POLITICIANS in Thurrock have reacted to news that the government is pressing ahead with plans, and seeking financial support, for the controversial Lower Thames Crossing.

And a campaign group says building the crossing will "only bring five years of traffic relief at Dartford for seven years of disruption and misery."

Yesterday (Wednesday, 29 January) Thurrock Nub News reported on the announcement by chancellor Rachel Reeves that the government sees the crossing as essential to economic growth in the region.

On behalf of the ruling Labour group on Thurrock Council, its leader Cllr John Kent said: "There was much to welcome in the growth announcements from the Chancellor.

"After 14 years of a stagnating economy, it is vital that we do all we can to get the growth our country so badly needs.

"For us, here in Thurrock, we heard little that changes the situation with the proposed new Lower Thames Crossing.

"Planning consent hasn't yet been given and Thurrock Labour Group remains opposed to this crossing. We still believe, as we always have, that it would not resolve the very real problems caused by congestion at the Dartford Crossings, it would cause huge damage to our environment and ecology as well as doing little to add to the resilience of our local road network.

"We will be writing to the chancellor to reiterate our views and the views of Thurrock's residents."

Reform Cllr Alex Anderson, who represents Stanford East and Corringham Town, also commented, saying: "The announcement that Labour are committed to the disastrous Lower Thames Crossing is yet another decision that almost seems designed to worsen the living standards of working people across our borough.

"Sadly, this is becoming a pattern. Labour have removed the winter fuel allowance for thousands of Thurrock's pensioners, attacked farmers already under the cosh, and now put our health at risk by pursuing this project in an area that already sees high rates of respiratory diseases.

"The Lower Thames Crossing will scar our borough and cut it in half while doing little to remedy the problems it claims it will alleviate."

James McMurdock.

And East Thurrock's Reform MP, James McMurdock, echoed Cllr Anderson's scepticism, saying: "The Tories wasted 14 years and £800 million of taxpayers' money to create a project that will cost at least £9 billion, take five years to complete, and would still result in the QE2 bridge being 20,000 vehicles per day over max capacity after just five years of use. This is a quarter century of wasted opportunity.

"Six million tonnes of CO2. £9billion of taxpayers' money, and not even sorting out traffic jams. A mega project that doesn't even meet its own brief.

"It does not accommodate public transport, such as buses, and its benefits will be far more limited than people hope, as it does not solve capacity issues."

Campaign group Transport Action Network (TAN) is urging the chancellor to 'be wary of backing such a flawed development', saying evidence shows it would bring few benefits to the economy, would end up slowing down journeys across the wider south east, while destroying potential growth in international rail freight.

TAN also has a warning to both possible private investors and the government.

It says: "The scheme has been mis-sold by National Highways on many levels. It fails on all its scheme objectives, while costs are out of control.

"National Highways has been promising to cover the costs of low carbon construction techniques, but private investors will not be so keen on giving contractors a blank cheque.

"When the costs increase, investors will either lose money, or the government will have to bail them out, or drivers will see higher toll charges for both the LTC and Dartford. Whichever way you look at it, it's a bad deal for the public."

TAN is also warning that using private finance and tolling doesn't mean the road would be cost free to the Government, adding: "The scheme has had numerous elements stripped out to try and hide its true cost, including additional roads and junction upgrades that would be needed to make the scheme workable.

"It would still fail in its primary objective of providing long term traffic relief at Dartford."

Chris Todd.

Chris Todd, Director at Transport Action Network said: "The Lower Thames Crossing is a white elephant.

"Whoever thought it a good idea to recommend this to Rachel Reeves as a way of boosting economic growth must need their head testing.

"It fails on all its scheme objectives and will only bring five years of traffic relief at Dartford for seven years of disruption and misery."

"Whoever takes this on, whether in the public or private sectors, would be risking their reputation as well as billions of pounds.

"It's a bad deal for all concerned, including motorists who would see little benefit at Dartford and slower journeys on the M25 and elsewhere. It would encourage more HGVs onto our roads, making them less safe in the process, while undermining rail freight."

"If the chancellor wants to boost, rather than drain, the economy then she should scrap this unaffordable scheme and invest in dedicated public transport and rail freight links instead."