Wednesday, 3 February 2010

Peak Rail - dissent will not be tolerated

Good to see that freedom of speech is alive and well at Peak Rail.

As may be seen from this interesting email marking the demise of the Peak Rail discussion forum on Google Groups...

To: Peak Group
Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 7:21 PM
Subject: {Peak Rail topic:551} Closure of this Discussion Group

Dear All,

Today, I mistakenly let a posting through the moderation process which would have normally been moderated out.

This was caused by me not reading to the end of the post when using my Blackberry. It was a human error. I have been instructed by Jackie and Roger to reframe from moderating any further emails to this group and to "shut it down until further notice".

I would like to take this opportunity to aploligise for allowing such an inaccurate post to be published. This is therefore the last post to the 'Google Group'. I hope you, like me, found the open and transparent debate both enjoyable and informative.

With Best Wishes,

What wickedness could the offending post have contained?

Merely this:

To return to the original topic, what is the state of completion of the various stages of the legal framework we will need to connect with NetworkRail and operate into Matlock? The December Bulletin Board firmly stated that preparation work would begin in January.

From an examination of the site it appears that a shoulder of rock on the old quarry site will need to be removed. Has the permission of the landowner been obtained?

I have obtained a copy of the letter sent by NetworkRail to our M.P. in December. He seems to have sent out a number of copies. This sets out the list of outstanding agreements which they require to have completed; it has the potential to be a complicated affair which will require a lot of hard detailed work to get through. It will not be solved by a meeting or a few letters.

NetworkRail make it plain that they will have costs which they expect to recover from us. Is there an estimate of these costs and is the money to hand?

How deeply shocking!

Surely the letter from Network Rail to Patrick McLoughlin MP is not that contentious?

NR to McLoughlin 14-12-09

Eye readers are invited to draw their own conclusions.