THANKS to the Ormskirk Bypass plan, we've had no problems filling our letters pages throughout the usually pin-drop-quiet month of August.
I can't work out whether the timing was very shrewd (because many people are on holidays) or quite daft (because the plans have managed to fill up many column inches in the absence of nothing much else happening.)
Certainly the pro-bypass and anti-bypass camp have got their arguments well set out but I can't, for some nagging reason, get out of my mind the idea that it's already a foregone conclusion.
Afterall, this is something which has been talked about since the end of World War II and certainly not (despite what the 'anti' camp thinks) been drawn up on the back of a Benson & Hedges 20 deck.
What is important is that both the Labour MP, Rosie Cooper, and her Tory opponent Adrian Owens are pro-bypass. so that puts the 'anti' campaigners at a massive disadvantage.
Without anyone in the corridors of power fighting for the 'anti' corner, I'd pretty much say it was as good as already built...
- Post to:
del.icio.us
Digg
Newsvine
Nowpublic
Reddit
« Previous | Home | Next »
mike porter wrote...
Yes but just what will the bypass do for the good people of Ormskirk? Nothing. The only minor traffic problems are at rush hour and some weekends in summer. The bypass will let non Ormskirk traffic bypass the town but the (minor) rush hour problems will still exist. Also there would be more traffic on Wigan Road because that would be the route in to town from the bypass.
What a great idea given the presence of Ormskirk School!
So why are our representatives supporting a scheme which will waste £37m. There must be cases that are more needy than Ormskirk?
Why not spend smaller amounts addressing local problems, e.g. widen the corridor by the church and let more traffic pass through more quickly.
I am not a tree hugging NIMBY but am appalled at the potential loss of countryside, waste of money for a scehme with minimal benefits.
Posted by: mike porter | August 29, 2007 12:38 PM