Wilful diktat

Wilful diktat

Wilful diktat

First published in Letters by

CITY of York Council has erroneously referred to “independent” expert legal advice over road closures. It is not independent when they have commissioned someone to support their viewpoint and used £11,330 of our money to pay for it.

In order to claim an independent legal opinion, the expert would have to be appointed by both sides and his/her fees paid in equal shares.

Labour say it would have been irresponsible not to seek external legal advice over traffic restrictions. Its logic is flawed. It was far more irresponsible not to seek legal advice before closing Lendal Bridge.

It was further irresponsible to do this without any consultation or discussions with residents or businesses — and to have no agreed data for analysis before and after the closures.

Imposing the restrictions without proper forethought was not a bold political initiative. It was a reckless, foolish and wilful piece of diktat which has cost this city dear in both money and reputation.

Matthew Laverack, Architect of this parish, Lord Mayors Walk, York.

Comments (4)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:11pm Sat 9 Aug 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

Score me another one!
As is so easy to do with the Causnetts, Quarries etc I knew the author here before I clicked it.

"Diktat" = Standard Laverack rhetoric. Dead giveaway :-D
Score me another one! As is so easy to do with the Causnetts, Quarries etc I knew the author here before I clicked it. "Diktat" = Standard Laverack rhetoric. Dead giveaway :-D Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 23

10:55pm Sat 9 Aug 14

Silver says...

Buzzz Light-year wrote:
Score me another one!
As is so easy to do with the Causnetts, Quarries etc I knew the author here before I clicked it.

"Diktat" = Standard Laverack rhetoric. Dead giveaway :-D
Doesn't mean he's not right though
[quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: Score me another one! As is so easy to do with the Causnetts, Quarries etc I knew the author here before I clicked it. "Diktat" = Standard Laverack rhetoric. Dead giveaway :-D[/p][/quote]Doesn't mean he's not right though Silver
  • Score: -5

11:43am Sun 10 Aug 14

strangebuttrue? says...

There was no need for any of this expenditure. All they had to do was ask the resident's of York if they wanted a bridge closing in order to create more congestion and pollution and get them wasting more of their lives sitting in the council created traffic queues.
There was no need for any of this expenditure. All they had to do was ask the resident's of York if they wanted a bridge closing in order to create more congestion and pollution and get them wasting more of their lives sitting in the council created traffic queues. strangebuttrue?
  • Score: -21

2:13pm Mon 11 Aug 14

SpinningJenny says...

Is there a limit on how many letters one person can have published in the Press per month/year? Because if so, Mr Laverack should have reached it by now.

SpinningJenny, Commenter of this Parish
Is there a limit on how many letters one person can have published in the Press per month/year? Because if so, Mr Laverack should have reached it by now. SpinningJenny, Commenter of this Parish SpinningJenny
  • Score: 6

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree