An email being circulated at present
Does Project No 13 need to include both the A14 and A120, especially in view of planned upgrades to the A14? (See A14 Ellington to Fen Ditton on the A14 between Huntingdon and Cambridge - Public Consultation March to June 2005. Dual three-lane carriageway). (It should be born in mind that, if the P.Southern R. is built, the H.A. could well argue the necessity of adding on another couple of lanes in the future!) Also Project No 26 includes a railway priority section from Felixstowe to Nuneaton which should relieve some of the traffic, as should the Ipswich tunnel gauge enhancements. In a 2001 White Paper on transport, one of the targets included by the European Commission was the reversal of the decline in rail's share of passenger and freight transport (http://www.eubusiness.com/guides/transport).
One of the main objectives (see http://www.euractiv.com/Article?tcmuri=tcm:29-129628-16&type=LinksDossier) of the Commission's proposed White Paper on transport is:
- shifting the balance between modes of transport by 2010 by revitalising railways and promoting maritime and inland waterway transport;
At the mid-term of the White Paper European Transport Policy for 2010, the Commission is assessing how successful it has been in achieving its objectives and seeing how further progress can be made. A reassessment of this new section of A120 should be included as surely this new Braintree to Marks Tey dual-carriageway is in conflict with the E.U. objective to revitalise the railways? Why isn't there a railway priority section out of Harwich? We have the railway line out of Harwich - couldn't we do more with it? Furthermore, the development of a rail-link between Braintree and Stansted was in the Labour Party manifesto back in 2001:
3 MAY 2001
Labour will also press strongly for the development of a rail-link between Braintree and Stansted Airport as a matter of urgency.
However, there is unfortunately no mention of this rail-link in the 2005 manifesto and this is a measure that would take the pressure off the A120.
Stansted Airport Expansion and the A120.
Stansted runway facing long delay
By Michael Harrison, Business Editor
19 May 2005
Construction of a second runway at Stansted will be delayed by several years if the £4bn project has to be financed entirely by passengers using the Essex airport, BAA warned yesterday.
The airport operator said the timetable for opening the runway had already slipped by more than a year. The Government gave the go-ahead last year for a second runway to open in 2011-12, but BAA said yesterday it would not be ready until 2013 at the earliest, even if part of the cost was met by higher charges on passengers at Heathrow and Gatwick. If the runway had to be funded on a stand-alone basis, then completion of it would be delayed by "several years" beyond that date, BAA said.
How necessary is this A120 Braintree to Marks Tey Improvement really going to be? In the light of the uncertainty surrounding Stansted, should the H.A. be forging ahead?
The Trans-European Network (TEN) is a massive road and rail infrastructure project subsidised by the EU that essentially facilitates the export of cheap food and manufactured items from Eastern Europe.
This is not about removing the east - west traffic from Essex's roads - it is about bringing more freight through Harwich and creating extra east - west traffic! We don't need these imports, so why encourage them?
On 5.4.2005, oil prices hit fresh historic highs. In the light of this, this country cannot afford to increase its reliance on cheap imports.
The focus needs to be shifted away from the Dublin to Brussels road to the needs of Essex, i.e. the focus should be on the revitalisation of our railways and road building should include necessary improvements to existing networks rather than neglecting them in favour of a 13.1km new dual-carriageway that slices across the arable land of rural England, destroying the setting of our country villages forever. It is not impractical to link the A12 with the A120 Braintree to Stansted road in a way that moves traffic efficiently and benefits local communities, road improvements being coupled with rail and bus service enhancements. The Proposed Southern Route does not achieve this