Network On-Line  

      Activists Newsletter September 2007

homeaboutdownload networkMAG e-mail listscampaignsMAG links

September 2007

Front Page

Down Load Network

Network Front Page

Action Briefing UK

MAG On Filtering

Liverpool Parking - Forum

MAN Hole Covers

Action Briefing Europe

MAG Heading To Europe

Campaigns Reports

Public Affairs

MAG News

MAG Visuals

MAG Sport

News

Barrister Loses Appeal

Scots Champion Cause

BikeGuard Goes West

GEM Leaflet Filtering

Thames Gateway

PACTS AndThe Met

Belgian Police

Congestion Road Pricing

Drive To Make Bikes Pay

MAG Says Flawed Research

ANPR - Speed Cameras

Issues

Petitions

Free Bike Parking

ID Cards And Issues

Reports and Issues

Humour

Worlds Easiest Quiz

Events

Events MAG UK

Marshall Appeal

Previous Issues

Previous Issues

Livingstone lunacy- once again

Ken Livingstone 'supports' the project, but gives £65,000 to objectors

The latest example of the UK's and Ken Livingstone transport lunacy, the inspector reporting to the secretary of state for transport has recommended that permission should be refused for the much needed Thames Gateway Bridge, this is because it "might encourage people to travel".

Under Planning Policy Guidance 13 ("PPG13") planners need to take account of "the impact of the proposal on traffic generation and overall travel patterns having regard to the desirability of achieving development that minimises the need to travel, particularly by private car".

Transport for London (TfL) and Ken Livingstone say that the new crossing is crucial to plans for an extra 160,000 houses and 42,000 jobs in the Thames Gateway region.

Now we find that the public enquiry will be reopened.

Ken Livingstone is supporting both sides of the argument, and an inspector quoting PPG13 reveals that this planning guidance actually precludes any transport infrastructure project.

Then there is the inspector's comments about private motorists which beggars belief, the implications are; if lots of people object to something then their views can't be taken into account because their numbers are disproportionate!

Inspectors report: http://www.persona.uk.com/thamesgateway/DECISION/Planning_report.pdf