CAMPAIGNERS have welcomed a delay in making a decision on the Lower Thames Crossing but have urged the Government to scrap the £9 billion scheme.

The Government announced on Monday it has postponed a decision on whether to go ahead with the new crossing between Kent and Essex until May 23, 2025.

Transport Secretary Louise Haigh, in a written statement to Parliament, said it was "necessary" to extend the deadline for a decision as it would give more time for the application to be considered, including "any decisions made as part of the spending review".

Transport Action Network (TAN) welcomed the delay but said Ms Haigh should "use the time to examine the significant concerns with the scheme by independent experts, the local Labour MPs, and the local Labour councils in Thurrock and Gravesham".

Chris Todd, TAN's Director, said: "We hope Louise Haigh will use this breathing space to fully engage with the concerns about this outdated project. It fails on all its objectives and would provide only five years relief at Dartford, less time than it would take to build. Proceeding with it would be madness.

"The £9bn price tag is just the tip of the iceberg as National Highways has hidden the true costs of a deliverable scheme, which is already more expensive per mile than HS2. Even then it undermines all five of Labour's missions and ambitions to move freight onto rail, improve public transport and protect nature."

The group added: "Something does need to be done in this area. However, it requires a fresh approach, looking at all the transport needs of the region, not just a road crossing.

"The blinkered approach to the problems at Dartford got us into this mess in the first place."

There is considerable consensus across Thurrock that the Lower Thames Crossing project is not fit for purpose

The scheme has been in the pipeline for 15 years with £800 million of taxpayer money already spent.

A decision was due to be announced on October 4 but was delayed until Parliament resumed from recess this week.

John Kent, leader of Thurrock Council said he was concerned about the delay. He said: "

Cllr John Kent, Leader of Thurrock Council, said: "It is disappointing that a decision has been delayed, leaving a dark cloud hanging over the people of Thurrock. All the while we don't have clarity about the future of this project, home- and landowners are left in limbo when planning their futures.

"I urge the government to look quickly at all the facts. I am confident the evidence points to one clear decision, which is to scrap this costly, disruptive and unnecessary project."

South Basildon and East Thurrock MP James McMurdock condemned the government's lack of action, stating: "This is a textbook case of kicking the can down the road. After 15 years of planning and £800 million spent, we still have no clear decision. The longer the delays, the higher the costs for the taxpayer, and yet no real progress has been made." 

He particularly criticised the previous Conservative government for failing to make a final decision on the project before the general election and accused the newly elected Labour government of mishandling the situation, adding: "The Conservatives shirked their responsibility to make a decision, and now we have an inexperienced Labour government fumbling its way through decisions that will cost tens of billions of pounds.

"This project could have been justified if it truly solved the region's transport issues, but it doesn't. The delays only deepen the environmental impact and uncertainty surrounding its effectiveness." 

In closing, Mr McMurdock urged the government to ensure plans were fit for purpose and to reconsider the allocation of funds for the project and focus on more long term, sustainable transport solutions.

"The government must explore alternatives, including rail and public transport improvements, which would provide a longer-lasting solution to the region's connectivity challenges. We owe it to future generations to ensure that public funds are spent wisely, and this ongoing indecision is failing both the taxpayer and the environment."