 |
Hammersmith and Fulham Liberal DemocratsCampaigning for the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham |
Super-Sewer - Public meeting challenges short-listing of Fulham's Carnworth Road as site for main shaft.
December 8, 2011 7:58 AM
Campaigners against the construction of a super-sewer shaft in a residential area of Fulham were disappointed at a travesty of a meeting in South Fulham tonight, Wednesday.
Residents at the meeting, organised by the Council had hoped for some constructive movement towards convincing Thames Water that it was a mistake to make the site at Carnworth Road their preferred site for the main shaft of the Thames Tideway Tunnel.
Instead it became the lastest episode in the long-running feud between H&F's Tory Council and Thames Water. The 500 people who turned up to question two spokesmen from Thames Water had to hear speeches from Council Leader Stephen Greenhalgh, MP Greg Hands, and the Tory deputy London Mayor Kit Malthouse. Instead of addressing the disastrous choice of Fulham over Barn Elms, Mr Greenhalgh, by deciding to chair the meeting himself , spent the entire evening trying to steer the discussion towards whether the Super-sewer was necessary at all.
Opposition to the choice of site was universal among the attendees, but as most of the questions from the floor had been submitted in advance to the Cllr Greenhalgh, it was almost impossible for anyone to criticise the strategy of the Council who should have been protecting the interests of local residents. One questioner was sneeringly told that his very pertinent question was merely "political".
Several speakers objected to the Carnworth Road site being described as a brownfield site. Classifying the entire affected area as brownfield because one small portion of it had been previously developed had made it easier to ignore the fact the majority of the affected area was a residential community.
Thames Water's only explanation for their choice of site, which they admitted was more expensive, was that they had followed statutory guidelines, which tell them not to use a greenfield site if another site is viable. After the effective and well-organised campaign in Barnes had succeeded in mobilising local people against a development which would affect just 2% of their public open space, Thames Water suddenly discovered that they could make the tunnel a bit smaller, making the Fulham site "viable".
Meanwhile two years on, our Council is only just recognising that an 7-year major construction project surrounded by housing, schools and some of the most overcrowded roads in the country would be a disaster.
Lib Dem spokesman Tamara Dragadze, as part of RATSF (Residents Against the Sewer In Fulham) campaign, had surveyed residents close to the Carnworth Road site, interviewing 85% of the households. Her data, complied by herself and Frances Holloway, supplied to Thames Water, showed that 1200 people lived within 200 metres of the proposed site, and over 200 within 2 metres, many of them in poor health or with other special needs.
Dr Dragadze had been asked by Thames Water for detailed methodology for her survey (being an academic she was able to demonstrate that it was rigorous), and she was scathing at the meeting about the failure of Thames Water to provideequally robust evidence for their choice, and not to reveal the methodology they themselves had used to choose Fulham instead of Barn Elms.
The meeting was informed that only just over 130 objections had been received to Thames Water's consultation, and after an angry description by one resident of the difficulties of completing the online consultation form, they acknowledged that all written submissions, whether email, post-card or letter, which had the sender's name and address would be considered valid responses to the consultation.
However, since Thames Water insist that they had followed the required procedures in making their assessment, objections that address weaknesses in their methods would be the most effective
Write to Freepost RSSB-HYRU-EGUT, Thames Tunnel, 35 King Street, Bristol, BS1 4DZ
Or www.thamestunnelconsultation.co.uk. Don't worry about answering their questions. Just tell them what's wrong with choice of Carmworth Road.
Consultations responses are needed by by 12 February, before which we hope to have some more information about the weaknesses in their assessment and shortlisting procedure.
***
For more:
http://hflibdems.org.uk/en/article/2011/465380/super-sewer-should-not-begin-at-sands-end
http://hflibdems.org.uk/en/article/2010/426627/super-sewer-council-seeks-allies
http://hflibdems.org.uk/en/article/2009/426613/poo-power-saves-money-and-thames-pollution
http://hflibdems.org.uk/en/article/2009/426530/sewage-in-river-was-not-an-accident
http://hflibdems.org.uk/en/article/2009/426531/council-scaremongering-on-super-sewer
What would you like to do next?
-
Subscribe for updates
Follow the party's activity on...
- Twitter:
- Liberal Democrats
- Facebook:
- Liberal Democrats
- YouTube:
- Liberal Democrats