Skip to main content

Boris-Island: The real reason why we are even talking about this:

I studied Philosophy at Oxford University with London's Mayor Boris Johnson. I have watched Boris's career since then with interest, including his stint as MP for Henley, near Heathrow. I find his proposal for a massive, madly-expensive new airport in the Thames Estuary to be nothing more than a piece of envioronmental vandalism. The real reason that this location is proposed is obvious: it is so that Boris's friends in Henley dont have so many planes flying over them...
It's great that there is to be no 3rd runway at Heathrow. But: Why should the people of Essex have to suffer more noise, pollution and traffic congestion than there is already? Just so that rich Tories living west of London can have a quieter life?!
It is crystal clear now that there was no environmental reason for the no-3rd-runway-at-Heathrow decision. . .
Lets put the vast sums of money that would be spent on this proposed eyesore in the Thames Estuary to better use, to making the quality of all our lives better, right here and now. Lets take the pressure off our roads and invest in a better rail network here in the East, rather than loading more pressure onto those roads by going ahead with this insane and retrograde proposal for a mega-expensive new airport in the estuary.
Among all the Political Parties it is only the Green Party that is prepared to tell the truth on this one. The last shred of environmental credibility has been thrown away by this Government, and the quality of life of people in the Eastern Region of this country is now hanging by a thread: all so that the government's rich friends living in and to the west of London dont have to suffer more overflights...

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Post-Growth: A new vision for a fairer and more sustainable Britain

More on why 20's plenty -- without need for any further 'trials'...

There are a number of reasons for setting a default speed of 20mph throughout the 'unclassified' road network in residential parts of a city such as Norwich. Most important perhaps is that of driver recognition as to what the speed limit is. If you have 20 mph as the default then you not only establish this limit clearly, but you also adjust the driver's recognition as to what is the "normal" speed in such residential areas. The most important aspect is that drivers set 20 mph as the norm with those 30 mph areas or roads being seen as 50% faster, rather than seeing 30 mph as the norm with 20 mph as 33% slower. The psychological adjustment of normal speeds in residential areas is key to the success of reducing speeds and therefore danger to pedestrians and cyclists. Therefore any trial, pilot or whatever, that only implements 20 mph in a tiny proportion of the city is not modelling 20's Plenty in any realistic manner.   When considering the val...