Mr T M Crookall

Mr T M Crookall

Mr T M Crookall

Did not speak.

Mr T M Crookall

Mr Crookall: Thank you, Mr President.

I would have risen to second Mr Cretney’s amendment, but that has already been done and I think it has just been superseded by Miss Bettison’s, so I am happy to second Miss Bettison’s amendment. I do not know, on the back of that later on, if Mr Cretney might like to take his back because it has just clarified his.

The President: That will not be necessary: Mr Cretney has clarified. What Miss Bettison has done is regularise the position as far as the wording goes.

Mr Crookall: Thank you for clarifying that, Mr President. I, like other Members in here, do not see an awful lot has changed since July, since we made that vote. I have some questions on what the Minister has brought forward today, but, as I said, I am more than happy to see a single line track from one end to the other that is capable of taking the horse trams, the electric trams and maybe, at a later date, the light railway. I would like it to go right the way to the far end and possibly up to the Sea Terminal, where you would have a waiting area for people inside and you can use the facilities there – but that would be down to planning and to the Department, obviously, whether they want to bring that forward.

If I can just go back to the health and safety that my colleague, Mr Henderson, was asking about, and about the state of the Promenade as far as up to the War Memorial. The road there, as we all know, is up and down like a fiddler’s elbow. Is it only that bad up to there or does the whole reconstruction need to go right the way to the far end to that degree? If the Minister can answer that – I do not know whether he will have that. We all know how bad it is at that section, but whether it is that bad right the way to the far end – if he could answer that. For me, I would rather the Minister and the Department get this right – do it once, do it right: when the tracks go in and when the road is done, do it all at the same time, do not do a part-job and then come back later and say, ‘Right, we are going to go up the Gaiety Theatre and then we will come back in years to come and do the rest.’ That might never happen.

What I would say with the single track is, if you put that on the seaward side of the road and then you have your pavement on the outside of that, then you can have your parallel parking on the outside of that. I am sure, like Mr Turner when he was talking, we have seen the schemes that said, actually, you only lose about 70 or 80 parking spaces doing it parallel rather than herringbone. If we are so concerned about losing the parking spaces, yes there are spaces now; I guarantee, if you walk around Chester Street Car Park now, you would find 70 or 80 car parking spaces. Go and put two-hour disc parking on the top floor. You can replace it like that. It can be done, as I think my colleague, Mrs Caine, has said just now. There are parking spaces around and it can be done.

As has been said, this is our shop window, the gateway to the Island. The Minister called it, ‘One of the most important spaces in the Island’, so, as I say, we need to get this right. We should not be doing a great job on here and then making it a car park. Yes, you can use it for parking, but do not cram them all in and make it look even worse than it should be. It could be a great place; it was a great place. So let’s take this one opportunity and do it right.

If we were to have double tracks in the middle of the road, and then you have your electric trams – or even single track in the middle of the road – or your light railway, you would then need your stanchions and your overhead cables, I presume, unless there are other ways of doing it. That then presents a traffic issue to me, health and safety wise, with vehicles running into them in the middle of the night or whatever the case may be.

They will say there are ways round that, but if you have it on the seaward side of the Promenade, of course, you can have those stanchions on the pavements or on the side of the road and, hey presto, they are out of your way. Also, the overhead cables are not going to be hit by high vehicles or whatever. It just takes it out of the way.

By putting it on the side of the Promenade, as well ... We have heard recently that we want to grow the Island’s population to maybe 100,000. We know there are more vehicles here now than ever before. The Promenade is busier than ever before, and yet we want to put the trams back in the middle of the road. Why would we do that? It is going to get busier and busier with more vehicles and we are not doing anything to stop that. By putting them on the side of the road, you have got a clear way, so you could either have three or four lanes of traffic. If you have got three, you can have two going one way in the morning when it is busy and one going the other way, and you could reverse it in the night. Clever little things like that make all the difference. (Mr Cretney: Hear, hear.)

I quite agree with the idea of the cultural quarter outside the Sefton. I think it is a good idea.

Again, I believe by putting the tramway on the seaward side, it gives you more space. It takes the horse trams and the vehicles away from that space, and I think it gives you an enhanced area. Yes, of course, you have got to have crossing places, but you are going to have that all the way along the Prom anyway, for people to cross the road.

I think much has been said already, Mr President. I think Mr Turner, before, said about this scheme that we had seen. I do remember seeing it and he will probably remember that in one of the pitches, there was an island down the middle of the Promenade with palm trees sticking out of it –

Mr Turner: I do, yes.

Mr Crookall: – and a single track lane was on the other side. That did exist, that scheme. I know it did; we all know it did.

Mr President, I will leave it there for now. I think the rest has been said.