More importantly, how can a decision have already been made for such a major project without the completion of a full assessment of the many river crossing options and release of the details for community consideration?

We were told these would be available late last year, but that didn’t happen. Now we are being told that the documentation will be available later this year – 12 months after originally promised.

But too late, the decision’s already made. What’s left for us to comment on?

This is a travesty of public participation – a key principle of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

How can a critical piece of highway road infrastructure involving crossing of the largest river on the NSW South Coast receive less planning, design, costing, environmental assessment and community consultation than any of the other Princes Highway upgrades?

And how can the government make this decision without giving the community the opportunity to consider the arguments for and against?

The current bridges are a major traffic impediment at peak weekday and holiday periods. Where is the data to establish that the western option is the best way of getting rid of the present intersections and their associated sets of traffic lights on both sides of the river? Will there be overpasses to make this happen?

What about the strong community support for a rail crossing of the river? Gareth Ward made a commitment that this would be considered during the investigation process, but when asked about this last week, the Roads Minister said that was not a matter for him, that it was a matter for the Minister for Transport. It doesn’t sound like they’ve had much of a dialogue on this matter. And how will a bridge on the western side facilitate a rail crossing that would have to go on the eastern side? Mr Ward’s commitment is sounding a little hollow.

The most economical and most likely way of achieving a rail crossing would be to design a road bridge that could accommodate a future modification for a railway line. It stretches the imagination to see how a new bridge on the western side could accommodate this possibility.

The intersection and rail crossing issues are just two of the many questions that need to be answered before a properly considered decision can be made. It’s not just a matter of building a new bridge to replace the old one.

So, let’s have a genuine and open decision-making process which properly involves the community in resolving current and future traffic congestion problems rather than a quick-fix political decision.

T. Barratt,

Bomaderry.