Should BCs Board make a meeting with the users of Eastway?

[Plurien]

You may be apoplectic by now about the volume of coverage this issue has received.
One thing is for sure, the users of Eastway do not feel their interests are best represented by BC, but BC has done nothing to communicate with them directly in order to allay their concerns over how it has been handling the issue of Eastway's loss.
It is proven over and over in situations of conflict and unresolved debate, that the only way to resolve and move on is to meet and to make terms.
EUG has tried this approach to BC for a meeting on many occasions, but it's only been at moments of greatest urgency for the developer that BC has been to meet with users at an open meeting (for the announcement of Rammey Marsh and just before the latest planning application closed).
So, the question is -
Should BC's board come and meet with the users of Eastway?

[Tony Bell]

No! Please, please, haven't we heard enough already about this fekkin subject...
By the way, you didn't put an option for 'I can't be ar$ed about your fekkin circuit in London'.

[mosschops]

[Flikken]

[George Gilbert]

The option I would vote for isn't there.

What I would like BC to do is whatever is in the best interests of cycling - if that's meeting with the EUG then they should meet, if that isn't meeting with the EUG then they shouldn't.

Fundamentally, I don't know enough about who the people are who are likely to be able to make a difference, for me to decide on behalf of BC.

No matter how strongly the EUG believe in themselves, or their cause, or how loudly and frequently they shout, if the EUG are just a talking shop who are unlikely to ever make any difference to what gets built then BC meeting them would take time that they could be better spending acting in the best interests of cycling.

Of course, if the EUG has channels open to the relevant people who will actually make the decision on the plans for the Eastway area, and BC do not, then BC should meet them. If this is the case though, I suspect you would be talking to those relevant people rather than wasting your time trying to talk with BC because you could be better spending *your* time acting in the best interests of cycling.

[Tony Bell]

Get over yourselves. You'll get a new circuit in the end, so what's the problem?

[stanno]

[Tony Bell]

Southern Puf fs. You'll still have a circuit. Never mind about how steep the bends are, just get on with it.

[stanno]

[KJ]

Given the response on this board to the posts about EUG perhaps the time would be better spent lobbying those who are in a postion to institute change rather than trying to elicit sympathy from us.

Those of us still interested in the building of the Velopark can follow the developments well enough on the londoncycle sport forum and the BC website.

[Lee]

What Tony said.
_________________

[Des]

Interesting comment from two the two posters who fill the board up with shite about crap bands and crap soaps
_________________
www.kentonrc.co.uk