Council calls on Government to rethink Melksham bypass decision

By Local Democracy Reporter Peter Davison

Someone is killed or seriously injured on a notorious stretch of the A350 roughly once every 11 weeks, a senior councillor has said, as Wiltshire Council demands the Government rethink its decision to ditch funding for the Melksham bypass.

During an emergency debate at full council on Tuesday 20th October, councillors overwhelmingly backed a motion condemning the decision and demanding continued investment in the key north-south route. They also called for the more than £500,000 the council has spent developing the scheme to be refunded.

Cllr Jon Hubbard (Independent, Melksham South) said 24 people had been killed or seriously injured on the A350 between Chippenham and Melksham over five years.

“That works out at roughly one of them every 11 weeks,” he said.

“But nobody in Melksham experiences that as an average. They experience it as a Tuesday morning, as a telephone call, as a knock on a door in Beanacre while the kettle is still on.”

He accused the Government of improving the route around Chippenham but abandoning Melksham, despite the road through the town and Beanacre being described as “substandard” in its own programme.

“This is not an affordability decision,” he said. “This is a decision about whose safety is worth protecting.”

He added, “The Government has built the funnel at Chippenham and then refused to build the bypass around Melksham.”

The debate – just 11 days after the government’s decision was announced – formally registered the council’s disappointment at the decision not to progress the bypass through the current Major Road Network programme.

It called on the Transport Secretary to provide development funding so technical, environmental and business-case work can continue, while seeking funding for interim safety and traffic measures.

Council officers were also asked to examine short, medium and long-term options for improving the A350 through Melksham and Beanacre.

Highways cabinet member Cllr Martin Smith also criticised the Department for Transport.

“Joined-up thinking, putting your money where your mouth is, emphasis on safety. These are all the things that have been sadly lacking from the Department for Transport in recent times,” he said.

He argued improvements around Chippenham risked funnelling traffic towards unresolved congestion further south.

But not everyone was convinced another council motion would achieve much.

Cllr Ian Blair-Pilling (Conservative, Avon Valley) warned councillors against “whipping ourselves up” by repeatedly passing motions and writing to ministers, calling instead for the Cabinet to decide which of Wiltshire’s road schemes were its top priorities.

The debate also widened beyond Melksham, with councillors arguing the A350 needed to be treated as a single strategic route through Wiltshire rather than improved piecemeal.

Cllr Robert Smith (Reform UK, Westbury West) called for the long-awaited Westbury bypass to be progressed, while Cllr Jane Davies (Conservative, Marlborough West) argued improvements to the A350/A36 corridor were also crucial to tackling heavy traffic through Marlborough.

Cllr Andrew Griffin (Liberal Democrat, Melksham Without West & Rural) warned that improvements around Chippenham meant traffic could simply reach Beanacre faster before coming to “a grinding stop”.

An amendment from Cllr Phil Alford (Conservative, Melksham Without North & Shurnhold) was accepted demanding the Government reimburse Wiltshire Council for the £500,000-plus it had spent developing the Melksham scheme.

The amended motion was carried by 75 votes to one, with three abstentions.