|
4th November 2006
Dear Sir,
Your article "'Distasteful' Legal Challenge Blasted" carried in yesterday's (Friday 3rd) Gazette throws a curious light on Councillors Perry and Hanson.
They complain of a member of the public taking his rightful legal recourse against yet another project designed to increase traffic, and therefore to worsen global warming (not to mention congestion). The Councillors don't mention that the legal team maintained throughout the Second Tyne Road Tunnel Inquiry by the sponsors consisted of a QC, a second barrister and a firm of expensive London solicitors. Ranged against them were Bryan Atkinson and other members of the Tyne Crossings Alliance, including myself. We provided our services free and we had no legal representation.
The Inquiry process was grossly lopsided and certainly expensive, but that was not on the Objectors' account. The adjective 'distasteful' would appear apply to Messrs Perry and Hanson's denial of the democratic process, such as it is.
The Alliance took no part in Mr Atkinson's High Court challenge to the Inquiry decision, but we admire his bravery. We note that the judge's remarks at the Appeal indicated that Bryan had an important case to make. The remarks were: "It is indeed ironical that the sponsors of a large project taking years to implement are freed from the detail requirements for disclosure which apply to smaller projects for the disposal of waste".
So Mr Atkinson proved his point. Cheap at the price?
Yours faithfully,
Paul Winch,
Co-ordinator,
Tyne Crossings Alliance.
|