Leeds Trolleybus Enquiry Day
16:
May 23 2014
May
I first apologise for not posting this blog for day 16, the last day of the
Enquiry before the break, sooner. I did
not attend that day and have had to study the recordings which my associates
who were there were able to supply me with, and to whom I am most grateful for
their assistance in keeping those recordings flowing.
As
usual the short descriptions and links are given for those who didn’t catch the
tweet on Saturday and I give some commentary below, including an update on the
timetable.
First
Morning Session
http://www.mixcloud.com/CosmicClaire/leeds-trolleybus-enquiry-day-16-may-23-2014-first-morning-session/
In the first morning session of day 16 of the Leeds Trolleybus Enquiry, May 23 2014, the cross examination of Mr John Henkel, acting Director of the WY Combined Authority for transport (formerly Metro) is continued by Dr John Dickinson, of the North West Leeds Transport Forum, who asks questions around the capitalisation costs and risks of NGT. He is followed by Mr Chris Longley of the Federation of Small Businesses who subjects the business case to some analysis, then by Mr Bill McKinnon for the A660 Joint Council who looks at strategic issues and lastly Mr George Geapin, a private objector.
In the first morning session of day 16 of the Leeds Trolleybus Enquiry, May 23 2014, the cross examination of Mr John Henkel, acting Director of the WY Combined Authority for transport (formerly Metro) is continued by Dr John Dickinson, of the North West Leeds Transport Forum, who asks questions around the capitalisation costs and risks of NGT. He is followed by Mr Chris Longley of the Federation of Small Businesses who subjects the business case to some analysis, then by Mr Bill McKinnon for the A660 Joint Council who looks at strategic issues and lastly Mr George Geapin, a private objector.
Late
Morning Session
http://www.mixcloud.com/CosmicClaire/leeds-trolleybus-enquiry-day-16-may-23-2014-late-morning-session/
In the late morning session of day 16 of the Leeds Trolleybus Public Enquiry, May 23 2014, Neil Cameron QC completes the examination of Mr John Henkel of the West Yorkshire Combined Authority for transport (formerly Metro). This session finished at about twenty minutes past midday and the Enquiry was adjourned early since there is now to be a week's break for Bank Holiday and half term and the Inspector felt that it would not be helpful for the Enquiry to call the next witness for one session alone as their evidence is on an entirely different subject.
In the late morning session of day 16 of the Leeds Trolleybus Public Enquiry, May 23 2014, Neil Cameron QC completes the examination of Mr John Henkel of the West Yorkshire Combined Authority for transport (formerly Metro). This session finished at about twenty minutes past midday and the Enquiry was adjourned early since there is now to be a week's break for Bank Holiday and half term and the Inspector felt that it would not be helpful for the Enquiry to call the next witness for one session alone as their evidence is on an entirely different subject.
The evidence explored today
covered some very interesting and important issues, although they might not at
first glance appear as significant as some of those which have been discussed
lately.
The matter of the
capitalisation or as I understand it, the raising of the money to build this
scheme, was examined by Dr John Dickinson, for I think, the North West Leeds
Transport Forum. One point elicited
that I found quite alarming is that the franchise operator who had won the
tender for the system would not be liable for losses if the required money to
pay back the finance to build and supply it, but it would be the City of Leeds
which would bear the weight of that burden, in other words, the Council Tax
payers of Leeds. Somewhat reminiscent
of the socialised debt of the large financial corporations of recent years.
When coupled with the
examination of Chris Longley from the Federation of Small Businesses who asked
searching questions about how much NGT had examined the £60 million loss making
Sheffield Supertram, this makes me very concerned that the Council, Metro (or
the now Combined Authority) and NGT are taking a massive gamble on this thing
being a success financially, and all that apart from the unavoidable
destruction of communities, heritage and environment which it would entail.
A matter came up about
dealing with the anti-competitive nature of the scheme, at least believed to be
so by some. If anyone would like to
help me with this I would be glad of elucidation on what the Inspector meant
about it not being dealt with by the Enquiry.
Obviously it is an issue and the Counsel for First have worked around
the matter, but this is also a technical matter of competition law, and I have
to declare not to fully grasp it at this stage.
Mr Bill McKinnon’s
questioning which followed raised some extraordinary facts which I had no knowledge
of. Although I lived in Leeds 6 for
most of the eighties I was entirely unaware of a scheme entitled ‘Electrobus’
which was a trolleybus system. I can put that down to not
being clued in to local political issues at the time, but it was fascinating to
hear that the Director of Metro/ WY Combined Authority’s knowledge was scant
about the Electrobus, even though he had heard about it. While it was a scheme abandoned within
living memory, it seems to have been reincarnated as the NGT trolleybus. These things keep getting rejected, but then
people keep re-presenting them in slightly different forms so that we have to
go through the whole process of rejecting them all over again.
It reminds me of the Irish
referenda on the EU/ treaty, constitution or whatever it ended up being
called. They rejected it, so the
politicians wouldn’t let go of it and pushed another referendum only two years
or so later.
I recall Cllr Richard Lewis
at the Headingley Heart Centre Public Meeting almost a year ago (June 2013)
talking about how this had all come a long way since Supertram was first mooted
in the early ‘90s. It must now be
pointed out that he made no mention of Electrobus which had been kicked out a
couple of years earlier.
There seems to be a
persistent lobby lurking in the shadowy places of Leeds and West Yorkshire
trying to get a trolleybus system installed somewhere, ever since Bradford
closed its own last trolleybus in 1972.
It was the last and longest running trolleybus in the country, running
since 1911. I can’t decide if it is a
bunch of grown up schoolboys who want to play with trainsets on a grand scale
or if there are other motivations behind the idea they won’t give up on. No-one elsewhere in England seems to have
any interest in trolleybuses, Liverpool rejected a similar scheme in 1999, yet
they keep trying to come back to haunt Leeds, like HR Giger’s Alien in the
Ridley Scott movie, returning to stalk Ripley however many times she thinks she
has killed it off.
But perhaps this will be
the occasion when the people and businesses of Leeds do finally kill this
monster that would devour well loved communities and heritage. The Public Enquiry is bringing a lot of very
interesting information out into the public domain, where it should be and
making a permanent open record of it with the audio recordings which we have
been organising.
One isn’t surprised that
Leeds City Council would be unco-operative towards making the hearings
available for public access. They
claimed cost was the reason, and yet it has cost us virtually nothing in
monetary terms to make and publish them.
The citizenry of Leeds need to be reminded of not only the massive
financial risk and social loss which would be entailed but also that this has
happened before, repeatedly. As Mr
McKinnon reminded Mr Henkel and the Enquiry, ‘Those who forget the past are
doomed to repeat its mistakes’.
One fact of history which
Mr Henkel seemed not to have learned from was the fact that when trolleybuses
were given up by Leeds in 1927 it was largely because people didn’t want to be
making interchange connections, such as the contemporary park and ride, but
preferred to stay on one vehicle, the motor bus then or their cars now, than to
have to change and wait and then most likely have to stand for the length of
the journey.
Mr Henkel came back with a
response which stimulated some stifled snorts and chortles from the back rows
so far as I could tell from the recording when Bill McKinnon asked if he
thought people had changed and might now be willing to get out of their cars to
go on a trolleybus where they might have to possibly stand for the rest of the
journey to town. He said ‘Yes’ but he reply was rather muted, almost choked
upon. To imagine that anyone could
expect that answer to be satisfactory for a ‘Quality Bus’ experience is
laughable. I wouldn’t have minded
seeing his face. It was rather a blunt
moment. He passed on the next question
to another witness, as to whether any passenger surveys around this had been
done, but if he isn’t brandishing a passenger consultation paper demonstrating
that passengers are fine with standing then I wonder why not. To be perpetually vague on subjects where he
should be in mastery of the detail is not satisfying. He may be the Director, but he should have some hands on
engagement with such a massive and important project if we were to have any
confidence in his proposal.
I have said that if people
and environments and heritage didn’t matter, this might be a good cattle
truck. I think Mr Henkel just confirmed
what I suggested.
Mr Henkel reminds me somewhat of Martin Farrington at the beginning of the Enquiry who was always passing on questions to his specialists, and who has no real grasp of important facts, or is obfuscating. I have been alarmed at how, like President Reagan, he ‘couldn’t recall’ so many details, dates, meetings and so forth that he should have known about. I trust that the Inspector has noted this.
The next week, after Bank
Holiday/ Half Term break, starting Tuesday June 3rd 2014 will be on
Heritage matters. A brief summary of
the draft plan for the remainder of the Enquiry follows below.
The Public Enquiry resumes on Tuesday June 3rd at 10 am
in the Regus Suite, fifth floor, no 2 Wellington Place, Leeds 1 (off Wellington Street)
in the Regus Suite, fifth floor, no 2 Wellington Place, Leeds 1 (off Wellington Street)
Week
5: Heritage
Tues
3rd June to Fri 6th June 2014
Week
6: Transport Matters
Tues
10th June to Fri 13th June 2014
Week
7: Environmental Matters
Tues
17th June to Fri 20th 2014
Week
8: Environmental Matters
Tues
24th June to Fri 27th June 2014
Non
Sitting Week
30th
June to 4th July 2014
Non
Sitting Week
7th
July to 11th July 2014
Week
9; Environmental and Planning Matters
Tues
15th July to Fri 18th July 2014
Week
10: Heritage Matters
Mon
21st July to Thurs 24th July 2014
Non
Sitting
28th
July to 29th August 2014
Week
11: Case for the Objectors
Tues
2nd Sept to Fri 5th Sept 2014
Week
12: Case for Order Applicant and for
the Objectors
Tuesday
9th Sept to Fri 12th Sept 2014
Non
Sitting Week
15
Sept to 19 Sept 2014
Week
13: Case for the Objectors, Residential
Associations and Individuals
Tues
23rd Sept to Fri 26th Sept 2014
Week
14: Case for individual Objectors, A660
Joint Council, Weetwood, West Park, North Hyde Park Residents, Friends of
Woodhouse Moor and others.
Tues
30th Sept to Fri 3rd Sept 2014
Week
15: Planning Conditions, Site visits, Closing submissions.
Tues
7th Oct to Thurs 9th Oct 2014
This
is only a draft and is subject to alteration.
Check www.persona.uk.com the Programme Organisers for the latest
status.
No comments:
Post a Comment