Proceeding contribution from David Evennett (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 20 October 2005. It occurred during Debate and Adjournment debate on Thames Gateway.
Thames Gateway
I have changed my mind, but the Thames Gateway bridge is quite a different prospect from the east London river crossing, to which the hon. Gentleman alludes, although he was not a Member when it was proposed. The road network structure was quite different. Many of us were looking to a cut and cover under Oxley wood, but times move on. As the hon. Gentleman knows, some of his views have changed. We now know that traffic has increased substantially and that we have not secured the rail improvements that we were promised by the hon. Gentleman and his party. We have heard at recent elections that things are going to improve, but they have not. The proposed bridge is quite a different prospect and time has moved on. This is a different project at a different time with different consequences. On this proposal, many Conservative Members—we all know that we are having a leadership election today —are looking forward, not backwards. Unfortunately, Labour Members always want to look back, as we heard at Prime Minister’s Question Time yesterday, and trot out the same details about the past. We are looking forward and working together for the benefit of people in the area. The quality of life issue is paramount for people living in Bexley. A six-lane freeway taking huge amounts of traffic through our borough from the A2 and the A20 will cause an environmental nightmare: pollution, noise, nuisance, safety risks and health issues. Great problems will be created in our borough with no benefits to local people. Regrettably, Bexley and Greenwich already have very congested roads. It was Greenwich council that approved plans for the bridge, but it does not affect that area in the same way as it affects Bexley. If the bridge is built, traffic will come through Bexley and there will be gridlock on our local roads. Clearly, the Thames Gateway project must deal with many problems relating to transport and traffic. I pay tribute to some of the local people who are campaigning against the Thames Gateway bridge. Jacqui and Steve Wise have campaigned hard, as have Terry Grant and the St. Michael’s residents association and Councillor Clement, leader of the Conservative group. They all support the development of the Thames Gateway as a regional regeneration project, but only if it will bring benefits to the whole area. We believe that, if the bridge goes ahead, considerable disadvantages for our local area will result. We need more jobs, but how many new jobs will the Thames Gateway redevelopment project create south of the river? That question must be addressed. Many new jobs will be created in the north—we know that house prices are going up in Stratford on account of the Olympics and everyone is looking to invest there—but what about south of the river? There are tremendous opportunities for development in the area. They are long overdue, and have bipartisan support. However, the consequences for south London, and for Bexley in particular, have not yet been addressed. I urge the Minister to do so.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 437 c1026-7
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Construction Building regulations Housing Infrastructure Standards Regional planning and development Sustainable development Regeneration Thames Gateway
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 19:34:48 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_268446
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_268446
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_268446