hefty amount of public money being spent in a damages pay-out following a council cock-up.
Work that one out.
Have you seen our new homepage?Bookmark hulldailymail.co.uk for the very best and exclusive local content.
