Andrew Jones MP’s Weasel Words on Station Gateway
If you’re a supporter of sustainable travel, calling the flagship local sustainable travel project “dead” is a funny way of showing it. And yet that’s where we are with Andrew Jones MP.
Mr Jones is quoted by the Stray Ferret as follows:
‘The key consideration is that the latest challenge means that the deadline to spend the cash allocated to this area is certain to expire. It is time therefore to stop spending public money trying to drag what is effectively a timed-out dead scheme – the good parts regrettably and the bad too – over the line.
The council must start talking to government about retaining the funding and re-positioning it to other projects in Harrogate and Knaresborough. I am happy to help with that process.’
andrew jones mp
But if it is possible to negotiate with the DfT so as to reallocate the money to “other projects”, why isn’t it possible to negotiate with the DfT to extend the deadline?
This is nonsense from Andrew Jones MP.
It looks very much as though he is an opponent of sustainable travel who hopes that his inaccurate characterisation of the project as “dead” becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Mr Jones is further quoted as follows:
‘There are parts of the scheme I think that are welcome – the emphasis on sustainable transport, tidying up the area as you come out of the bus and train stations, the improvement of the public realm, changing the crossing arrangements on Lower Station Parade, improving the shabby one arch and so on.
“There are elements of concern too such as the narrowing of Station Parade for a short stretch outside the bus station and how deliveries to businesses will work and I have consistently asked the council to address these concerns. It is clear that significant numbers have not been reassured by the explanations that have been given.’
Andrew jones mp
Those really are weasel words.
In the first paragraph, Mr Jones pretends to like ‘the emphasis on sustainable transport’. In the second, he makes it clear that he is against the reallocation of road space that makes sustainable transport provision possible.
It is delusional to believe that we can ‘put the emphasis on sustainable transport’ without allocating any road space to it.
Mr Jones looks like someone who is in favour of sustainable transport in theory but not in practice.
He wants to keep all the space for motor vehicles. He wants to prioritise motor vehicles, not sustainable travel. Therefore he is an opponent of sustainable travel, not a supporter of it.
Astonishing U-Turn
Mr Jones’ opposition to Station Gateway in August 2023 represents an astonishing u-turn from his position in June. Then he wrote:
‘…I am pleased [the project] has not stalled or fallen foul of the often inaccurate and vociferous criticism it has received…it is important local authorities can show they can deliver projects and this is a big test for North Yorkshire Council (NYC).
The business case will go to the West Yorkshire Combined Authority in September and I hope construction will begin at the earliest opportunity. As the councillors noted we have done enough talking. It is time for some doing.’
andrew jones mp
Questions for Andrew Jones MP
Why is it that you can you negotiate with the DfT to keep the money for unspecified “other projects”, but you can’t negotiate with them to extend the time limit to use it for its current purpose, Station Gateway?
How can we ‘put the emphasis on sustainable transport’ without allocating any road space to it?
Which active travel projects has North Yorkshire Council successfully delivered in the last 10 years? (There are none).
Is there any reason why the “other projects” would actually result in on-the-ground improvements, instead of getting caught up in interminable rounds of consultations and reports?
What have you done to help deliver sustainable travel projects over the last 10 years? (He hasn’t done anything).
The Station Gateway project has been under way for 3 years, with a first consultation in March 2021, and two others since then. A vast amount of work by local authority officers has gone into it, as well (according to reports) around £2 million in consultants’ fees.
Why do you think it is a good idea to throw all of this work down the drain and start again from scratch on something completely different?
What specifically are these “other projects”?
Why would they be better or more likely to meet with your approval than Station Gateway?
When, if ever, would you forsee the unspecified “other projects” resulting in on-the-ground improvements?
Is the objective to go round and round in circles putting on a pretence of pursuing sustainable travel projects, and spending millions of pounds on them, before inevitably abandoning them without delivering anything of value?
Being Honest
Politicians don’t want to be seen as overtly anti-sustainable transport.
Being honest, though, if an MP is in favour of sustainable transport in theory but not in practice, that is indistinguishable from being against sustainable transport.
People Who Want a Cycle Network in Theory but not in Practice
Mr Jones is now a member of the People Who Want a Cycle Network in Theory but not in Practice club.
- don’t do it here – build it over there
- not now – later
- not this design – I want to keep all the space for cars
- not this scheme – a different, unspecified, one (which I probably also will not support when it comes to the crunch)
Who knows what he really believes, if anything?
Given the 180 degree about-turn from June to August, he must have been told what to think, possibly by his neighbour in Richmond.