It's of course completely reasonable for Britain Remade to hold this Government's feet to the fire. Infrastructure delivery in the UK is broken, years of consulation and preparation, only to be scuppered by local opposition in too many instances.
That said, the appetite of this Government to get Britain building, adopting it's mantra, is real. And a sea change to the previous Government. The previous Government literally doubled (tripled?) the cost of HS2 through its deference to local NIMBY opposition.
The fact that Miliband managed to approve his pet projects quickly says a lot, as does previous Tory opposition to wind. Any drawn out process like this is almost certain to be subject to heavy political bias, with the public losing out on necessary infrastructure as the price. The political party that has the stones to put the NIMBYs in their box, and explain why, could do very well indeed.
It seems to me bonkers that the majority of this process isnt done by local govt who could set the need for a eg new runway etc in their local area so that costs and delays and consultsncy fees are reduced and eng firms do the build out against parameters set by the local area/nat govt. Of course the likely key problem here is a lack of engineering capacity locally for this to set the design parameters sensibly. If these are “nationally significant” it should be the public sector setting the case for it.
It's of course completely reasonable for Britain Remade to hold this Government's feet to the fire. Infrastructure delivery in the UK is broken, years of consulation and preparation, only to be scuppered by local opposition in too many instances.
That said, the appetite of this Government to get Britain building, adopting it's mantra, is real. And a sea change to the previous Government. The previous Government literally doubled (tripled?) the cost of HS2 through its deference to local NIMBY opposition.
The fact that Miliband managed to approve his pet projects quickly says a lot, as does previous Tory opposition to wind. Any drawn out process like this is almost certain to be subject to heavy political bias, with the public losing out on necessary infrastructure as the price. The political party that has the stones to put the NIMBYs in their box, and explain why, could do very well indeed.
It seems to me bonkers that the majority of this process isnt done by local govt who could set the need for a eg new runway etc in their local area so that costs and delays and consultsncy fees are reduced and eng firms do the build out against parameters set by the local area/nat govt. Of course the likely key problem here is a lack of engineering capacity locally for this to set the design parameters sensibly. If these are “nationally significant” it should be the public sector setting the case for it.