National Grid plan to run cables through a disused rail tunnel that crosses the Peak District National Park. If they go ahead, the tunnel could no longer be used as a railway, despite there having been several
proposals in the last 10 years to do just that (Central Railways, Arriva, and Translink–all rejected by the Government!) That would be a big mistake.

MPs and local people are trying to persuade the government to intervene, to protect the route so that it could, in future, be re-opened and provide much-needed passenger and rail-freight services connecting the east and west sides of the Pennines.

See recent article in the Guardian

Please act quickly as the National Grid work is scheduled to start in January 2008.

We need MPs across the country to sign Early Day Motion (EDM) 459 calling on the Government to intervene and help safeguard the Woodhead Tunnel for future rail use.

Campaign for Better Transport have set up an easy e-action form on their website. To write/send an e-mail to your MP asking them to sign EDM 459:
http://www.advocacyonline.net/eactivist/srv/render?NdsTID&view=GB,en,2581,15223,-1,n,n,n

Plus, there’s a petition online calling for the railway to be reopened:

Visit the Save Woodhead Tunnel website.

I have the following letter published in this week’s Bury Times and Prestwich & Whitefield Guide.  

BURY’S decision to say no’ to the proposed congestion charge is a much needed ‘nail in the coffin’ for the proposal to make us pay to make local journeys, but it should not be the end to the discussion on public transport. To make local people pay a charge to drive between Whitefield and Prestwich is quite clearly wrong, and another example of this government trying to impose unpopular measures on the people of Greater Manchester.

But the need for improved public transport has not gone away. For the sake of our environment, and the sake of future jobs and wellbeing we need to tackle the polluting traffic problems of our major roads and motorways. advertisement Other cities are having major public transport schemes funding by other means . . . so why not Greater Manchester? Other solutions are available like using private investment.

Some much needed solutions, like safer Metrolink stations or school transport schemes shouldn’t cost the earth.

The debate on congestion charging was distracting us from the real issue of how we find the means to improve our public transport.

Coun Tim Pickstone Leader, Bury Liberal Democrats

The Labour Party in Bury have finally shown their “true colours” when they refused to oppose the proposed Manchester “Congestion Charge” scheme and refused calls for a Greater Manchester referendum on the charge. Labour councillors unanimously refused to support a Lib Dem proposal which set down clearly that Bury was opposed to the Charge and called for the people of Greater Manchester to be consulted through a referendum vote on the issue.

Everyone knows that we need to do something about the lack of public transport infrastructure in the Greater Manchester area, but forcing people to pay an extra £5 a day (at todays prices!) to get the investment we need is ridiculous. For Holyrood Ward where we live its particularly mad - our ward straddles one of the charge points - local people would have to pay to make local journeys to school, the shops or local amenities - without going anywhere near Manchester city centre.

My colleague Cllr Richard Baum made an excellent speech outlining our proposals. When I came to ’second’ the proposals I just highlighted a couple of points. I gave the Council two examples where major public transport investment was happening, that somehow didn’t need a Charge to pay for it (Crossrail in London and the Edinburgh Tram System). I also noted how the decision that Bury would make tonight might actually shape the future by enabling the people of Greater Manchester to have their say in a public referendum.

We had hoped for all-Party support, but Labour tried to subtlety change the proposal to say that the Charge was acceptable if it was agreed locally (by the Greater Manchester councils - most of which are run by their Labour Party friends!). None of us were so easily fooled.

Despite Labour opposition, the Lib Dem proposals were agreed by the Council. Bury now has a clear position that, we need public transport investment, that the Congestion Charge is wrong, and that the people of Greater Manchester need to have their say in a public referendum. Its also clear that Labour couldn’t support this simple position.

You can read our proposal, that’s now Council policy here - Lib Dem TIF Amendment (PDF)

Please don’t hesitate to get in touch if you need any more information on this important subject.

Tim

Most people spend Halloween making or eating pumpkins, or dodging “trick or treaters”, but not so for the 51 councillors of Bury! Wednesday night was one of our five-times-a year “full council” meetings which normally go on right up to the close of business at 10.00pm.

Members of the Liberal Democrat Group of Councillors try to make full use of the meeting - its one of our only opportunity to question the Leadership of the Council and raise important issues.

Between us the Lib Dem councillors asked no less than eight written questions to the Executive Committee. These ranged from recycling, to road safety education, homelessness and the SCOOT traffic management system. On the latter my colleague Donal O’Hanlon asked how the expensive SCOOT management system had completely failed to work when a single lorry had broken down in Whitefield on Wednesday night in October - the whole of northern Greater Manchester was a gridlock for hours!

I asked two questions:
- one on the delays to Radcliffe Riverside High School. I asked what the scope of the involvement of the District Auditor in the proposed purchase of the land that the school is proposd to be built on. I asked the Executive Member for Children’s services if she could assure me that the Council will move on as soon as practical with a permanent solution for Radliffe schoolchildren. I know from our experiences in Prestwich how damaging protracted uncertainty can be to children’s educition.

- one on the absence of an “alleygating” policy for the Council. I was assured that a policy is on its way this municipal year (ie before next May) and that pilot areas are going to be identified for intial work. I asked if the Council would take up a proactive policy of supporting groups of local residents who wanted to pay for alleygating themselves - Michelle Wiseman, the Conservative Executive member responsible, said she would.

There was also two policy debates at full Council.

One, proposed by the Labour Group, congratulated the Government on the free bus travel for elderly people. We supported this, but added our own amendment to call for free bus travel to be rolled out to all school chidlren and young people. My Lib Dem colleague Cllr Richard Baum spoke exellently on the subject (you can even read his speech here!) and in the end both the other parties supported us.

Next it was the turn of the Lib Dem group motion - Vic D’Albert proposed our motion which called for a halt to the Government’s Post Office closure programme. At present around one fifth of all post offices are scheduled for closure next year - that’s around another six in Bury on top of the 19 that have closed in recent years. Our proposal was supported by both other parties, but in reality the fight begins now to save our local post offices.

Bury Council is proposing to implement some parking restrictions on the junction of Heaton Street and Heywood Road.

Apparently there have been a number of accidents here, probably associated with the shops across the road. The draft scheme, which is for double yellow lines around the junction can be downloaded here. If you have any queries or comments please do not hesitate to contact me.

The Bury Manchester Metrolink line is back up and running again after a summer long closure during which we’ve been dependent on bus replacement services.

I haven’t had chance to go on the tram since the upgrade yet, but work seems impressive! On Heaton Street where I live many of us have the tramline at the back of our houses, and its a significant difference in the noise made by the trams. The track prior to work was laid on wooded sleepers and (apparently) dated back to the days of the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway before 1914!

I know that in some parts of Prestwich - particularly nearer to the Village where the line is more elevated that my area - residents have had enormous problems over noise. Hopefully this will mean a smoother and quieter time for passengers and residents alike!

At the last full meeting of Bury Council I submitted a written question on the safety of the tram network at night. The tram is an excellent service for all of us, but I’m worried that many people are frightened of using the serivce in the evening - especially in the darker months. I’ve asked Cllr Andrew Garner, who is Bury’s spokesperson on the Passenger Transport Authority to take this up for me.

Residents who live alongside the Metrolink line need to be aware that the contractors currently working on renewing the track have informed the Council that some limited work may be needed during the night. Your local councillors have protested against this proposal, and we have received assurances that no heavy cutting or noisy work will take place, and that work will only take place if the recent wet weather continues and work cannot be completed during the day.

 Please contact me or one of your other councillors if work is disturbing you during the night and we will report this immediately to the relevant authorities.

Tim

Liberal Democrats called for a £3bn investment in public transport in Greater Manchester at the July meeting of Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority (GMPTA). The Lib Dem proposals also called for control of the bus network to be seized back from private hands and into the control of GMPTA again for the first time in over 20 years. But Lib Dem GMPTA members were furious that discussions on congestion charging were prevented when the meeting was rescheduled to take place after a decision on road charging had been made elsewhere.

Cllr Andrew Garner (Liberal Deomcrat member for Sedgley ward), one of two Bury Lib Dems who are members of the GMPTA, said “The issue of congestion charging and whether to back the controversial Transport Innovation Fund (TIF) bid was made by the Leaders of Greater Manchester Authorities on Friday morning. The GMPTA was supposed to meet on Thursday, but this meeting was re-scheduled until Friday afternoon, depriving us of a say. But whilst Bury’s Conservative led Council gave the green light to backing the bid, we used our influence on the GMPTA to press for real improvements to public transport.”

Liberal Democrats proposed important amendments to a Labour-backed motion calling on the GMPTA to support the public transport proposals put forward in the TIF bid. The Lib Dems demanded that a specific figure of £3bn be agreed as the minimum investment needed in the transport network. Cllr Garner said “We want world class public transport. Anything less than £3bn just won’t be enough, and yet the government have been strangely vague on the total that we’ll be eligible for. We need absolute certainty, and if the figure ends up less than £3bn, then the TIF bid is dead in the water as far as I am concerned.” Lib Dems also called for re-regulation of the bus network. Cllr Garner said “Whilst our buses are improving, they need to be better. They need to serve our vulnerable communities more, and put service before profits.”

The Lib Dem amendments were passed unanimously by the GMPTA. Cllr Garner stated that “although the GMPTA was deprived of an opportunity to debate the TIF bid ahead of a decision, we made the best of a bad situation by putting important safeguards in place for local people. “