IT is one of the most controversial projects planned for Inverness in recent years and will impact on the city for decades to come. Completing the Inverness bypass is vital if we are to tackle congestion in the city centre, stop motorists “rat running” through residential streets in Dalneigh and speed journeys between the A9 and A82. Yet the last part of the link is proving the most controversial both politically — the Scottish government’s sudden withdrawal of support has never been properly explained — and practically in terms of how the connection should be achieved.
Do we go for the most effective, but also the most expensive option, of a tunnel or high bridge to negotiate the River Ness and Caledonian Canal, or a more meandering route crossing treasured green space in Whin Park?
By Friday afternoon we will be much closer to knowing the answer. Fifteen councillors on a specially-convened Highland Council working group meet during the morning to consider results of the public consultation into the eight possible routes and choose their favourite. This will then be put to the full council which is expected to rubber stamp the recommendation.
That makes this week’s meeting one of the most important of recent times, yet no-one will be allowed in to hear the deliberations or see how their councillor votes. Working groups are not automatically open to the public and, despite its importance and the absence of any commercially sensitive information which should legitimately be considered behind closed doors, there are no plans to make an exception in this case.
When pressed on the matter yesterday senior councillor John Laing used the “that’s the way it always is” defence for this lack of transparency.
“There is nothing sinister, it is normal procedure,” he said.
But that is not good enough. Working groups are held in private because they often deal with contractual issues but in this case councillors are simply making a decision based on facts already in the public domain. It would normally be a matter for the Inverness City Committee, which does meet in public, but was hived off to speed up the process and enable the technical aspects to be considered in more detail.
With full council approval of the working group’s recommendation likely to be a formality — potentially with little debate — the public of Inverness ought to be allowed access to Friday’s meeting to witness the issue being thrashed out. People need to know what stance their local councillor takes, how much weight is given to the consultation responses and how the final decision is reached.
It is not too late for the meeting to be thrown open. At the very least the council should provide a more convincing justification for excluding the public and press than a glib “because we always do”.
