Dear Editor, All routes lead to London, always have and always will!
Some choose not to accept this fact, others accepted the fact long ago.
It is interesting but somewhat depressing to see how people respond to such facts or change their opinion when something does not suit them.
Many people fought, and still continue to fight, the coming of HS2 on the grounds of environmental destruction and poor value to society. For their efforts they have had to endure cries of nimby from assumed intelligent folk who apparently know better.
We now read in the press that Birmingham Airport, which supports HS2 to make sense of a runway extension, in part, are now fighting their own battle in an effort to prevent the government from giving approval, in principal, to a new airport in the Thames estuary which would not be compatible with its plans.
Recently we read that the managing committee have now approved the once flawed business plan and given the go ahead to the runway extension and stepped up their opposition to the possible new London airport. Is this their HS2 battle?
Some politicians who found they could not support their constituents in their fight against HS2, preferring to support their Government peers, are now encouraging support from their constituents, under the guise that constituents should covet the chance to hear their voice heard, against a proposed change in constituency boundaries because I suspect that they feel that their influence on affairs will be undermined. Is this their HS2 battle?
And what about the activities of the Prime Minister who was reported as saying, before the decision on HS2 was announced, “I want HS2, so we’re having it”.
It seems that he is now taking the same stance on NHS changes “I want change, so we’re having it”. This is totally against the judgement of respected institutions who say they have unfairly been excluded from talks. Today, we hear that he has rethought the position and will talk to these institutions after all. Is this their HS2 battle?
I suspect the social position of the institutions is higher than the social position of the nimbys fighting HS2, so in essence social standing probably makes no difference to the government.
So is this what the Big Society is about?, ‘them’ (the government) and ‘us’ (the rest). I rather think that the Big Society is in tatters and collapsing, brought about by the government’s unwillingness to listen to all society groups who sometimes know better, if the Big Society ever meant anything.
Peter Bray, Solihull