Merseytram, shadow home secretary Chris Grayling, and the Conservatives
You've got to admire the honesty of Chris Grayling (shadow home secretary) in saying the Conservatives would be likely to kill off Merseytram (in it's current form at least).
OK, he can blame Labour for the state of nation's finances, but is this really the way to win votes in Merseyside?
You might say yes, because the only seats they are likely to win are on Wirral, which would not have benefitted from Merseytram.***
Maybe he is just saying what the Labour government does not have the guts to.
Having once already let the area down by refusing to hand over the money (remember when Alistair Darling was in charge of the Department of Transport), this is one decision ministers may be keen to not take before a general election.
Although to be fair to Labour it will not be cheap, click on this link to read the last story about the costs.
Meanwhile Merseytravel are yet to submit their renewed business case to the DfT for approval. To my mind it will be a great shame if Liverpool does not get a tram system. The city's leadership wants Liverpool to be a top class European city, and to be that having a tram system is almost a necessity.
For the sake of clarity this is what Mr Grayling said: "In principle I think we always did support Merseytram.
"But the big mistake was not to learn the lesson of Manchester and Croydon.
"You need an anchor route and Line One to Kirkby was not likely to be as commercially successful as a city centre route going south through the suburbs - it was looked at the wrong way round."
Asked if a Conservative government would back the scheme he added: "We funded London's Docklands light railway, Manchester and Croydon, but I would be cautious because of the finances over the next three or four years. I can't say we will support it in the early days of a Conservative Government."
***UPDATE: This statement may have been written slightly in haste. The Conservatives also stand a good chance in places like Crosby and Southport, but I still maintain that the Wirral seats are virtual dead certs.
Older/Newer
« Why equalities minister Harriet Harman is wrong to want to ban discrimination against northerners | Wavertree MP Jane Kennedy and her "mafia boss" Gordon (Godfather) Brown »
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Merseytram, shadow home secretary Chris Grayling, and the Conservatives.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blogs.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/cgi-bin/mt421/mt-tb.cgi/138736
3 Comments
Leave a comment
Profile
David Bartlett - City editor of the Liverpool Daily Post and Echo covering politics, regeneration, and urban affairs. He was previously chief reporter of the Daily Post and here he gives his insight into the workings of regional politics.
having a tram system is almost a necessity No it isn't. This reminds me of the blather a while back about the 'necessity' of an air link to London. Oh, how the city would suffer without one! Well, we got the air link but no one used it. Despite all the huffing and puffing, the route was never commercially viable. Same applies to this silly tram system. Route 1 to Kirkby will be route 1 to a white elephant, just like Sheffield. A route through Allerton or Hunts Cross to the airport could make commercial sense. But LibDem 'nimbyism' will block that idea. Anyhow, just how many transit systems does this not-very-prosperous city need? We have a rail-based Metro system that could (should?) be extended. Why add a tram system on top. Time to put aside these silly civic vanity projects, and concentrate on what might really make a difference
Ronnie,
I think you make a good point. Maybe I should have said that an improved public transport network is a necessity. And I accept what you say about a south Liverpool route making commercial sense. But one of the main points about the Kirkby Line was about improving the life opportunities of some of the region's poorest communities that lived along that line, and that surely would have been a good thing? And I would have thought that extending the rail system would be far more expensive than a tram system.
David,
I would quite happily argue that Merseytram is exactly the sort of system that Liverpool needs and also that it is probably sensible to promote the Kirkby route first. However, whether or not you support the project there is a deeper issue here that we seem to be missing.
Merseytram came about because of the rejection (on mainly technical grounds) of the earlier MRT (Mersey Rapid Transit) scheme of electronically guided buses, which would probably have been much cheaper than trams. The Department for Transport encouraged Merseytravel to develop a three line tram system and then, when costs had risen - partly due to their prevarication, refused to fund it.
The upshot of all this is that, with one exception, the Liverpool South Parkway station which was also a victim of expensive government prevarication, there has been no major transport investment in Merseyside over the twelve years of the New Labour government.
It is not just trams that have failed to appear. There has been no extension of the Merseyrail system (what happened to Bidston-Wrexham electrification?), no programme of new stations and only minor road construction.
The only comfort we can take from this is that most other English regional cities have also suffered from this moratorium on investment.
The people of Liverpool and Merseyside pay their taxes and it is a scandal that so much transport investment is now directed to the New Labour heartland of London and the South East. The amount of money that the Jubilee Line went over budget (partly to get it open in time for the Millennium) would have paid for the three routes of Merseytram several times over.