Graeme Wall wrote:
On 15/12/2020 12:00, wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 11:52:23 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, told Hammersmith & Fulham council,
which is run by Labour, that the money would be needed to open the bridge,
suggesting that it could be raised through a council tax increase or by
raiding its reserves.

Its about time the government woke up to how local councils are struggling.
Tightening belts is one thing but they're virtually on starvation rations
funding wise now. Where do they think Fulham will get the millions from?
Raising council tax with all the covid unemployment? Oh yeah, great plan.

Always been the tory plan to cripple local councils, especially labour
controlled ones.

Yes, if Hammersmith still had a Tory council, I'm sure it would have been
treated much better. This government seems to be particularly blatant at
discriminating in this way.

wrote in message ...
On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 11:52:23 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:

Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, told Hammersmith & Fulham council,
which is run by Labour, that the money would be needed to open the bridge,
suggesting that it could be raised through a council tax increase or by
raiding its reserves.

People living in Barnes are inconvenienced far more by the closure
than are people living in Hammersmith. That side of the river is in
the London Borough of Richmond which is controlled by the Lib Dems.


michael adams

....

michael adams wrote:

wrote in message ...
On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 11:52:23 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:

Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, told Hammersmith & Fulham council,
which is run by Labour, that the money would be needed to open the bridge,
suggesting that it could be raised through a council tax increase or by
raiding its reserves.

People living in Barnes are inconvenienced far more by the closure
than are people living in Hammersmith. That side of the river is in
the London Borough of Richmond which is controlled by the Lib Dems.


But that borough doesn't own the bridge, nor have to share the cost of the
repairs (why not?).

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

wrote in message ...
On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 11:52:23 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:

Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, told Hammersmith & Fulham council,
which is run by Labour, that the money would be needed to open the bridge,
suggesting that it could be raised through a council tax increase or by
raiding its reserves.

People living in Barnes are inconvenienced far more by the closure
than are people living in Hammersmith. That side of the river is in
the London Borough of Richmond which is controlled by the Lib Dems.


But that borough doesn't own the bridge, nor have to share the cost of the
repairs (why not?).

Because -

quote

The Local Government Act 1985 dealt with the abolition of the GLC, and
transferred non-trunk road bridges in their entirety to one of the two London
boroughs that each bridge lay within
[...]
The choice of borough to be decided between the two councils, or failing agreement,
by the Secretary of State for Transport
[...]
For Hammersmith Bridge, the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham took
responsibility.

/quote

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammersmith_Bridge

The reasoning behind both decisions isn't immediately obvious. If two boroughs
shared responsibility for the Bridge they could still agree to be subject to
decisions made by an independent mutually acceptable body - rather than
necessarily arguing ad-infinitum. And possibly H&F accepted this
particular poisoned chalice in the expectation that the SoS would find
against them in any case.


michael adams

....

On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 18:07:31 -0000, "michael adams"
wrote:


"Recliner" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

wrote in message ...
On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 11:52:23 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:

Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, told Hammersmith & Fulham council,
which is run by Labour, that the money would be needed to open the bridge,
suggesting that it could be raised through a council tax increase or by
raiding its reserves.

People living in Barnes are inconvenienced far more by the closure
than are people living in Hammersmith. That side of the river is in
the London Borough of Richmond which is controlled by the Lib Dems.


But that borough doesn't own the bridge, nor have to share the cost of the
repairs (why not?).

Because -

quote

The Local Government Act 1985 dealt with the abolition of the GLC, and
transferred non-trunk road bridges in their entirety to one of the two London
boroughs that each bridge lay within
[...]
The choice of borough to be decided between the two councils, or failing agreement,
by the Secretary of State for Transport
[...]
For Hammersmith Bridge, the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham took
responsibility.

/quote

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammersmith_Bridge

The reasoning behind both decisions isn't immediately obvious. If two boroughs
shared responsibility for the Bridge they could still agree to be subject to
decisions made by an independent mutually acceptable body - rather than
necessarily arguing ad-infinitum. And possibly H&F accepted this
particular poisoned chalice in the expectation that the SoS would find
against them in any case.


michael adams

...
Ownership of and responsibilty for bridges over the Thames has given
rise to disputes far upstream from London. The solution where a
county or other boundary is usually in the middle of the river, at
important bridges the boundary shifts to one side or the other.
putting the bridge entirely in one authority.
A classic case was the important bridge at Datchet which gave access
to Windsor Castle and was built by Berkshire and Buckinghamshire
Counties, using different plans and techniques but managing to meet in
the middle!
Finally demolished in about 1850 and replaced by the Albert Bridge and
the Victoria Bridge and the land towards the castle becoming the
private Home Park.
This being a transport group, you might enjoy researching why the
Victoria road bridge was the responsibilty of the railway that goes to
Windsor Riverside station..


Guy Gorton

In message , at 18:07:31 on Tue, 15 Dec
2020, michael adams remarked:

"Recliner" wrote in message
...
michael adams wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 15 Dec 2020 11:52:23 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:

Grant Shapps, the transport secretary, told Hammersmith & Fulham council,
which is run by Labour, that the money would be needed to open the bridge,
suggesting that it could be raised through a council tax increase or by
raiding its reserves.

People living in Barnes are inconvenienced far more by the closure
than are people living in Hammersmith. That side of the river is in
the London Borough of Richmond which is controlled by the Lib Dems.


But that borough doesn't own the bridge, nor have to share the cost of the
repairs (why not?).

Because -

quote

The Local Government Act 1985 dealt with the abolition of the GLC, and
transferred non-trunk road bridges in their entirety to one of the two London
boroughs that each bridge lay within
[...]
The choice of borough to be decided between the two councils, or
failing agreement,
by the Secretary of State for Transport
[...]
For Hammersmith Bridge, the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham took
responsibility.

/quote

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammersmith_Bridge

The reasoning behind both decisions isn't immediately obvious. If two boroughs
shared responsibility for the Bridge they could still agree to be subject to
decisions made by an independent mutually acceptable body - rather than
necessarily arguing ad-infinitum. And possibly H&F accepted this
particular poisoned chalice in the expectation that the SoS would find
against them in any case.

Having seen the arguments in Reading in the 90's regarding the proposed
third river crossing, it's the kind of project they seem systemically
unable to agree upon. So making one or the other 100% responsible is
probably the only solution.
--
Roland Perry