I was in touch with a local rep of the Campaign to Protect Rural England this week, to find their views on the problem about the Grantham Canal crossing. (Original story here.)
I thought the CPRE might have found common cause with the Grantham Canal Society, British Waterways and the councils and other bodies working towards the canal's restoration.
Wrong.
While the CPRE attends meetings of a sub-group of the Grantham Canal Partnership, the issue of the A46 crossing hasn't even been mentioned in those meetings. As the rep said:
... presumably because the role of the sub-group (of the Partnership) is seen as protecting the wildlife/ landscape of the Canal and advising on what needs protection, rather than promoting its restoration to navigation.
... It is in an area where we were arguing strongly for the new A46 to be kept much lower than planned, and we suggested that the minor road should go over it rather than under, which would probably have solved the canal problem on the minor road but might well have created a problem where the canal goes under the A46!
Because we saw CPRE's focus as being on the overall effect on the landscape (major road on very high embankment across a pretty flat landscape) we confined our arguments to that - and failed totally to get the A46 lowered.
This suggests to me a lack of joined-up thinking on the part of CPRE - in particular to what the canal does. I suspect they see it as simply a footpath - or more likely a linear nature reserve where humans aren't welcome, afloat or otherwise.
Their motto is "Campaigning for the beauty, tranquillity and diversity of the countryside."
I wonder if the CPRE understand the benefits of having a navigable canal, not just in terms of sustainable transport, but also in terms of tranquility and diversity?
Comments