I didn't read the transcript of the meetings, but at any point did the planners point out to the councillors that they could be personally liable for the costs of their decision?
One of those planning decisions that should be left to the professionals, councillors add no value whilst claiming to be acting on behalf of the public.
The transcripts show local councillors wary of the reaction from voters. Heartening - the preservation of greenscapes and the pressures of local democracy are both in play and they aren't always. HS2 remains a vastly overpriced boondoggle rendered pointless by the global move to digital networking.
A nice big gravy train for the civil engineering industry. I wonder if they donate to a political party and its representatives… 🤔
An absolute scam designed to redirect public funds to the “private sector” and its shareholders… 🤬
The article says that, instead of using an existing track, a new one will be built, uprooting established hedgerows, diverting water courses disturbing wildlife, as well as wasting your money as a taxpayer. How is this "preservation of greenscapes"?
The transcripts show incredible levels of ignorance, the desire to put vibes over facts and evidence and it's literally one truck a day going in and out for a few weeks.
It may be a reflection of the arrant disregard HS2 has shown for the whole area and its inhabitants ever since this ludicrous, countryside-devastating route was embarked upon.
I get the impression, unfair as it may be, that the sort of people who get themselves voted onto planning decision committees tend to be exactly the people who want to be in charge of such things, and coincidentally exactly the people who shouldn't be.
Comments
An absolute scam designed to redirect public funds to the “private sector” and its shareholders… 🤬
"Preservation of greenscapes" utter, utter guff.