“Thank you Mr Hanney, for providing an opportunity to reply to your answers to both my comments and Tony's, because what you have written is as lifeless and well-rooted as tumbleweed.

Thank you, for confirming my point about lack of honesty in listing the consultation exercises to reveal either an aversion to achieve understanding or dismissal of the truth; that the BTP now passed by the DCC bears little resemblance to the scheme that was being considered when they took place in 2005-6.

Thank you, for confirming that it was the Conservative Administration (2007) who changed the parameters of the BTP as supported cross-party, going on to present Bath with what Tony described as the (very different) fait accomplis of Bathampton Meadows, Newbridge P&R extension on Green Belt land and the proposed BRT route, for which I know you must know as council cabinet member for resources there was no public consultation.

Thank you, for providing some illumination on the subject by not in any way answering my question on specifically how you might envisage a flawed public transport scheme aiding the future commercial investments and developments in the city you referred to earlier.

Thank you, for effectively saying nothing of any worth by suggesting everything might be distilled to a 'difference of opinion' in a style that might be better recognised in the alternative phrasing: "You may say that, but I couldn't possibly comment." In a fictional script uttered by the character Francis Urquhart such statements are artful. In real life they only bring to mind an artful dodger.

Thanks a bunch.”

“Gary

I am afraid I don't accept that the Bath Transport Package is a flawed scheme and nor does the Department of Transport and other key players.

Tony

On an earlier thread late last year or early this year I gave a list of all the consultation that had taken place while noting that the BTP wasn't directly in my portfolio. The matter had been raised as it has on this thread from an original article either on Spa or on Council budget.

I will just quote the first five bullet points of the 25 bullet points just to make it clear the BTP was not a fait accompli and indeed was supported cross party before there was a Conservative Administration (2007)

¿ July 2005 ¿ Council meeting ¿ provisional Joint Local Transport Plan, including initial plans for Bath Transport Package debated and agreed.

¿ March 2006 ¿ Council Executive ¿ Bath Package Major Scheme Bid

¿ March 2006 ¿ Council meeting ¿ Joint Local Transport Plan approval debate, including the Bath Transport Package and a map of the BRT route in the JLTP document.

¿ September 2006 ¿ Council Executive ¿ Bath Package Major Scheme Business Case (alterations agreed)

* October 2006 ¿ Council meeting ¿ Local Plan Inspector¿s report ¿ Council agreed amendment to Inspector¿s Report into the B&NES Local Plan, referring to BRT route and enclosing map of route

On your other points, I try and engage in a thread when it directly affects my portfolio and not tread on toes of my fellow Cabinet Members' portfolios. As the full list of consultation attests there were many many opportunities for community engagement. Cabinet Members also do their best to respond to direct correspondence and meeting requests (within reason) and personally I am not aware of any criticism levelled at me while I have been a Councillor for not responding promptly and with appropriate information. I think Cllr. Gerrish, who gets a lot more correspondence than me given his portfolio, is also pretty good at getting back to residents on issues raised.

I will have to leave it for somebody else to answer your Tumbleweed thread.”

“Cue tumbleweed.”

“Firstly, thanks to the Chron for making this forum available.
However isn't it a little bit ridiculous that the only way that a two way discourse between concerned residents, and those at B&NES that are responsible for major decisions, is done in this way ?

The whole BTP issue is highly contentious, and of great concern to many tax-payers who are able to string a proper line of reasoning together.
I suggest that the reason for this, and contrary to what I'm sure Cllr Hanney would say, is that the public consultation has been an absolute disgrace ........ it has therfore polarised opinion deeply and led to a completely unnecessarily comfrontational situation ..... add to this the track record of this council (whatever colour) ie Thermae Baths, and there you go.

Cllr Hanney - you are putting yourself in the position where you are having to talk in vague soundbites - if you had properly explained how this whole grand scheme was to hang together, to bring benefits to Bath, you might have avoided the debate over the last two years having degenerated into a slanging match.
The BTP has demonstrably been a fiasco from day one due to your policy of presenting Bath residents with unpopular fait-accomplis.

I hope you're learning”

“Firstly, thanks to the Chron for making this forum available.
However isn't it a little bit ridiculous that the only way that a two way discourse between concerned residents, and those at B&NES that are responsible for major decisions, is done in this way ?

The whole BTP issue is highly contentious, and of great concern to many tax-payers who are able to string a proper line of reasoning together.
I suggest that the reason for this, and contrary to what I'm sure Cllr Hanney would say, is that the public consultation has been an absolute disgrace ........ it has therfore polarised opinion deeply and led to a completely unnecessarily comfrontational situation ..... add to this the track record of this council (whatever colour) ie Thermae Baths, and there you go.

Cllr Hanney - you are putting yourself in the position where you are having to talk in vague soundbites - if you had properly explained how this whole grand scheme was to hang together, to bring benefits to Bath, you might have avoided the debate over the last two years having degenerated into a slanging match.
The BTP has demonstrably been a fiasco from day one due to your policy of presenting Bath residents with unpopular fait-accomplis.
I hope you're learning”

“Malcolm, thanks for the prompt reply.

What I do understand is that your council have pursued public funding from the DfT for the BRT as part of the Bath Transportation Package, with the threat of the loss of this funding having also been used as a lever to obtain planning permissions for the scheme.

If you can offer an explanation of how this might be justified, in view of the fact that DfT funding is available only for public transport improvements that can be integrated with other regional public transport schemes and the BTP does not meet this requirement, I would be interested to read it.

Please also bear in mind that planning application documents record that no sustainable improvement to congestion or air quality levels will result from implementation of the BTP and it is principally (but not exclusively) in this regard that less than honest council statements have repeatedly been made. In other words, BTP claims of improvements to infrastructure are exaggerated and without solid foundations.

Am I therefore not right in thinking you seem to be saying is it is acceptable to procure substantial public funding for a fundamentally flawed scheme that might possibly lead to facilitating future commercial developments, without being able to be specific about what those developments might be?”

“Dave

I am not sure it is a good idea for me to be involved in discussions relating to Planning - I have never been on the Development Control Committee since being elected in 1995. Somebody warned me I would never progress as a Councillor if I went on Planning! I have, however, supported establishment of Urban Regeneration Panel to provide advice to the Council including those on Development Control

Gary

I am not sure why you think the issues of regeneration of key sites and matters relating to air quality, public transport and congestion are not directly related. They are. We need the key sites to be developed for the sustainable development (including employment opportunities) for the City and B&NES. To be sustainable we have to have improved public transport and reduced congestion and related improvement in air quality.

It is ridiculous to suggest the Council haven't been honest about it. However, I am not sure the overall case is as well understood as it needs to be either within the Council or by the public.”

“Dave, I think Malcolm has already answered your question "why is the BRT so important"?

And in doing so he makes it clear that the council cabinet have never been honest about it because it's not about improving traffic congestion, air quality, or even public transport services.

It's about the future developments of Avon Street Car Park and Coach Park, Bath Quays South, Bath Western Riverside, and other sites currently suffering from B&NES's constructive negligence.”

“Usually Malcolm you get and deserve my wholehearted support, but in this case we differ. Yes, John Betty has seemingly been a success. Yes, you have made the best of an incompetent fiasco regarding the decisions taken by those Lib Dem buffoons that signed the Spa build contract and the giveaway deal with Thermae.

However I would point out the following facts:

I travel each day at rush hour times by car from Larkhall to Keynsham and back. It rarely takes more than twenty minutes. Try the M25 or London's North Circular. So why is the BRT so important? Connecting the A4 to the A36! Now that would be worth fighting for.

Both banks of our great river downstream from Pulteney Weir are a disgrace to a World Heritage City. Bland, dirty, devoid of interest or pleasure.

The Collonades, boarded up and derelict for years.

Bog Island, just one big traffic terminus.

Southgate and the bus rotunda, cheap, classless, soulless, badly designed and badly planned.

Western Riverside, yet another down market development disaster waiting to happen.

If John Betty is the City's saviour, then rid yourself of those incompetents in Trym Street and give him a team of planners that will push for quality, innovation and creativity deserving of us your electorate.”

“Since the Bath Spa, the Council has put in place a Major Projects department under the Strategic Directorship of John Betty. The Combe Down Stone Mines Project, three community resource centres (and related closure of 7 elderly person homes), various school rebuild projects (including Writhlington School recently completed) etc have been completed on time and on budget and with appropriate project management processes. This department and the Council's property department were also fully invovled with the arrangements regarding SouthGate which has been a very well run project. So yes the Council does have the capability to complete major projects and to mitigate and manage risk.

On a personal level I have absolutely no doubt that the regeneration of Bath including Avon Street Car Park and Coach Park, Bath Quays South, Bath Western Riverside (East and West) etc cannot proceed without the Bath Transport package. The project is clearly not without risk but the risks of not proceeding are much much greater in terms of the long term future of the City and the area.”