Stephen Metcalfe
MP has made local views heard in his response to the Lower Thames crossing
consultation having gathered the opinions of over 120 local people in South
Basildon and East Thurrock.
After attaching a
survey on the crossing options to his monthly newsletter, Mr Metcalfe was
inundated with responses which he then used, alongside other correspondence, to
respond to the consultation.
Mr Metcalfe delivered his response along with a report detailing the views of constituents by hand to the Department of Transport earlier today.
Mr Metcalfe delivered his response along with a report detailing the views of constituents by hand to the Department of Transport earlier today.
The options for
the crossing, all of which would have a significant impact on Thurrock
residents, are:
- Option A: at the site of the existing A282 Dartford-Thurrock river crossing
- Option B: connecting the A2 with the A108
- Option C: connecting the M2 with the A13 and the M25 between junctions 29 and 30
- a variant for option C would additionally widen the A229 between the M2 and M20
In his response
to the consultation, the local MP stressed his opposition to Option C and the
importance of maintaining treasured Greenbelt land; of keeping the local
community together, and of ensuring that local people are not once again
burdened with the fallout of an enormous infrastructure project.
He also expressed
the sense of betrayal felt by local residents about the fact that they are
still paying to use the current crossing despite promises that once it had been
paid for there would be no tolling.
Mr Metcalfe
commented: “I would like to thank all those who have made their views on the
crossing known to me, particularly about Option C. Your responses were vital in
communicating to the Government the strength of feeling behind this issue of
great local and regional importance.”
“I will continue
to campaign against Option C and for free use of the existing crossing for
Thurrock residents. I hope that the Government will take heed, listen to the
views of the people, and seek an alternative location for a new Thames
crossing.”