The Morecambe Bay Bridge is billed as an environmental and social good. It could bring jobs and tourism to "a desolate area" and by incorporating wave driven electricity generators it could produce renewable energy; but is the reality that simple, - is the Morecambe Bay Bridge a wonderful idea?

Some people seem to think differently and therefore took action against Lancaster Environment Centre, whose Director Bill Davies is al so Director of BABC -the company behind the project. People were leafletting around Lancaster University Campus and holding up banners in order to make sure that people understood the reasons and messages of the group.

Professor Davies came out to meet the protestors for a discussion that lasted for a whole hour during which he made it clear the had no interest in whether or not the bridge was being build and that his main concern was to provide an objective evaluation of the impact - moreover, Professor Davies said that if the bridge was to have a negative impact on the environment it would still be interesting to observe and study. He maintained that there is no conflict between his position as a Director of a company called Bridge Across the Bay Company and providing objective scientific evaluation of the environmental impact of that bridge. In defense of this position he argues that BABC is merely a preliminary activity and is not going to build any bridges, BABC merely as a consultant. So even though there is going to be no Western Bypass around Lancaster, to connect to the bridge, and despite reluctance and resistance in the local population to more roads and bridges, despite dubious scientific "evidence", CABC and Lancaster Environment Centre, both lead by Mr. Davies, are continuing to "evaluate" the bridge across Morecambe Bay.

Lancaster Environment Centre also dabbles in genetic modification (excerpt from their own website news section;  http://www.lec.lancs.ac.uk/news.htm ):

"...As well as laboratories, the new research facilities include fifteen glasshouses and ten walk-in controlled environment (CE) rooms, including high-grade containment facilities for research with genetically modified plants..."

And here is an excerpt from a corporate reporting:
 http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,3604,1220030,00.html

"...The project is promoted by a private firm led by David Brockbank, an accountant and former chair of the Lake District National Park Authority's development control committee, and includes Bill Davies, a director of Lancaster University's environment centre..."

Reasons for this action are not hard to find. While it may be true that in the short term there could indeed be some beneficial implications of the project, it is the long term implications that are central to people's concerns; in all its simplicity: more roads mean more cars mean more fossil fuel consumption and consequently a contribution to the increase of allergy, asthma and other diseases. Where do we stop? Can we keep on producing more and more, consuming more and more?

The action also brings to mind the general everyday life of the Academy. Just looking at Lancaster University you find intimate connections with all the usual suspects, such as the weapons industry (BAE Systems), Department of Defence, the oil industry, and other "kind financial supporters of knowledge production". There are few academic departments that can escape such criticism, which are by no means new. Dwight D. Eisenhower, who was a war hero and a Republican President warned "his fellow Americans" and the rest of the world in 1961 that what he called the military-industrial complex was a threat to the human kind. He expressed his concerns in terms that ought to resonate with any contemporary ear, eye and nose:

"...Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect. Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect. Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield. .." (Speech at  http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html )

The group was cheerful when it left Lancaster University in search of new moments of social disobedience and noted "Watch this space, we're on the case!!"

So maybe there is more to come already today?!?!? In any case, there are universities everywhere in the world and while a lot of good things are going on inside them, it is also within universities that environmental destruction, weapons upgrades and surveillance technology is conceptualised, so it would be of no great surprise if other universities will be paid unannounced visits by concerned citizens in the near future.