IN THE early 1890s Liverpool was losing trans-Atlantic trade due to commercial developments in Manchester and Southampton. Liverpool’s businessmen, along with the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board, rose to the challenge, decided what to do and planned and built Riverside Stadium in 1895.
It is a pity that our leaders today are not of the same calibre as their Victorian forebears. We lost Merseytram due to a lack of interest and lacklustre activity from councillors and MPs, businesses and others.
The only people to come out of the debacle with credit are Neil Scales, Mark Dowd, Louise Ellman and George Howarth.
Now we are losing cruise trade due to the lack of a decent cruise terminal at the Pier Head, which is just a stop-over point.
What we need in Liverpool is a Churchill to lead us – to galvanise MPs, councillors, travel authorities and business.
Once galvanised they should be constantly battering away at the closed doors of government to get the results needed to make us a world class city.
In closing I call to Liverpool to get up from its knees and stop rolling over like a whipped puppy slapped down by an anti-Liverpool government.
Keith H Shepherd, L18
Bizarre solution
YOU published a letter on Tuesday from a Mr Cunningham about the Mersey Gateway Public Inquiry, which proposes a bizarre solution to the problem, ie. don’t build a new bridge – but put tolls on the existing one to deter traffic from using it.
I must admit that there is opposition to the proposals – some who want a bridge but not where it is proposed to put it, and others who want a bridge but don’t want tolls but, apart from Mr Cunningham, I have not heard any local support for doing nothing.
The design life of a bridge differs from bridge to bridge but the problem with the present one is that it is carrying 10 times the traffic it was meant to carry. The maintenance costs and closures are increasing year by year and it is becoming a positive deterrent to businesses.
The present proposals have massive support and could it be that the lack of attendance at the proceedings reflects not opposition but general support. The “what ifs” are needless but the promise of a discount system is not wishful thinking but a commitment.
Finally, the headline “A Bridge Too Far?” seems to be the default headline for anything on the bridge and is wearing a bit thin. What about “A Bridge To The Future”? Remember that even at Rimmegen the good guys won in the end.
Cllr Tony McDermott, Leader, Halton Borough Council
EU must be joking
I REALLY must respond to Alistair Jenkins’s assertions in Thursday’s Daily Post regarding our need of the EU.
He talks about fishing policies: EU member states have been fishing what were our territorial waters almost to the point of extinction, while we had strict limits on what we could have, thus causing prices to escalate.
He mentions the Lisbon Treaty helping to reform the EU – if that were true why are several states against it? Try reading the treaty and see how many rights you're going to lose if this treaty is ever ratified.
We need EU help to control cross border crime? Most of our illegal immigrants/asylum seekers got here through people traffickers. Crime has rocketed due to this sordid trade in humanity. So how does the EU help control the pressures of the immigration we have at present – by allowing thousands to congregate on the Calais coast to try to smuggle themselves into the UK.
I suggest Mr Jenkins checks out what is really going on in the EU (that we are not being told about), after all Edward Heath once stated that the British people were too stupid to have any part in governing themselves.
The public accounts have not been signed off in the EU for over 14 years. It would make what our MPs have been up to look like child’s play – if we ever found out why the books haven't balanced for so long.
Enid Lindsay, via email
Excellent MP
I RECENTLY read with regret the news that Ben Chapman is to stand down at the next General Election.
Mr Chapman has served as an excellent constituency MP for Wirral South and it will be sad to see him go. Most people to whom I speak know somebody that has been helped by him in one way or another over the past 12 years.
Most recently, he held a debate in Parliament on the subject of Clatterbridge Centre for Oncology amid fears that its services would be moved to Liverpool. This is just a couple of months after he spoke in the House of Commons about Eastham and the numerous issues the area is facing at present. He has also worked hard to continue his campaign against the proposed closures of Wirral’s libraries and community centres such as Heswall Hall.
Despite recent events, we ought not to lose sight of the positive things – for which, I hope, Mr Chapman’s tenure will be remembered. His successor has a tough act to follow.
Helen Shepherd, Bebington
Great shame
IT IS a great shame that my MP, Ben Chapman has decided to stand down at the next election, given the hard work he has undertaken for his constituents over the past 12 years. He has been a very good representative at Westminster for his constituents and has been both professional and fully committed in carrying out his parliamentary duties.
It has been reported that Mr Chapman “deliberately over-claimed”. This is misleading. The fact that the House of Commons Fees Office sanctioned everything Mr Chapman claimed for should not be ignored. The root of any problems surely lies at the door of the Fees Office.
With MPs all over the UK deciding to stand down left, right and centre, it seems that nationally we are facing unprecedented times. As for Wirral South, I am disappointed that we will lose such a good representative.
Dot Gregg-William, Bebington
