Metropolitan mobility
Sir: Tony Craig's fascinating article (5 March) on the Greater London Council Labour Party manifesto made me race back to have another look at my copy—particularly the transport section which was causing all the squabbles. 'What does the Londoner ask of the GLC?', it asks. 'First he asks more freedom to move around London, an end to road congestion and less crowded journeys to and from work.' The manifesto continues: 'New roads are essential to the well-being of us all . . . a new and efficient network of roads which will direct traffic from busy shopping streets and residential areas on to roads for motor age is being created.'
Being created ? But what about the 'bashthe-motorist, ban-the-lorry, free public transport' stuff around which Tony Craig says the arguments rage? He makes no suggestion of efficient roads being created for the well-being of us all, no new network to relieve shopping and residential areas. Could it be that Tony Craig has been looking at the
1977 manifesto, made for a London which has lost over one-third of its manufacturing industry jobs in twelve years, has traffic congestion the working day long in many areas, and is known throughout Britain as the most hostile area to efficient business .mobility ? Perhaps my confusion is simplY that I picked up a copy of the Labour GLC manifesto for 1967, and wondered what happened to our capital city in the meantime.
Andrew Warren Secretary, Movement for London, 26 Manchester Square, London W1
Previous page
