AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

Deputations For and Against the Severn Bridge D URING the past

24th December 1937
Page 22
Page 22, 24th December 1937 — Deputations For and Against the Severn Bridge D URING the past
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

few days two deputations have waited on the Minister of Transport in connection with the proposal to construct a bridge across the Severn, near Chepstow, one deputation consisting of representatives of local authorities and other interests in South Wales, and the West of England which support the proposal, whilst the other was representative of bodies opposed to the scheme.

The former was introduced by Alderman A. E. Meredith (Monmouth County Council), and the speakers included Mr. Rees Jeffreys, of the Roads Improvement Association. Although it was only last year that the Bill pro A34 moted to give effect to the project was rejected by Parliament, the interests represented were anxious that the scheme should again be thoroughly examined.

They were confident that such an investigation would show that previous objections to the Bill would lose much of their strength and, in support of this belief, it was instanced that Bristol and Newport Corporations, which had petitioned against the Bill, were now strongly in favour of a bridge being built.

Another point stressed was that South Wales offered great possibilities for tourist traffic, which at present was much restricted by the need for making a long detour in order to reach the west. A fact also emphasized was that the national interest, as distinct from that of South Wales, demanded the construction of this bridge to span the Severn estuary.

In support of the second deputation the Mayor of Gloucester said that there had been no change of circumstances to warrant fresh consideration of the scheme. He submitted that the bridge is not a public need, much less a national necessity. He was supported in this view by several other speakers, representing trading, commercial and navigational interests.


comments powered by Disqus