The blog entry entitled "Time to Go" has been taken down for review.
It is not the intention of this site to display any inaccurate material.
Cllr Martin Curtis's response has also now been removed.
W.
Wednesday 23 April 2008
Monday 14 April 2008
Ostriches
A strange snippet appeared in the Cambridge Evening News on 22.03.08. Hidden in the middle of an article about Cambourne was the startling line:- "the proposed carbon neutral developments in Cambridgeshire are at Mepal, Mereham, Hanley Grange, Alconbury, Six Mile Bottom and Denny St Francis, near Waterbeach."
The Government has tasked every County Council to identify sites to build new 'carbon neutral' towns. When Cambs County Council proposed Mereham, the ensuing fuss was heard a long way around.
But when did Mepal get sneaked onto the list, and why was no-one told ?
Despite falling within the jurisdiction of the neighbouring District Council, Mepal is less than 5 miles from Chatteris and shares parish boundaries. A new town with a target population of 20,000 would certainly effect Chatteris, and the Town Council should be have been consulted before Mepal was ever added to the list.
It seems to me that the Chatteris Town Council should be taking an active interest in this matter, as should the County Councillors for Chatteris.
Walt
Note: When the Government finally published the shortlist, the only Cambridgeshire site selected was Hanley Grange.
The Government has tasked every County Council to identify sites to build new 'carbon neutral' towns. When Cambs County Council proposed Mereham, the ensuing fuss was heard a long way around.
But when did Mepal get sneaked onto the list, and why was no-one told ?
Despite falling within the jurisdiction of the neighbouring District Council, Mepal is less than 5 miles from Chatteris and shares parish boundaries. A new town with a target population of 20,000 would certainly effect Chatteris, and the Town Council should be have been consulted before Mepal was ever added to the list.
It seems to me that the Chatteris Town Council should be taking an active interest in this matter, as should the County Councillors for Chatteris.
Walt
Note: When the Government finally published the shortlist, the only Cambridgeshire site selected was Hanley Grange.
Monday 7 April 2008
Old Dogs ? New Tricks ?
I'm currently considering whether to take legal advice on suing the 'Cambs Times' for compensation for injuries suffered due to my falling off my chair laughing ! Posting the story "It's 'back to school' time for 40 councillors" on their web site without an accompanying health warning must surely be negligent ?
The steam rising from the collective heads of our worthy councillors on learning that they are going to be taught to be better councillors must be equivalent to the power output of your average Fenland windturbine !
Fenland is judged one of the very most deprived districts in the country, by almost every available social, economic or welfare indicator. It is clear to me that our district and county councillors "could and should do better" ! Many appear to fail to realise that it is both their job, and their duty, to fight for improvements. Being a district or county councillor shouldn't merely be a well paid sinecure.
I welcome any efforts at improvement, but wonder whether Fenland can be rescued by trying to re-educating its current crop of councillors. I tend to believe we would all be best served by sacking the lot and starting again with a new batch of younger, brighter, more energetic councillors, drawn from a wider range of life and experience.
Walter
The steam rising from the collective heads of our worthy councillors on learning that they are going to be taught to be better councillors must be equivalent to the power output of your average Fenland windturbine !
Fenland is judged one of the very most deprived districts in the country, by almost every available social, economic or welfare indicator. It is clear to me that our district and county councillors "could and should do better" ! Many appear to fail to realise that it is both their job, and their duty, to fight for improvements. Being a district or county councillor shouldn't merely be a well paid sinecure.
I welcome any efforts at improvement, but wonder whether Fenland can be rescued by trying to re-educating its current crop of councillors. I tend to believe we would all be best served by sacking the lot and starting again with a new batch of younger, brighter, more energetic councillors, drawn from a wider range of life and experience.
Walter
Monday 31 March 2008
Council of the Year ? No Chance !
A fortnight ago FDC failed to win the prestigious “Council of the Year award”. They were similarly thwarted in “Most Improved Council” category. One wonders if the judges perhaps visited Fenland to judge FDC’s real performance for themselves.
Over the last couple of years FDC have displayed an obsession with entering for any, and every, award going. In polite circles this is called ‘spin’. Wags have even asked if FDC will be lobbying for the creation of a prestigious ‘Council with the best anagram of their name’ award, in which they would surely be leading contenders, as ‘Fenland District Council’ rearranges itself nicely into ‘Conflict Ridden Lunatics’.
I ask myself if I really am fortunate to live somewhere blessed by the benevolent stewardship of a potential ‘ Council of the Year’ contender, when I consider FDC’s:-
* Inability to include satisfactory road safety measures within the Planning Process they administer,
* Whole hearted embrace of Wind Turbines, irrespective of suitability of location,
* Lack of endeavour to develop public access to our unique waterways,
* Failure to try to secure any of the huge pot of money available through SUSTRANS - which could have gone toward providing safe cycle routes in the District, for use by residents and tourists,
* Chronic failure for over a decade to ensure civic improvements to accompany new houses.
Chatteris must surely be the most deprived of the Fenland Towns with:-
* No Public leisure or fitness facilities,
* No Public Swimming Pool,
* Nowhere for kids to kick a ball around without getting muddy feet,
* No public tennis courts,
* No all-weather pitch for our children’s teams to practice and play on,
* Nowhere suitable for teenagers to informally meet,
* Little or no toddler play equipment within a convenient, toddler length walk of their home,
* No effort to promote and encourage the economic well being of the shopping centre,
* Insufficient accessible Public transport,
* Minimal interest in helping make roads safe for cyclists or pedestrians,
* Less public green space that the national average, or recommended minimum level, let alone a country park.
Chatteris appears to be the ‘lost world’ of the District. FDC seems happy to ‘flog off’ the Town’s assets’ but refuses to commit to reinvesting the money back into the town.
And for over 30 years Chatteris has been helping finance the leisure facilities in the other Fenland Towns which are inaccessible to Chatteris residents!
Surely the well being of the District is the ultimate measure of a council’s performance ? Some might argue that this is a more important criteria than, for example, a complaint system which invariably clears FDC of ever making a mistake, and unfailingly boosts their own customer satisfaction rating surveys.
Walt
Over the last couple of years FDC have displayed an obsession with entering for any, and every, award going. In polite circles this is called ‘spin’. Wags have even asked if FDC will be lobbying for the creation of a prestigious ‘Council with the best anagram of their name’ award, in which they would surely be leading contenders, as ‘Fenland District Council’ rearranges itself nicely into ‘Conflict Ridden Lunatics’.
I ask myself if I really am fortunate to live somewhere blessed by the benevolent stewardship of a potential ‘ Council of the Year’ contender, when I consider FDC’s:-
* Inability to include satisfactory road safety measures within the Planning Process they administer,
* Whole hearted embrace of Wind Turbines, irrespective of suitability of location,
* Lack of endeavour to develop public access to our unique waterways,
* Failure to try to secure any of the huge pot of money available through SUSTRANS - which could have gone toward providing safe cycle routes in the District, for use by residents and tourists,
* Chronic failure for over a decade to ensure civic improvements to accompany new houses.
Chatteris must surely be the most deprived of the Fenland Towns with:-
* No Public leisure or fitness facilities,
* No Public Swimming Pool,
* Nowhere for kids to kick a ball around without getting muddy feet,
* No public tennis courts,
* No all-weather pitch for our children’s teams to practice and play on,
* Nowhere suitable for teenagers to informally meet,
* Little or no toddler play equipment within a convenient, toddler length walk of their home,
* No effort to promote and encourage the economic well being of the shopping centre,
* Insufficient accessible Public transport,
* Minimal interest in helping make roads safe for cyclists or pedestrians,
* Less public green space that the national average, or recommended minimum level, let alone a country park.
Chatteris appears to be the ‘lost world’ of the District. FDC seems happy to ‘flog off’ the Town’s assets’ but refuses to commit to reinvesting the money back into the town.
And for over 30 years Chatteris has been helping finance the leisure facilities in the other Fenland Towns which are inaccessible to Chatteris residents!
Surely the well being of the District is the ultimate measure of a council’s performance ? Some might argue that this is a more important criteria than, for example, a complaint system which invariably clears FDC of ever making a mistake, and unfailingly boosts their own customer satisfaction rating surveys.
Walt
Thursday 27 March 2008
DEATH IN FENLAND
Only a couple of hours after it was first posted, a Cambs Times poll asking “do you believe enough is done to promote road safety in Fenland ?” showed 20% voting “YES” and 80% thinking that the County Council’s record was simply not up to scratch
Hardly a ringing endorsement of Shire Hall, but I wonder who the 20% are who appear unconcerned about people dying, but none the less have taken the trouble to reply to a newspaper poll.
I’ve discussed Fenland Road safety (or lack of) with literally hundreds of people in the last few years. There are certainly a handfull (mainly councillors) who have said to me “people have always driven into the dikes, so why change it now ?”. But in my straw poll they have never amounted to anything likely to be even approaching 20% of a public opinion poll.
Last week Graham Chappell’s eloquent letter to the Cambs Times suggested the breathtakingly engaging idea of legal action against the Authorities for “Corporate Manslaughter” !
When I read the letter, I wondered if this suggestion of long overdue legal action for manslaughter might finally concentrate County Council’s attention on preventing unnecessary deaths on our roads.
Are the early results of the Cambs Times poll truly representative of the broad swage of Fenland opinion ? Or was the polling population largely constituted of the County Council and its Members scurrying in a panic to their computers ?
Walt.
Hardly a ringing endorsement of Shire Hall, but I wonder who the 20% are who appear unconcerned about people dying, but none the less have taken the trouble to reply to a newspaper poll.
I’ve discussed Fenland Road safety (or lack of) with literally hundreds of people in the last few years. There are certainly a handfull (mainly councillors) who have said to me “people have always driven into the dikes, so why change it now ?”. But in my straw poll they have never amounted to anything likely to be even approaching 20% of a public opinion poll.
Last week Graham Chappell’s eloquent letter to the Cambs Times suggested the breathtakingly engaging idea of legal action against the Authorities for “Corporate Manslaughter” !
When I read the letter, I wondered if this suggestion of long overdue legal action for manslaughter might finally concentrate County Council’s attention on preventing unnecessary deaths on our roads.
Are the early results of the Cambs Times poll truly representative of the broad swage of Fenland opinion ? Or was the polling population largely constituted of the County Council and its Members scurrying in a panic to their computers ?
Walt.
Here’s looking at you...
I’d like to join Chris Howes, 'Dame' Christine Colbert and Friends, in extending to Ed Bryce our very best wishes for success in his new job and happiness in his new home in Cambridge.
('Seeing as' we understand you will be working in Vision Express - we'll clearly be seeing you in future!)
Chatteris'll miss you.
All the best
Walt, C & C et al
('Seeing as' we understand you will be working in Vision Express - we'll clearly be seeing you in future!)
Chatteris'll miss you.
All the best
Walt, C & C et al
Friday 21 March 2008
WHAT PRICE FENLAND LIVES ?
Cambridge News 12 March 2008 "More than £8 million is to be spent to make St Neots cleaner and safer."
Have you every asked yourself why nothing seems to be spent on Fenland?
Visit most Cambridgeshire towns and it's clear that lots of public money is spent on things that are needed. However meanwhile, Fenland is left year after year with poor and frequently dangerous roads, a lack of adequate public leisure facilities and town centres that would clearly benefit from investment.
Why does Fenland continually fail to attract investment?
It seems that St Neots is about to receive huge amounts of public money due to its town centre problems from vehicle exhausts. Plans are for a whopping £8 million to be spent co-ordinating traffic lights to improve the flow of vehicles and on improvements to pedestrian and cycling facilities.
What could we do with £8million in Fenland ?
For a start we could do something about the 40ft road. A couple of years ago County Council said that it would cost £750,000 to sheet-pile the bank. A similar amount to make the 16 foot road safer would amount to £1.5 million.
And how about pedestrian safety in Fenland ? Or any kind of cycling facilities at all ? It would obviously be very nice if residents could cycle to work or the shops in safety, and we were all able to let our children out on their bikes for leisure or to cycle to school without worrying if they might come to grief. Fenland is also a natural haven for cyclists and it would be a delight to be able to cycle from one community to another, or just cycle for pleasure. Think of all that enjoyable exercise and the natural beauty of the Fens to enjoy, and think about the potential for fewer cars on the roads.
A few million would go a long way to providing cycleways,.
And there are many places in Fenland where safe road crossing places are desperately needed. Many residents of Chatteris drive into town from Doddington Road rather than run the gauntlet of the A141/A142 roundabout. And any morning, or after school, you can see numbers of youngsters or mothers with pushchairs and toddlers teetering on the kerb waiting for a gap in the roaring traffic, so they can get into town, or home again.
This situation is intollerable! The recently built Fordham by pass has a pedestrian and cycle fly over link to Soham, and the new Thorney by-pass has a similar link which seems to be little used at all. But in Chatteris, where two major roads converge, there is a complete absence of attention to public safety. You have to ask yourself why?
Fenlanders, just as much as any other residents of Cambridgeshire, deserve money to be spent on them!
We need safety on roads and the ability to walk or cycle about in safety and with pleasure, just as much as anyone else!
Could the problem by any chance be down to the fact that all of Fenland is represented exclusively by Tory County Councillors? Tory Councillors who are ineffectual and apparently don't wish to upset their ruling Tory colleagues at County Hall by asking for any money to be spent in Fenland!
Let's face it, the sitting Tory Councillors haven't even been able to persuade their colleagues to stick to their promise for a roundabout at the Goosetree junction.
What ARE the local Tories doing for you?
Have you every asked yourself why nothing seems to be spent on Fenland?
Visit most Cambridgeshire towns and it's clear that lots of public money is spent on things that are needed. However meanwhile, Fenland is left year after year with poor and frequently dangerous roads, a lack of adequate public leisure facilities and town centres that would clearly benefit from investment.
Why does Fenland continually fail to attract investment?
It seems that St Neots is about to receive huge amounts of public money due to its town centre problems from vehicle exhausts. Plans are for a whopping £8 million to be spent co-ordinating traffic lights to improve the flow of vehicles and on improvements to pedestrian and cycling facilities.
What could we do with £8million in Fenland ?
For a start we could do something about the 40ft road. A couple of years ago County Council said that it would cost £750,000 to sheet-pile the bank. A similar amount to make the 16 foot road safer would amount to £1.5 million.
And how about pedestrian safety in Fenland ? Or any kind of cycling facilities at all ? It would obviously be very nice if residents could cycle to work or the shops in safety, and we were all able to let our children out on their bikes for leisure or to cycle to school without worrying if they might come to grief. Fenland is also a natural haven for cyclists and it would be a delight to be able to cycle from one community to another, or just cycle for pleasure. Think of all that enjoyable exercise and the natural beauty of the Fens to enjoy, and think about the potential for fewer cars on the roads.
A few million would go a long way to providing cycleways,.
And there are many places in Fenland where safe road crossing places are desperately needed. Many residents of Chatteris drive into town from Doddington Road rather than run the gauntlet of the A141/A142 roundabout. And any morning, or after school, you can see numbers of youngsters or mothers with pushchairs and toddlers teetering on the kerb waiting for a gap in the roaring traffic, so they can get into town, or home again.
This situation is intollerable! The recently built Fordham by pass has a pedestrian and cycle fly over link to Soham, and the new Thorney by-pass has a similar link which seems to be little used at all. But in Chatteris, where two major roads converge, there is a complete absence of attention to public safety. You have to ask yourself why?
Fenlanders, just as much as any other residents of Cambridgeshire, deserve money to be spent on them!
We need safety on roads and the ability to walk or cycle about in safety and with pleasure, just as much as anyone else!
Could the problem by any chance be down to the fact that all of Fenland is represented exclusively by Tory County Councillors? Tory Councillors who are ineffectual and apparently don't wish to upset their ruling Tory colleagues at County Hall by asking for any money to be spent in Fenland!
Let's face it, the sitting Tory Councillors haven't even been able to persuade their colleagues to stick to their promise for a roundabout at the Goosetree junction.
What ARE the local Tories doing for you?
Thursday 13 March 2008
DEMOCRACY IN ACTION
In May '07 the Wenneye Ward of Chatteris elected Ed Bryce as one of its 3 members of the Town Council. One of Chatteris's youngest ever councillors, Ed was a breath of fresh air, but unfortunately circumstances conspired to prevent Ed being about to attend as he would have liked, with the result that his seat has now been vacated.
The May '07 election saw a spirited and exciting battle between Chatteris's two significant political parties, with many issues aired and debated. But once the dust had settled, the two parties settled down together and got on with the business of Chatteris, (ably chaired by the sole independent councillor, our Mayor Sue Elam).
At the news of the vacancy the 2 parties discussed whether Chatteris needed to bear the cost of a by-election so soon after the regular scheduled elections, and in an exemplary example of 'cross party politics' both parties agreed not to call an election themselves, preferring to co-opt a an mutually acceptable replacement. There were after all 12 candidates from the May '07 election who failed to be elected, and the opportunity existed to look amongst this group.
However, news then came that someone had exercised their democratic right to call for a by-election in Wenneye. Speculation was rife as to who called it. It was even a mystery to the some time branch chairman of the nearly defunct Chatteris Labour group.
I can exclusively reveal that the by-election was petitioned for by a group seemingly led by former labour councillor David Biggs. This is something of a surprise as Mr Biggs didn't exactly distinguish himself when he stood unsuccessfully for re-election for the Birch ward of Chatteris in the May '07 elections. On that occasion he produced what is probably the least literate and certainly the most irrelevant election literature it has ever been my pleasure to chuckle over.
David Biggs clearly failed to 'connect' with the electorate and polled just 5.5% of the Town Council vote. He faired little better in his bid for the District Council seat, winning less than 9% of the vote cast between the 3 candidates. In fact I would say that his sole achievement by standing for Labour in the District election was to secure a narrow win for the sitting Conservative councillor Alan Melton, cushioning Mr Melton from a spirited and close run challenge by Lib Dem Christine Colbert. The unsuccessful Mr Biggs has rarely been seen in Chatteris since.
After 4 years experience of Mr Biggs as their town councillor, the good people of Birch ward clearly didn't feel inclined to renew his mandate.
Since Mr Biggs is clearly heavily involved in calling the Wenneye by-election, one can assume he's planning to stand for the seat himself. The burning question now remains whether Wenneye ward will forgive former councillor Biggs for bringing about the significant cost of the by-election and return him with a rousing majority ? Will he do any better than he did (or didn't) in Birch ? Can he do any worse ?
Walt
The May '07 election saw a spirited and exciting battle between Chatteris's two significant political parties, with many issues aired and debated. But once the dust had settled, the two parties settled down together and got on with the business of Chatteris, (ably chaired by the sole independent councillor, our Mayor Sue Elam).
At the news of the vacancy the 2 parties discussed whether Chatteris needed to bear the cost of a by-election so soon after the regular scheduled elections, and in an exemplary example of 'cross party politics' both parties agreed not to call an election themselves, preferring to co-opt a an mutually acceptable replacement. There were after all 12 candidates from the May '07 election who failed to be elected, and the opportunity existed to look amongst this group.
However, news then came that someone had exercised their democratic right to call for a by-election in Wenneye. Speculation was rife as to who called it. It was even a mystery to the some time branch chairman of the nearly defunct Chatteris Labour group.
I can exclusively reveal that the by-election was petitioned for by a group seemingly led by former labour councillor David Biggs. This is something of a surprise as Mr Biggs didn't exactly distinguish himself when he stood unsuccessfully for re-election for the Birch ward of Chatteris in the May '07 elections. On that occasion he produced what is probably the least literate and certainly the most irrelevant election literature it has ever been my pleasure to chuckle over.
David Biggs clearly failed to 'connect' with the electorate and polled just 5.5% of the Town Council vote. He faired little better in his bid for the District Council seat, winning less than 9% of the vote cast between the 3 candidates. In fact I would say that his sole achievement by standing for Labour in the District election was to secure a narrow win for the sitting Conservative councillor Alan Melton, cushioning Mr Melton from a spirited and close run challenge by Lib Dem Christine Colbert. The unsuccessful Mr Biggs has rarely been seen in Chatteris since.
After 4 years experience of Mr Biggs as their town councillor, the good people of Birch ward clearly didn't feel inclined to renew his mandate.
Since Mr Biggs is clearly heavily involved in calling the Wenneye by-election, one can assume he's planning to stand for the seat himself. The burning question now remains whether Wenneye ward will forgive former councillor Biggs for bringing about the significant cost of the by-election and return him with a rousing majority ? Will he do any better than he did (or didn't) in Birch ? Can he do any worse ?
Walt
Saturday 1 March 2008
READ ALL ABOUT IT !
Chatteris Town Council has launched its official web site !
Now you can read the minutes and judge for yourself the validity of my observations on the proceedings.
Enter " http://www.eastspace.net/chatteris-council/ " or click on the link top left of this page.
Now you can read the minutes and judge for yourself the validity of my observations on the proceedings.
Enter " http://www.eastspace.net/chatteris-council/ " or click on the link top left of this page.
Saturday 16 February 2008
THREATENING SOUND AND FURY, BUT ACHIEVING NOTHING !
There’s a meeting of FDC Standards Committee on Monday 18th February.
Anyone is welcome to attend, but if you do go expecting to see justice in action - don’t be disappointed if you are asked to leave before the juicy bits start. According to the published agenda, Item No. 6 requires the exclusion of the Public and Press. Why ?
It could well be that this deals with a case against a local councillor which first hit the headlines in December 2006, and continued to create column inches in the local press through the beginning of 2007. Surely if whatever lead to the complaint was in the papers, any investigation, even if only quasi judicial, about that complaint should similarly be public ?
The Standards Board of England insist that their role is to promote “Confidence in Local Democracy”. I can’t see that any of this promotes confidence in anything. There’s one case patiently still waiting for investigation by FDC which allegedly was first reported in September 06, sent to FDC early in ‘07, an officer started to investigate it, but then suddenly left the authority in March 07. It would appear to have languished, forgotten ever since then.
Mind you, even if a case gets to a hearing, it’s not justice in the manner we expect. Last time FDC held a standards hearing, new and uncorroborated ‘evidence’ was unexpectedly produced on the day, the case was immediately dropped, but under scrutiny the ‘evidence’ didn’t hold up.
The problem may be that the Standards Committee doesn’t follow the principals of common law as we understand them. Cllr Howes has been attacked before in the papers by senior councillors (and their associates) as a serial complainer. His complaint is that when something wrong happens - like for example a private company claiming public land in March - the Standards Committee appears to serve to protect the perpetrator, not establish the truth.
Walt
Anyone is welcome to attend, but if you do go expecting to see justice in action - don’t be disappointed if you are asked to leave before the juicy bits start. According to the published agenda, Item No. 6 requires the exclusion of the Public and Press. Why ?
It could well be that this deals with a case against a local councillor which first hit the headlines in December 2006, and continued to create column inches in the local press through the beginning of 2007. Surely if whatever lead to the complaint was in the papers, any investigation, even if only quasi judicial, about that complaint should similarly be public ?
The Standards Board of England insist that their role is to promote “Confidence in Local Democracy”. I can’t see that any of this promotes confidence in anything. There’s one case patiently still waiting for investigation by FDC which allegedly was first reported in September 06, sent to FDC early in ‘07, an officer started to investigate it, but then suddenly left the authority in March 07. It would appear to have languished, forgotten ever since then.
Mind you, even if a case gets to a hearing, it’s not justice in the manner we expect. Last time FDC held a standards hearing, new and uncorroborated ‘evidence’ was unexpectedly produced on the day, the case was immediately dropped, but under scrutiny the ‘evidence’ didn’t hold up.
The problem may be that the Standards Committee doesn’t follow the principals of common law as we understand them. Cllr Howes has been attacked before in the papers by senior councillors (and their associates) as a serial complainer. His complaint is that when something wrong happens - like for example a private company claiming public land in March - the Standards Committee appears to serve to protect the perpetrator, not establish the truth.
Walt
Thursday 7 February 2008
MORE TEA VICAR ?
Email received from Chris Howes:
Following your invitation, I am writing to say how Sunday’s Civic Service went.
In two words - very well ! Christine and I were both very pleased that Council and Church had healed the apparent rift of the failed F.D.C. Civic Service a couple of years ago. Good on the Mayor - rebuilding bridges is part of her job. And good on the Church too.
The congregation ws representative of many parts of the Chatteris community, together with a number of local dignitaries including our retiring M.P. Many of the dignitaries were sporting their Chain of Office, whilst Mr Moss was wearing a gabardine mac. Christine and I had no problem with this apparel, but clearly this was not the view of everyone as I did overhear a disparaging remark about ‘raincoats’ and ‘flashers’. Thoughts return to Michael Foot’s choice of coat in the 1980s.
After a Civic Service, it is customary for guests to attend a reception and engage in polite conversation. You may wonder if this might be tedious, but be assured that in light of the Mayor’s Consort’s skill in making cakes, this was a absolute pleasure. Behold Brian, the ‘Mr Kipling’ of Chatteris.....
Imagine my surprise when my munching was interrupted by our MP Malcolm bouncing straight over to me. On the assumption that I am Walter, (if you follow my meaning) he complimented me on “tricking him into commenting on the blog”, and assured me that he “wouldn’t be doing it again” ! Then, rather abruptly, he enquired if I was going to be the LibDem parliamentary candidate for the next election. This thought had never crossed my mind before Malcolm mentioned it. But with Mr Moss’s apparent recommendation behind me - perhaps I should take the notion seriously ! .
Slightly flabbergasted, I endeavoured to continue the conversation in a manner slightly more akin to the normal polite chit-chat appropriate to church rooms.
“Tell me Mr Moss” I asked, “are you looking forward to your retirement, or do you think you’ll miss the Commons ?”
“20 years is quite enough” Malcolm replied.
“Do you have any plans for your retirement” I continued, “for example, where we previously lived, our last MP, the former Member for Huntingdon, has recently published a book on cricket”
“Really ?”
“Yes,” and I added “he was called John Major !”
Oh how fickle is the memory of a Tory backbencher.
Malcolm Moss is starting to grow on me. One thing is for certain though, our next M.P., whoever it may be, is going to be a different cup of tea. Should I take Malcolm up on his suggestion .... ?
Chris Howes
EDITORS NOTE: This blog accepts contributions from a variety of sources. Any one is welcome to send copy, and all contributions will be considered. Walt.
Following your invitation, I am writing to say how Sunday’s Civic Service went.
In two words - very well ! Christine and I were both very pleased that Council and Church had healed the apparent rift of the failed F.D.C. Civic Service a couple of years ago. Good on the Mayor - rebuilding bridges is part of her job. And good on the Church too.
The congregation ws representative of many parts of the Chatteris community, together with a number of local dignitaries including our retiring M.P. Many of the dignitaries were sporting their Chain of Office, whilst Mr Moss was wearing a gabardine mac. Christine and I had no problem with this apparel, but clearly this was not the view of everyone as I did overhear a disparaging remark about ‘raincoats’ and ‘flashers’. Thoughts return to Michael Foot’s choice of coat in the 1980s.
After a Civic Service, it is customary for guests to attend a reception and engage in polite conversation. You may wonder if this might be tedious, but be assured that in light of the Mayor’s Consort’s skill in making cakes, this was a absolute pleasure. Behold Brian, the ‘Mr Kipling’ of Chatteris.....
Imagine my surprise when my munching was interrupted by our MP Malcolm bouncing straight over to me. On the assumption that I am Walter, (if you follow my meaning) he complimented me on “tricking him into commenting on the blog”, and assured me that he “wouldn’t be doing it again” ! Then, rather abruptly, he enquired if I was going to be the LibDem parliamentary candidate for the next election. This thought had never crossed my mind before Malcolm mentioned it. But with Mr Moss’s apparent recommendation behind me - perhaps I should take the notion seriously ! .
Slightly flabbergasted, I endeavoured to continue the conversation in a manner slightly more akin to the normal polite chit-chat appropriate to church rooms.
“Tell me Mr Moss” I asked, “are you looking forward to your retirement, or do you think you’ll miss the Commons ?”
“20 years is quite enough” Malcolm replied.
“Do you have any plans for your retirement” I continued, “for example, where we previously lived, our last MP, the former Member for Huntingdon, has recently published a book on cricket”
“Really ?”
“Yes,” and I added “he was called John Major !”
Oh how fickle is the memory of a Tory backbencher.
Malcolm Moss is starting to grow on me. One thing is for certain though, our next M.P., whoever it may be, is going to be a different cup of tea. Should I take Malcolm up on his suggestion .... ?
Chris Howes
EDITORS NOTE: This blog accepts contributions from a variety of sources. Any one is welcome to send copy, and all contributions will be considered. Walt.
Sunday 20 January 2008
‘ACTION MAN’ (probably) SELECTED
There is a woeful dearth of information currently available on line about the results of North East Cambs Constituency Conservative Party’s selection of their new parliamentary candidate yesterday.
conservativebone.blogs.com relates that it has been won by a Stephen Barclay:-
“Mr Barclay, is a cantab, rugby playing, skydiving, former army officer, a corporate lawyer and very good egg".
what’s more, the same site also tells us:-
“Two plum seats are selecting this 'Super Duper ' weekend. N E Cambridgeshire today and Maidstone and The Weald tomorrow. Steve Barclay was in the final for both and has been selected today for NE Cambs”
So why haven’t the Tories yet posted this apparently clear result on their official web site ? (N.E.Cambs don’t quite run to their own site)
Could it be that they’re waiting to see whether Mr Barclay, if also selected for Maidstone and The Weald today, will ‘jump ship’ (or leap airplane) from Fenland, before he even lands amongst us.
Since our outgoing Member, Malcolm Moss, has recently added his comments to this very blog, can I ask “Malcolm, if you happen to again be perusing this humble blog, any chance you could let us know who has been anointed your heir” ?
Walt
conservativebone.blogs.com relates that it has been won by a Stephen Barclay:-
“Mr Barclay, is a cantab, rugby playing, skydiving, former army officer, a corporate lawyer and very good egg".
what’s more, the same site also tells us:-
“Two plum seats are selecting this 'Super Duper ' weekend. N E Cambridgeshire today and Maidstone and The Weald tomorrow. Steve Barclay was in the final for both and has been selected today for NE Cambs”
So why haven’t the Tories yet posted this apparently clear result on their official web site ? (N.E.Cambs don’t quite run to their own site)
Could it be that they’re waiting to see whether Mr Barclay, if also selected for Maidstone and The Weald today, will ‘jump ship’ (or leap airplane) from Fenland, before he even lands amongst us.
Since our outgoing Member, Malcolm Moss, has recently added his comments to this very blog, can I ask “Malcolm, if you happen to again be perusing this humble blog, any chance you could let us know who has been anointed your heir” ?
Walt
Tuesday 15 January 2008
GLAD TIDINGS OF GREAT JOY !
This morning I received a four page colour newspaper extolling the virtues and achievements of my M.P. - Malcolm Moss.
It begins "Welcome to my first constituency newsletter as your Member of Parliament" Mr. Moss was first elected in 1987. Never one to rush into anything, we must all congratulate Malcolm on his alacrity in producing his first constituency news letter after 20 years in the post !
Walt.
It begins "Welcome to my first constituency newsletter as your Member of Parliament" Mr. Moss was first elected in 1987. Never one to rush into anything, we must all congratulate Malcolm on his alacrity in producing his first constituency news letter after 20 years in the post !
Walt.
Monday 14 January 2008
Bad habits and camels
In a surprising but encouraging twist of fate, Chatteris Town Council and Fenland District are working together in partnership to put on a major Chatteris event in 2008. A medieval weekend is being planned on 4/5/6th July, with a school’s living history encampment on the Friday, historic lifestyle and combat reenactments and a fayre, over the weekend. As you read this,a variety of other Town events are hopefully being planned.
The Town Council group forming their half of the partnership with FDC is lead by Chris Howes, who allegedly could be seen on the occasion in December of the ‘turning on of the christmas lights’, dressed as a Monk, and handing out promotional flyers for the event, dashingly assisted by Christine.
Chris reports, tongue in cheek (I hope), a predicament facing a recent partners meeting:
“Our event stewards need to be easily identifiable”
“Couldn’t we dress in a medieval theme ?”
“Health & Safety Regulations demand ‘High Visibility clothing’ “
“So why don’t we get high viz. monks habits !”
It puts you in mind of the words of the late, great, Alec Issigonis
"A camel is a horse designed by committee."
Walt.
The Town Council group forming their half of the partnership with FDC is lead by Chris Howes, who allegedly could be seen on the occasion in December of the ‘turning on of the christmas lights’, dressed as a Monk, and handing out promotional flyers for the event, dashingly assisted by Christine.
Chris reports, tongue in cheek (I hope), a predicament facing a recent partners meeting:
“Our event stewards need to be easily identifiable”
“Couldn’t we dress in a medieval theme ?”
“Health & Safety Regulations demand ‘High Visibility clothing’ “
“So why don’t we get high viz. monks habits !”
It puts you in mind of the words of the late, great, Alec Issigonis
"A camel is a horse designed by committee."
Walt.
Sunday 13 January 2008
THE MOUSE THAT ROARED
I was recently invited by a reader to provide an update on the Town Council’s endeavours to provide a leisure centre.
Until last week there appeared little to update. Having first undertaken a survey which revealed what everyone already knew - we haven’t got a leisure centre but all want one, the Town Council commissioned architects to undertake a feasibility study on providing an all-weather pitch and fitness facility at Cromwell Community College. This initiative was immediately derailed by the announcement that Cromwell was to receive £millions under the BSF initiative (building schools for the future). No serious planning could be undertaken until plans for a revitalised school were finalised.
But last week a truly remarkable and commendable letter was sent from the Town Council to the District Council. I have reproduced the agenda item and part of that letter:-
1) A letter has been received from District Councillor Garratt (FDC portfolio holder for Leisure) following his visit to the meeting held on 8th November 2007.
2) In the view of your officers, the letter and tenor of his remarks when he attended the Town Council are contemptuous of the Council’s aims and dismissive of the efforts made to date in trying to fill the void in leisure service provision in Chatteris which is the true responsibility of his own council.
3) (we reply expressing) .... this Council’s disenchantment with the abysmal failure of FDC to become actively involved in the provision of leisure facilities in Chatteris, despite the current stimulus of the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme.
extracts from that letter:
“The impression has been given in BSF meetings to date that FDC has little interest in managing a leisure centre in Chatteris in the same way it does in the other three towns”
“The provision of leisure facilities in Fenland and the management of the centres in Wisbech, March and Whittlesey has been the responsibility of FDC since its formation in 1974, including meeting annual operational revenue deficits. The burden of those deficits has been passed to all council tax payers in Fenland, including those in Chatteris, and now the Town Council feels entitled to ask why the District Council appears to be putting little energy into similar leisure provision in Chatteris as a fast growing town. The final paragraph of your letter “ I trust that my suggestions have been constructive and I wish the Town Council every success with developing leisure facilities in Chatteris” can be interpreted as condescending and indicates to members that you believe that the onus for the provision of such facilities in Chatteris rests solely on the town Council’s shoulders, ignoring the principal that it is FDC’s precept that includes a levy for provision of leisure services districtwide. Why all of a sudden is it the Town Council’s responsibility ?
Not particularly helpful have been comments allegedly made by Cllr Harper, as reported in the press last year, regarding the availability of money from council house sale proceeds and other development monies - “which could mean a leisure centre for Chatteris”. These remarks have only served to confuse the issue and suggest that the Leader has a different agenda and little regard for the ongoing BSF developments. If leisure facilities for Chatteris are part of the District Council plans, why has their been no real discussion with the Town Council, and why has there been little attempt to liaise at the proper level with the BSF ?”
“It is a constant source of irritation to CTC that various FDC cabinet members have attended its meetings and talked about providing leisure facilities for Chatteris - and that is all. FDC is responsible for provision of the leisure service within the district and to date has provided no tangible evidence, other than rhetoric, of its desire to deliver these services to Chatteris. Even now, with the advent of the BSF programme, FDC is standing on the sidelines, with no real involvement in the detailed work, as though it is nothing to do with that council. In fact CTC could be forgiven for believing that if it did not have £1 million saved towards leisure facilities in Chatteris, there would be no proposals for their provision at all.
In this respect, CTC would draw your attention to a Fenland District Council minute, of a meeting on 3 August 2000 and the subject was Leisure Management Contract Working Party (Minute 78/00). The minute reads thus:
‘”Cllr Mrs Newell stated that whilst she had no wish to prevent the Manor Leisure Centre (Whittlesey) being upgraded through the revenue contribution to Chatteris Leisure Centre being deferred for 2 years, she sought a commitment from FDC that Chatteris would not loose out. In replying Cllr Melton expressed the view that the approach being taken is sensible, and that it is till the wish of FDC that, in the fullness of time, Chatteris would have a leisure centre. He could not give an assurance that a leisure centre will open in Chatteris in 2 years time, but gave an undertaking that FDC will facilitate all means possible to raise the funding necessary to provide a leisure centre in Chatteris.”
On the face of it, that seems a pretty firm commitment - but where’s the delivery ?
Finally, CTC is of the view that, if FDC is truly earnest in its desire to provide, or at least assist in providing, leisure facilities in Chatteris, it should engage in formal and meaningful discussions with CTC, instead of standing on the sidelines “wishing us every success”.
I’m never slow to criticise Chatteris Town Council, but praise when praise is due. I must compliment the Officer in the strongest possible manner on this excellent and incisive letter. I must also acknowledge the Council’s resolve in voting to send the letter. Lets now hope that our 4 District Councillors start demanding in increasingly strident terms that FDC “pull their finger out”.
I also think that credit is due to the voice of opposition on Town Council that over the last 4 1/2 years that has battered and bludgeoned at their inactivity, so eventually achieving the position in which the small milestone of this letter which dares to hold FDc to account, could both be written, and actually sent.
Walt.
Until last week there appeared little to update. Having first undertaken a survey which revealed what everyone already knew - we haven’t got a leisure centre but all want one, the Town Council commissioned architects to undertake a feasibility study on providing an all-weather pitch and fitness facility at Cromwell Community College. This initiative was immediately derailed by the announcement that Cromwell was to receive £millions under the BSF initiative (building schools for the future). No serious planning could be undertaken until plans for a revitalised school were finalised.
But last week a truly remarkable and commendable letter was sent from the Town Council to the District Council. I have reproduced the agenda item and part of that letter:-
Agenda Item 9, Chatteris Town Council, 08.01.08 Leisure Facilities
1) A letter has been received from District Councillor Garratt (FDC portfolio holder for Leisure) following his visit to the meeting held on 8th November 2007.
2) In the view of your officers, the letter and tenor of his remarks when he attended the Town Council are contemptuous of the Council’s aims and dismissive of the efforts made to date in trying to fill the void in leisure service provision in Chatteris which is the true responsibility of his own council.
3) (we reply expressing) .... this Council’s disenchantment with the abysmal failure of FDC to become actively involved in the provision of leisure facilities in Chatteris, despite the current stimulus of the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme.
extracts from that letter:
“The impression has been given in BSF meetings to date that FDC has little interest in managing a leisure centre in Chatteris in the same way it does in the other three towns”
“The provision of leisure facilities in Fenland and the management of the centres in Wisbech, March and Whittlesey has been the responsibility of FDC since its formation in 1974, including meeting annual operational revenue deficits. The burden of those deficits has been passed to all council tax payers in Fenland, including those in Chatteris, and now the Town Council feels entitled to ask why the District Council appears to be putting little energy into similar leisure provision in Chatteris as a fast growing town. The final paragraph of your letter “ I trust that my suggestions have been constructive and I wish the Town Council every success with developing leisure facilities in Chatteris” can be interpreted as condescending and indicates to members that you believe that the onus for the provision of such facilities in Chatteris rests solely on the town Council’s shoulders, ignoring the principal that it is FDC’s precept that includes a levy for provision of leisure services districtwide. Why all of a sudden is it the Town Council’s responsibility ?
Not particularly helpful have been comments allegedly made by Cllr Harper, as reported in the press last year, regarding the availability of money from council house sale proceeds and other development monies - “which could mean a leisure centre for Chatteris”. These remarks have only served to confuse the issue and suggest that the Leader has a different agenda and little regard for the ongoing BSF developments. If leisure facilities for Chatteris are part of the District Council plans, why has their been no real discussion with the Town Council, and why has there been little attempt to liaise at the proper level with the BSF ?”
“It is a constant source of irritation to CTC that various FDC cabinet members have attended its meetings and talked about providing leisure facilities for Chatteris - and that is all. FDC is responsible for provision of the leisure service within the district and to date has provided no tangible evidence, other than rhetoric, of its desire to deliver these services to Chatteris. Even now, with the advent of the BSF programme, FDC is standing on the sidelines, with no real involvement in the detailed work, as though it is nothing to do with that council. In fact CTC could be forgiven for believing that if it did not have £1 million saved towards leisure facilities in Chatteris, there would be no proposals for their provision at all.
In this respect, CTC would draw your attention to a Fenland District Council minute, of a meeting on 3 August 2000 and the subject was Leisure Management Contract Working Party (Minute 78/00). The minute reads thus:
‘”Cllr Mrs Newell stated that whilst she had no wish to prevent the Manor Leisure Centre (Whittlesey) being upgraded through the revenue contribution to Chatteris Leisure Centre being deferred for 2 years, she sought a commitment from FDC that Chatteris would not loose out. In replying Cllr Melton expressed the view that the approach being taken is sensible, and that it is till the wish of FDC that, in the fullness of time, Chatteris would have a leisure centre. He could not give an assurance that a leisure centre will open in Chatteris in 2 years time, but gave an undertaking that FDC will facilitate all means possible to raise the funding necessary to provide a leisure centre in Chatteris.”
On the face of it, that seems a pretty firm commitment - but where’s the delivery ?
Finally, CTC is of the view that, if FDC is truly earnest in its desire to provide, or at least assist in providing, leisure facilities in Chatteris, it should engage in formal and meaningful discussions with CTC, instead of standing on the sidelines “wishing us every success”.
I’m never slow to criticise Chatteris Town Council, but praise when praise is due. I must compliment the Officer in the strongest possible manner on this excellent and incisive letter. I must also acknowledge the Council’s resolve in voting to send the letter. Lets now hope that our 4 District Councillors start demanding in increasingly strident terms that FDC “pull their finger out”.
I also think that credit is due to the voice of opposition on Town Council that over the last 4 1/2 years that has battered and bludgeoned at their inactivity, so eventually achieving the position in which the small milestone of this letter which dares to hold FDc to account, could both be written, and actually sent.
Walt.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)