Sherington Tory

It seems it's not just the Conservatives who are seeing though the Lib Dems posturing:

Lib dem Council out of focus on 'city streets'

Sir - Why does every Liberal Democrat Focus leaflet take credit for things they haven't done and attempt to mislead the public on the expansion agenda? I find it quite perplexing that only a few years after the LibDems described a 'High Street' on the V10 (Brickhill Street) as 'good news', they are now claiming credit for the cancellation of plans to downgrade the V10.

Local residents are to thank for halting these crazy plans, and the LibDems should be apologising for supporting such an absurd idea in the first place! The LibDems now have the A5130 (the unofficial V12) on their hit list and the Focus leaflet describes their plans to change this road into a 'city street'.

What it fails to point out is that buses, bicycles, pedestrians, great crested newts, and practically anything else that moves will have right of way over the car.It also fails to mention the road will have a vastly reduced speed limit.

The leaflet describes a 'city street' as the new name for a grid road, but in reality this is an attempt to trick the electorate through yet more spin.

These plans will result in vastly more traffic pouring onto the V11 and into Broughton. That isn't 'good news'! I like grid roads and I believe the vast majority of people support improvements to the network.I like cycling on redways, away from motorists, and I'm happy to share the redways with great crested newts too.

I want councillors to make sensible decisions on MK expansion, and when a Focus leaflet is more spin than truth, it's time to question if LibDem councillors can be trusted to run the MK expansion agenda.

John Baker
Broughton

Sir - Cllr McCall, the council leader, expresses surprise at the public opposition to 'city streets' (MK NEWS, March 28). Cllr McCall ought to be asking who, if anyone, actually supports them. City streets are a bad idea. They are to be main roads carrying fast and heavy traffic through residential areas with homes, children's schools and play areas fronting onto them.They are likely to be unsafe and unattractive. And they will clash with the existing character and local distinctiveness of our new city.

Unsurprisingly, the public has vigorously objected to them wherever Milton Keynes Council or Milton Keynes Partnership have proposed them. Local people opposed the downgrading of the V10 through Oakgrove. Local people opposed the 'city streets in the Western Expansion Area. This opposition even included the developers who protested that the council was forcing them to build 'city streets'.And now there is public opposition to the downgrading of the A5130.Who DOES want 'city streets'?

Michael Moutrie
London Road,
Stony Stratford

Interestingly, the second letter raises an important point: namely that the local residents opposed city streets, even though MK Partnerships proposed them. What did the Lib Dems do? They went along with MK Partnerships in spite of public opposition. The first letter points out that when they proved unpoular they then tried to claim credit for opposing city streets.

They are doing the same thing over the expansion debate to the east of the M1.

I have urdged in my literature to judge actions, not gimmiks or words alone. The Conservatives have given a manifesto pledge, backed up by the Conservative Shadown Minister for Local Government, Caroline Spellman, to unwind MK Partnerships and hand planning decisions back to MK Council. Those are our "actions". I'll leave you to judge the "actions" of our opponents!

http://www.mk-news.co.uk/mknews/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=38226