Second Mersey Crossing - importance of the Green perspective

I note in the past month or so there have been several letters in the Widnes Weekly News regarding the second Mersey crossing. Some of these letters have been opposed to the new bridge but the majority have raised various points in relation to the consequences of the project but at the same time not opposing it directly.

The Green Party maintains its opposition to the second crossing on three main premises. The major threat of climate change with the consequences of more rapid change than what is currently anticipated, completely throwing out of the window all the figures relating to use of the new crossing. That building more roads/ bridges does not really solve the long term problem of congestion - there are many examples of this nationally and internationally. Finally the socio economic arguments that the new crossing will be of real benefit to local residents in my opinion does not hold up to detailed analysis.

No matter whether you agree with the views expressed above it’s possible that you’ll appreciate that the really sad thing in the whole process relates to the apparent power imbalance between the proponents of the second crossing and those who object to it wholly or selectively. That imbalance is to do with finance and therefore the ability to present as best a legal case as possible.

In some ways, and in an ideal world, the better way of dealing with such a proposal that has uncharted consequences for residents in Halton would have been to have had a proper balanced public debate and inquiry. With financial provision for objectors as well as proponents to make their case in the most effective way possible. And at the end of the day to hold a referendum on the matter – as was the case regarding the congestion charge in Manchester.

The only other suggestion I can make would be that a Green presence on the council might have ensured that the proposal from the beginning might have been subject to greater critical appraisal. This might have encouraged the important issues being raised at this late stage to have been aired earlier. This could have affected the evidence that will be considered by the inspector at the public inquiry over the next few weeks.