Leeds Trolleybus Public Enquiry
Friday 17th October 2014
Here are the links for the audio recordings of all sessions from Day 65 of the Enquiry.
Following these there is a short update on the process of making the blog, which regrettably has fallen behind a little at this late stage of the proceedings.
The first morning session of Day 65 of the Leeds Trolleybus Public Enquiry, 17th October 2014, Mr Anzir Boodoo, a former student of Transport Studies at Leeds University gives his case regarding the NGT proposals and is examined on it.
In the mid morning session of Day 64 of the Leeds Trolleybus Public Enquiry, Friday, 17th October 2014, Mr Anzir Boodoo, a former student of Transport Studies at Leeds University gives his case regarding the NGT proposals and is examined on
In the early afternoons session of Day 64 of the Leeds Trolleybus Public Enquiry, Friday, 17th October 2014, 17th October 2014, Doug Kemp gives the case against NGT for the West Park Residents and is followed by Michael Broadbent, former Traffic Police Inspector.
May I apologise to my readers for the absence of full commentary on my blogs of late. The pace and load of material at the Public Enquiry has been intense as it draws towards a conclusion, which will be next week, and so I am primarily focussing on ensuring that the audio recordings of all sessions are properly made and uploaded, and listed here on my blog.
It is my intention to write commentary on those days which have been missed from blogging once the Enquiry is completed, as well as providing enhanced level normalised versions of the recordings from the early parts which did not benefit from the new software that I have been able to use since Week 9.
A major delay was unavoidable this last weekend when it became apparent that the recordings from Day 64 were problematic in that Mr Brooks spoke more quietly than any other witness or examiner at any day or sitting so far and was regrettably almost inaudible. Clearly it was important that his evidence should be available, and to be available, it had to be audible. This thus required an immense amount of revising of levels in an extremely selective manner. I should emphasise that no editing has been done at any time to the recordings which would remove anything that was said, nor has the order of what was said at any time been changed. On a small number of occasions the recordings have been initialised a few moments after the Inspector resumed the Enquiry, but nothing of any substance has been lost through this.
On one occasion alone so far, a problem with the power supply led to about seven minutes being lost from the end of one session. This is the only loss of any substance in the recordings which has been suffered. I am somewhat relieved that it was I who was suffered this loss being the objector making the cross examination at the time, since no-one else will be put in the position of having their verbal evidence caused to be missing. Also this is of less importance than it might have been since most of that lost section comprised of questions which the witness at the time was unable to answer and which were passed on to later witnesses, in this case Mr Ward and Mr Walker, and I was able to re-enter these questions at a later stage.