| Topic: | Reply | |
| Posted by: | Gordon Southwell | |
| Date/Time: | 02/09/21 17:00:00 |
Paul, it maybe that the report you are thinking of was from Ealing Council and that an officer sought to defuse the conflict between the two authorities over the issue by claiming LTN21 wasn't responsible for extra traffic in Hounslow. Hounslow would never have accepted this and their original suggestion was the incorporation of Swyncombe Avenue into LTN21 but this was apparently rejected by Ealing. They then came up the idea of closing access at Boston Manor Road which would have washed back vehicles into LTN21 and its distributor roads. You might say that Paul Mason was 'spooked by One Ealing' but it is more likely he was influenced by the public pledges made by several ward councillors in areas where there were LTNs that they wouldn't support them if they were demonstrably unpopular. I don't think any of them having made these commitments would be prepared to adopt your argument about 'self-selecting polls' to dispute that the majority of their constituents are against LTNs. I don't think it is correct to say that there was any clarity in government policy towards LTNs. Obviously the structure of the way they were implemented should mean that in most circumstances they should operate for six months, but force majeure was also allowed for and many councils have abandoned schemes without punishment. LTN21 had operated for some time and it was only due to a technicality — the reissue of the ETO that it could be deemed to be cancelled early. There are clearly two factions at the Department for Transport, one led by Grant Shapps which has been giving reassuring messages about more consultation and no unpopular schemes being implemented and the other by Andrew Gilligan who has the upper hand due to the support of the Prime Minister. Peter Mason failed to recognise this and thought that a statement by the Minister. that unpopular schemes should be got rid of, was authoritative. What appears to have happened is that he has unwittingly made Ealing a target because the political closeness of Gilligan and Julian Bell has allow the latter to get some pay back. |