A packed council meeting on Wednesday saw Broxtowe Councillors vote by an overwhelming majority of well over 2 to 1 in favour of the tram. The meeting had to be adjourned for 20 minutes and the police called so that a number of late-comers could be accommodated within the building, after complaining they could not hear the discussion on fly posting from outside the chamber. The fly posting debate was called at late notice and held before the tram debate. The significant number of BACIT members at the meeting said the atmosphere was very hostile, with councillors supporting the tram (even if they expressed reservations, and only did so in principle) being heckled and even abused throughout the meeting. It has been reported 300 people attended the meeting, BACIT counted about 120 in the chamber and the post reported 50 in the corridor. Further details and quotes from BACIT can be found in the local press.

The first two (above) have been used as arguments in the past by the Anti-tram groups, now they have added the third. Recently a BACIT member was fortunate enough to get involved in a conversation with an anti-tram supporter. The new anti-tram line is “bringing the tram to Chilwell will lead to obesity”. Apparently parents will not allow their children to cross the tram un-supervised to get to the park to play, this will make them fat. When they were asked if they were suggesting the parents currently allow their small children to cross a busy road and play unsupervised in a public park, they had no response. The fact is, the trams will be only every six minutes and will be driven on line of sight, therefore crossing the tram line has to be safer than crossing a busy road, this also seemed to escape them.

Last Saturday – 3 April 40 of the most acclaimed tramway experts descended on Nottingham for an officers conference of the Light Rail Transit Association (LRTA). They heard Cllr John Taylor, chair of NET and our chair Steve Barber talk on the development of a tram network. They left impressed with many hoping that other cities “will follow Nottingham’s fine example” The Editor of Tramway & Urban Transit (£2.75 from WH Smith etc.) described our city as a “Pocket of Excellence”.

Recently anti tram group BCBRA tried to reintroduce into the equation their favourite rail scheme (with the one with unfortunate acronym). The scheme uses the (apparently) disused rail line between Nottingham and Beeston and then runs on a new line on “spare” land through Attenborough and returns via North Nottingham. A number of BCBRA speakers have said this scheme is less damaging and cheaper than the proposed tram route. There are numerous reasons why this route does not stand up to scrutiny, space prevents detailing them all here. However, an item in the Post on the planned re-signalling of this length of “under used” line sums up one of the follies of this proposal, it describes part of the BCBRA route as “….the second busiest stretch of probably the most congested main rail route in the country.”

Residents on Line One of NET have been advised to take down all washing and keep all windows shut. Preserved coal fired steam tram number 0104 will run on the line on occasional days to relieve congestion. Passenger numbers on line 1 have exceeded all expectations. NET are trying to obtain more rolling stock, unfortunately Bombardier have laid off staff at Derby and are unable to build any new trams for over a year. The spare trams at Crich have trolley poles which will not work on the modern overhead system, however a steam tram is available. The specials will operate appropriately enough from Cinderhill to Phoenix Park. The tram 0104 has local connections in that it was originally built as a works engine for the construction of the Great Central Railway London Extension, part of the embankment for which is proposed to form part of NET Phase 2, the vehicle was then rebuilt as a 3ft gauge light rail engine.