Saturday, 1 August 2009

Bowstring Bridge and Pump and Tap.

At the bottom of this post is the opinion piece in today's Mercury, which sums up how many people feel about the city council's decision to try to push this through in private.

Now lets start from the beginning....All council agendas and related non-confidential reports always land on my desk a week before the meeting is held. So I looked through the agenda and papers. Now you will always have a good look at the confidential items, sadly councils will nearly always have them and often it can be something juicy.

For the meeting on Monday there are two confidential papers.

The first is called "LEICESTER'S NEW BUSINESS GATEWAY: NEW BUSINESS QUARTER PHASE 2". Without reading this report you can pretty much guess what this is about, it has been talked about for years. The clue is in the title and it is probably about the development of the Campbell Street Post Office to prepare for a new square outside Leicester Railway Station. I guess we'll find out later on.

Now the second is called: "SALE OF LAND AND VIADUCT AT DUNS LANE". Now I know what this is because I was given the report. Now you could also guess what this was about, maybe, but having read this report, this really is a creative use of a title. Cynical I know. But the second paragraph is the one which says that the council will agree to spend up to £472,000 to demolish the Bowstring bridge. What I am trying to say is that the sale of land is one of two main recommendations to be agreed on Monday. Why was this not included in the title? You can make up your own mind.

Anyway, so I received this report and rang Ross Willmott, because he was presenting the report. Instead Patrick Kitterick called me from Ireland. First thing he said was that the council was not being secretive. They had a press release to be sent out after the council meeting. That sticks in my throat. How is that open? No-one would have known anything until afterwards. (They then put out a press release out on Friday anyway.)

I really do not understand why this is being discussed in private. The deal is done, the costs agreed. What is different about other reports on the main agenda on Monday? For example, there is a report, being discussed in public, on the development of a science park around the National Space Centre.

The science park report says the cabinet will agree to: "Acquire the freehold of the site from Emda, likely at a peppercorn (subject to negotiation)".

So here they are openly saying they will agree to buy the freehold, in a bit, after negotiations. This is what De Montfort University and the council have done on Dun's Lane, a deal much further along the line as DMU have already agreed to pay a peppercorn rate plus other phased payments. It makes no sense.

The council will not change their mind and on Monday it sounds like some people will be at the Town Hall to vent their anger at the plan, and also the circumstances of how it is to be agreed.

The council think this deal is great news for Leicester, but they have handled it very badly indeed. They would have been happy to wax lyrical about this decision, afterwards, when no-one knew it had been happening. When thousands of people have protested against this very plan, that is wrong.

Here is the Mercury's opinion:

The future of Leicester's Bowstring Bridge has been one of the most talked about issues in this newspaper in recent times.

Furthermore, campaigners have set up websites to show their strength of feeling on the matter. Thousands of names have been added to petitions against the removal of this local landmark in the heart of Braunstone Gate.

It is somewhat strange then that a meeting which will decide the future of the bridge should be held in private.

In fact, most of the people who have battled for so long to save the bridge, and the popular pub The Pump and Tap - which will also be demolished as part of the plans - would not have found out about the deal to knock it down had they not bought yesterday's Leicester Mercury.

In turn, the Leicester Mercury would not have been able to publicise the fate of the area had someone with a conscience, or at least some sense of democracy within the city's corridors of power, not leaked to us the report which explains the deal struck between De Montfort University and the council.

Today we have learned that despite the details of the Bowstring Bridge's future now being available on every newsstand in the city, the meeting to discuss the deal between the parties will still be held in private, on Monday, as planned.

The councillors at the heart of this situation claim the information in the report could not have been publicised because it was deemed commercially sensitive.

Their point being that they did not want the amounts being paid for the land in the area around Duns Lane being revealed.

However, now the deal is in the public domain and the figures are out there. We think it is it now time for the council to rethink their plan to discuss the matter in private.

Surely the people of Leicester deserve to hear about the major things which are happening in their city.


  1. "Surely the people of Leicester deserve to hear about the major things which are happening in their city. "

    Indeed we do.

    So why the hell weren't you, or anyone else from the Mercury, at the planning committee meeting on Tuesday?

    For the second time in two days, the Town Hall Square hosted a demonstration by residents seeking to lobby the council.

    Yet this time around the Mercury did NOT put a picture on the front page. In fact, it did not carry a photograph at all!

    A lot of your readers will be overjoyed to see the return of speedway and track cycling to Leicester.

    And both the City Council and the developers deserve full credit in allowing this to happen.

    Unfortunately, they're not likely to receive that from a publication which appears hell-bent on dragging this city down as far it can.

  2. Mr or Mrs Anonymous. Thanks for the message, but I'm afraid there are a few errors.

    Our reporter Simon Ward was at as the planning meeting, wrote about it and a story was in today's paper. I know we will also have a substantial sports piece in tomorrow's paper.

    We have also covered this campaign for many years, in fact I know the supporters club believe that we have been very supportive of this (I was told this by several members last week) and we have certainly given the consortium and council praise. In our archive there must be hundreds of stories on this, and there will be more in the future. Only a week ago I did a big write-up on this.

    I think that you are misguided to think that we are "hell-bent" on dragging this city down. Why would we want this or do this?

    I am proud to live and work in this city. In fact I was telling my colleague Ian Wishart this just today.

    It makes me very sad that you believe questioning decisions made about something (the bridge and pub in this case) that thousands and thousands of people are passionate about/disagree with is trying to drag the city down.

    Why don't you call me on 0116 222 4267 tomorrow and we'll talk about it.

  3. Leicester Resident1 October 2009 at 17:33

    The council think people are just going to quietly roll over and accept the decision and the way it was made. I don't think this is anything like the end of the matter. I heard that the civic society are applying to have the existing sports hall listed (apparently the roof is unusual) which would throw a major spanner in the works. Keep up the pressure - we need these politicians to LISTEN.

  4. Hi,

    I have a video you may be interested in for your blog.

    It is a discussion between Noam Chomsky and Kate Albright-Hanna, the director of video for Barack Obama's presidential campaign.

    Noam discusses the first year of Obama's presidency, global activism and the survival of the human species as a cause for concern.

    Do get in touch if this is of interest.

    Kind regards,