Leeds Trolleybus Enquiry Day 6
May 8 2014
On Day 6
of the Public Enquiry the cross examination of Dave Haskins, Project Director
for NGT, continued apace with sessions of questioning from several private
objectors as well as groups. Cllr Barry
Anderson (C. Adel), Dr John Dickinson and Emeritus Professor of Transport
Studies, Peter Bonsall, Mr Haig, retired chartered engineer, and Chris Longley
of the Federation of Small Businesses, and Dawn Carey Jones, Secretary of the
A660 Joint Council.
While a
wide variety of topics were covered throughout the day, the subject of the
limited nature of the consultations that had taken place was a matter that was
returned to by most of the questioners.
Chris Longley brought expertise from the Sheffield Supertram which
challenged the position of Mr Haskins.
The subjects of prioritisation of trolleybuses over other traffic and
the uncompetitive nature of this prioritisation were sore points of contention.
To follow
all these in detail it is necessary to listen to the audio recordings which our
team of objectors has been putting together and
Today’s
recordings
A major
feature of the Enquiry which is emerging is that the amount of questions is
vast, and while the Inspector is quick to limit anyone who questioning is not
focussed or if it is in danger of becoming repetitive, clearly the fact that an
almost endless stream of new questions on each subject just keep emerging is of
interest. Mr Haskins seems to be
another big picture man like Martin Farrington last week, as we have become
accustomed to his stating that such and such a question would be able to be
answered by another gentlemen who would come after him. I heard someone joke that it would be
fascinating to wait until the final day when all the questions which had been
passed down the line would be answered by the last witness!
There
seems a strong prospect that the Enquiry will run beyond the initially proposed
30 days over six weeks. Mr Whitehead
the Inspector hinted today in something he said about the matter that this was
becoming a stronger possibility by the day.
Another
matter relating to the administration of the Enquiry is something I am slightly
speculative about, but which seems a reasonable ground for such
speculation. The Programme Officers
have a little office just over the hallway in which they have computers,
printers etc and an audio feed from the microphone system in the Enquiry
room. It may just have been rumour, but
someone suggested to me that the Programme Officers were recording that audio
feed. I would be surprised if they were
not, and in my view the Inspector would be unwise not to take the opportunity
to do so for his own reference. This is
only right and proper and I believe he should do so. However the Council has
done nothing to take advantage of this and request use of it for public
information. But now it is too late ~
it would be a loss of face for them to do it now, a repeat of the consultation
responses release climb down which they had so strongly resisted. It would be a
poisoned chalice for the Inspector to allow his own copy to be used as it might
be interpreted either way ~ on the one hand he could be accused of favouring
the objectors in assisting us with our request for official audio recordings,
and on the other of deliberately trying to defuse the situation and getting the
Council off the hook.
This
should be dealt with cleanly and openly by the Council, but it is not, and probably
will not, so we the people have to do their job as they are negligent of their
duties of transparency to the citizens.
The
entire Enquiry is a fascinating battle of wills and it is very interesting to
rub shoulders with so many erudite and learned people. We on the objector’s side are trying not to
get over confident, but it is hard not to when the questions are so sharp and
so many, and the answers all seem to be so evasive or complacent. Mr Haskins seems to assume that we will all
accept and bow to his expertise, but there are a host of experts who challenge
his assessment of his own skills and his suggestion that some of these matters
were simply not worth consulting about and that he was quite justified to go
ahead with the trolleybus scheme rather than seeking a wider consensus on what
might be acceptable to the citizens of Leeds.
These are
just my own views. I would urge anyone
with any interest in the future of our beautiful city to spend some time
listening to the audio recordings so as to be able to reach their own
conclusions as to the pros and cons of the whole affair.
No comments:
Post a Comment