It's good to see a well balanced series of articles in the Post over the last couple of days regarding the tram. Clearly the overwhelming opinion is to get the next phase built.

I thought that tonight's opinion column was well written. I'm rather pleased with it!

Was that posted in response to the first night's articles on the 10th?

Or were you confused by the difference between what the tram promoters said was the overwhelming opinion?

Or what people's opinions said?

 

You need to look at the following night's:

But those who believe they will be adversely affected by lines to the west and south of Nottingham also want a decision so they can plan for disruption to businesses.

http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=133965&command=displayContent&sourceNode=133948&contentPK=13487588&moduleName=InternalSearch&formname=sidebarsearch

 

"The route proposed is far too destructive for our community to suffer.

"This view is backed by our MP Dr Nick Palmer, and several Broxtowe and county councillors.

"The possible small, unproven gains claimed locally would not outweigh losing the last open, green, recreational spaces; some green belt, hundreds of mature trees, businesses and people's homes. It would have a massive negative impact on many of our senior citizen's lives at Neville Sadler Court (where the tram is proposed to go right through); and Sandby, Greenwood and Richmond courts.

"All of these are in very close proximity to the proposed line and, as we know, there are already problems regarding noise and vibration along Line One....

........"Improving roads and rail and giving priority where possible to new technology buses, as is given to the tram, would greatly improve journey times with no destruction and little cost. And this can all be done now.

"This Government is right to question the ever-spiralling costs of trams. There seems to be very little proven benefit.

"Where are the assessments that prove trams solve congestion, create regeneration and improve all our lives?

"Trams are being heavily sold to us in an effort to secure the massive funding needed.

"But for what? To boost the prestige of the city centre, only? This must be stopped before millions of pounds of taxpayers' money is squandered."

http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=133965&command=displayContent&sourceNode=133948&contentPK=13481187&moduleName=InternalSearch&formname=sidebarsearch

 

So it looks like the anti-tram lobby have a new recruit. As one who believes cars purify the air and more guns lead to safer societies I'm sure your arguments will be just as highly respected. Hopefully they'll ask you to represent them at the public enquiry. That should ensure we get the tram.

Incidently not enough Broxtowe Councillors opposed the tram to vote against it, even though the anti-tram lobby disrupted the meeting so the police had to be called. Is that the way you think democracy should work?

Please read my post. I said well balanced. You quoted just the anti-tram angle. I could have quoted the pro-tram angle. However if you weigh up both articles the balance was in favour which reflects public opinion.

Please read my post.

I said:

Or were you confused by the difference between what the tram promoters said was the overwhelming opinion?

Or what people's opinions said?

 

George, we all now know how democracy works.

Labour sets out its democratic views.

And if anyone disagrees with its democratic views the police sort the problem out.

 

Next.

 

George??????

You seem confused bogush.

A Professional Opinion Poll shows over twice as many support the tram as oppose it. You seem to think the rantings of a small minority make up the majority view. They don't.

Me confused?!

A Professional Opinion Poll ?

Well, we all know what that means!

 

Asking what, exactly?

And for whom?

Care to tell us what the questions were?

 

No?

 

Thought not!

 

 

shows over twice as many support the tram as oppose it.

Were they asked:

Are you happy for a fifth of a £Billion of YOUR money to be wasted on an inflexible "transport" system.

That is going to strangle large chunks of the city for three years of construction.

And then for another 27 years.

That is going to lose £2 Million a month, despite the bus routes and roads that would have competed with it being closed down, once you account for taxpayer funding, taxation and depreciation.

When we are having to close down schools, and sports facilities and the like through lack of money.

 

No?

 

Thought not!

 

 

You seem to think the rantings of a small minority make up the majority view. They don't.

That "comment" says far more about you than it does about the "small minority".

 

 

Try looking up the questions they're on the Net, search under NET phase 2. Then perhaps you might like to re-phrase the knee-jerk rubbish posted above.

QED

Thank you for pointing me in the direction of yet more evidence that my "knee-jerk reactions" are right.

Yet again.

Again.

 

The survey was designed, as they admit to:

a specification of the two areas where interviewing was to take place

ensured that we would achieve a sample of respondents who fitted the profile of the area in terms of key demographics

data was then processed and weighted computer tabulations produced. The computer tabulations were weighted on gender, working status, age and the number of households within each sample point to ensure that the profile of the two areas was representative

 

So, they pick a couple of areas where the residents are likly to be tram users, if not tram supporters, and then make sure that they survey the tram users/supporters.

And then they weight the analysis to make sure that they take more notice of the tram users/supporters and less of the non users/supporters.

IE 77% used public transport sometimes.

71% were bus users.

 

And the questions?

 

Stuff like have you ever experienced congestion?

And most say yes.

So what?

 

Did the question say that since the council started mucking about with the roads congestion has got worse despite traffic falling so do you think it would be a good idea to let NET muck around with the roads some more?

So what does their answer tell us?

Nothing!

But it's counted as a vote for the tram!

 

They were asked if they thought traffic pollution is serious

And most did.

So what?

 

Did the question say that the health scares about "traffic" pollution are based on pollution from buses and the power stations that fuel trams and study for the NHS has reported that there are neither health nor environmental reasons for restricting car use in cities so should we have more public transport or less?

No, it didn't.

It led the interviewee to believe, wrongly, that the pollution was down to cars.

So what does the answer tell us?

Nothing, again!

 

And what on earth do questions like do you think that public transport needs to improve, or do you think trams are safe tell us?

Is a tram more like a car or a nuclear missile?

More like a car.

So "safe" then.

So what!

 

Do you think public transport is crap?

Yes.

Ooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhh

We'd better spend a third of a £BILLION on some more then!

 

Look at question 15:

Split into parts a and b:

a) Do you approve of the Clifton Line?

b) Do you approve of the Chilwell Line?

ie, it looks like you have to say which of the two you'd pick if you had to pick one out of the two.

So what does the answer tell us.

Certainly not that anyone supports the tram.

 

You're either paid to spout your crap by NET.

Or your knee-jerk reactions demonstrate you lack the basic capacity for any thought whatsoever.

Never mind independent thought!

 

Next!

 

Nicely re-phrased mr Imposter into some even bigger crap.

 

 

-------------------------------

Do you actually have a brain?

If you do:

Why not use it?