A350 upgrades?

[whole diary]

[ellendune]

Surely "the do nothing option" is anathema to our elected representatives who feel they must always be seen to be doing something?

Not so the "do nothing" option is the preference of the treasury and traditional conservative* politicians. However they need to hide this from the people, so they need to be seen to do something without actually doing it.  For this reason long and tortuous planning and approval processes are favoured in order to kick any likelihood of actually spending money into the long grass**. When things look like they might happen they suddenly find a concern for the environment or historic monuments. Regrettably (for them) occasionally the odd scheme breaks through these barriers and actually gets built. 

* Note the capitalisation
** After all we doing need to spend money cutting grass do we? It will only grow again.

[grahame]

Surely "the do nothing option" is anathema to our elected representatives who feel they must always be seen to be doing something?

I have just submitted the written response from the Melksham Rail User Group to this consultation, as agreed at the meeting last Wednesday evening ... full document at http://www.mrug.org.uk/mrug_bypass_input_20210116.pdf

Having sent that in by email (email, snail mail and survey form being the three options offered) I looked to make brief personal comment at their online form.

I am flabbergasted  (my flabber is totally gasted) at how little they want to know and the utter lack of opportunity to make any comment on individual suggestions they have made, and the total lack of any write in box what so ever.   If you want to say anything, you have to compose an email ... I suspect they just want a lot of boxes tick to say "we have consulted".   Here are the complete 3 pages of the survey



Interestingly, just about the ONLY question that's actually asked is no. 6, which basically asks "are improvements needed" ... in other words, pits the "do nothing" option against all the other 18 described in the consultation.  Asked in that way, I would suspect that "Jo Public" will vote for improvements - combining the votes of the person who feels that perhaps the speed limits should be reviewed with those who want a 3 lane motorway to give an outcome to confirm for the council "we have to do something!".

[Red Squirrel]

Have you noticed how 'improvement' and 'widening' are used synonymously when referring to road schemes? I find this odd.

[eightonedee]

...at least you were not asked about your ethnicity, sexual orientation or religious affiliation.......

[broadgage]

I remain strongly opposed to new road building, and to widening of existing roads, under almost all* circumstances.

More roads attract more traffic. This results in congestion elswhere when the extra traffic comes to the end of the new road and meets existing infrastructure. Calls will then follow for more road building.
More road traffic means more pollution to the detriment of both local air qaulity and the wider enviroment.
More or faster roads make driving more attractive instead of public transport.

More or faster roads means more traffic noise, and more destruction of wildlife.
More and faster roads means more street lighting, and more carbon emmisions from electricity production.

Spend the money instead on railways, buses, trams, and on encouraging walking and cycling.

*I would allow very limited road building when unavoidable to serve new railway stations, or new housing estates.

Spending on roads is called investment, but spending on public transport is called subsidy.

[grahame]

I have just submitted the written response from the Melksham Rail User Group to this consultation, as agreed at the meeting last Wednesday evening ... full document at http://www.mrug.org.uk/mrug_bypass_input_20210116.pdf

Just received ...

Thank you for providing the views of the User Group which will be included in the response to the consultation.