Sponsored by
Letters, Thursday, April 3, 2008
Readers write to the Times & Citizen and Bedford Today.
Our front page story last week, 'Racist slurs mar gypsy feedback', has prompted many readers to write in; most letters are featured below.
****
Council should not seek to gag residents' legitimate concerns
SIR – We are also one of the 3,100 (almost 90 per cent) sets of
respondents who have now been branded racist and sent a letter by the council. To say that we are incensed is an understatement!
We currently contribute almost 1,500 per year to the coffers of the council and were pleased to see we were to be given the opportunity to respond. Having retained a copy of our responses, we are very
comfortable with them and certain that we are not racist – all but one of our comments was clearly purely planning related and the one which is presumably at issue is about fairness not race. We know only too well that there are good and bad in all groups in society, ethnic,
religious or otherwise, and would never seek to discriminate on such grounds. We strongly suspect that a majority of the other 'racist' responses were of a similar nature.
We note that there is an overall three-line-whip for local authorities (we presume their hands are forced by the relevant legislation) to
champion the cause of gypsies and travellers and this includes regular references to the fact that on permanent sites they are registered to pay rent and council tax.
We also note that there appear to be no readily available figures for what the rates of rent or tax are, nor of the amount of tax or rent actually collected from such sites and a comparison of this to the amount requested. We can only assume that if these figures were a compelling answer to the commonly held belief that little is 'paid in' to our society by these groups, the council would have been only too keen to publish them prominently.
To be asked in the planning questionnaire if we could suggest how gypsy and traveller communities could be better involved and consulted would appear to have been a step too far for so many of the respondents. It appears very much to the silent majority in 'middle England' that the gypsy and traveller voice is already well and truly heard at all levels of government – alas many of us feel our voices are not. To be
effectively gagged by Mid Beds Council on grounds of supposed racism only serves to reinforce that view.
The council should publish all responses received, with whatever disclaimer their legal advisers consider appropriate and allow the public to make their own mind up. Where nearly 90 per cent of responses appear to be in agreement, the council should consider why such views are held and not seek to gag them.
The council website notes the response rate was 'overwhelming' and we contend the reason for this is not racism but legitimate concerns and a perceived unfairness in the determination to spend money to improve access to the benefits of our inclusive society without demanding an appropriate level of reciprocation.
Name and address supplied
****
A disgrace to democratic Britain
SIR – I am very sad to know there are so many in Mid Beds who felt it right to show their racist feelings in response to the district council's request for their views on plans to provide new pitches for travellers.
Bedford is a town renowned for generally good relations between its many different nationalities and religions, so it is especially upsetting to know that this does not extend in Mid Beds towards travellers.
Travellers stand out because they have a different lifestyle: they surely have no more criminals among them than among those who live in houses. To deny all travellers the right to pitches of their own just because they are travellers is totally misconceived, and a disgrace to democratic Britain.
Margaret Gardner
by email
****
Chickens coming home
SIR – Are we talking here about gypsies (Romanies) or travellers? Travellers are the ones who leave our councils the problem of clearing up their mess when they move on.
Gypsies have been with us for centuries and have provided much of the casual labour needed on the land. I have been on gypsy sites and found them to be of the highest standard. Over the years Mid Beds Council has refused planning consent for a number of sites bought by gypsies and spent many hundreds of thousands of pounds in High Court actions, including the closing down of the site at Hatch, for which site
retrospective approval could have been given. Was this just an excuse to close down the site to please local opinion? Was it a racist decision? Now the council has to find new sites using council taxpayers' money rather than the gypsies' own. Talk about chickens coming home.
Brian Page
Cedar Close, Ampthill
****
Protect beautiful county
SIR – I'm new to your country, moving here from Australia a few years ago. The first thing I did was get a job so I could pay my taxes.
Why is it OK for this county to accept the new age traveller just dumping rubbish under a tree complete with empty gas bottles? I have noticed new age travellers come complete with a white van so there is no reason why they can't take their own stuff to the tip. I'll tell you why they don't: it's because we let them get away with it. This
Government should take a leaf out of Australia's book because I know this wouldn't happen back home. So get some backbone, Bedford is a
beautiful place and doesn't need black bin bags and gas bottles under every second tree.
Jack Blake
by email
****
Meaning is clear
SIR – Does the council not get the message? Why write to the 3,100
people again? They may not like the words used but surely the meaning is clear!
Cliff Codona has used the word 'racist' to jump on the bandwagon of the current climate of political correctness and the obsession with recent legislation that stifles any adverse comment on any issue that involves people of different colour or creed in case anyone is offended.
I am offended by travellers parking up wherever they feel like regardless of who owns the land, leaving horses tied up on verges and then moving on leaving rubbish – and worse – for others to clean up.
We have all seen this with our own eyes – this is not stereotyping – this is real!
The council spokesman states that they would not refuse planning
permission to people just because they happen to be black or gay – well of course not, as these people generally abide by the rules and
consider the rights of the rest of the community.
Lynn Archer
by email
****
Residents are angry
SIR – I fail to understand that Mr Hustwitt is surprised that over 3,000 responses cannot be used.
It actually brings attention to the fact that residents are angry and
concerned by the proposals. I doubt that many of the respondents have ever protested to the council before and perhaps their arguments were not politically correct. But the fact these people have taken the trouble to put pen to paper shows their concern. I hope all protesters
resubmit their responses.
At least your newspaper has been able to give the figures of responses – that in itself should make Mid Beds Council concerned.
PJ Lawrence
by email
****
Majority are not stupid
SIR – To say a certain group appears to live off society rather than with society is not racist, it only implies that the majority are not blind or stupid.
I do not believe Mr Codona or the majority of travellers are criminals but it is clear that when certain travellers are about not only does crime rise but the area they choose to descend upon becomes a tip, a huge mess is invariably left for councils to clear at the taxpayers' expense.
The council should publish all the responses with a clear note that the views expressed are in their opinion racist and unjust to the poor
minority.
Bryan M Eglinton
Bedford
****
Sites may lead to friction
SIR– My wife and I received a letter from Mid Beds suggesting that our responses reference travellers might have been racist. Nothing could be further from the truth.
We both made the point that two unauthorised sites within a couple of miles might be granted 'authorised'status and upgraded with a decent level of services. Our only reservations were that further sites located too close to housing and school developments might lead to friction, which is a widely held view in the area and, probably, generally.
Mel Bass
Sand Road, Flitton
****
House gypsies at Wixams
SIR – I live in Thurleigh and am very strongly opposed to having gypsies sited at Bletsoe and will not pay my council tax if the plans go ahead.If the council is so hell-bent on giving these people a pitch, then why not include it in the Wixams project? The house building hasn't started yet and we all know how architects like to change things once their drawings have been submitted and accepted.
Dave Lewin
by email
****
Angry, you bet
SIR – Mid Beds District Council's attitude to the 3,100 public responses that it objects to is patronising and impertinent. There are real problems with travellers' sites. Angry? You bet!
Chris Thomas
by email
****
The right to a quiet life
SIR – Political correctness has gone absolutely mad at Mid Beds District Council – since when were travellers a race? Why cannot the planning objections made by council tax-paying residents be related to the right to enjoy a quiet family life. This action by Mid Beds District Council is censorship and removal of the right of free speech.
Carol Scott
by email
****
Make it fair for all
SIR – If the suggested travellers' sites are built or opened, will these people contribute by paying council tax?
It is this clarity that needs to come to the fore as I am sure most people would not mind the travellers if they paid taxes; if this is not the case, then there must be some form of fairness as it cannot be deemed to be a fair society if it is one rule for one and one for another.
Mrs S Matthews
Bedford
****
Useful dialogue
SIR – Mid Beds Council has opened a dialogue with those concerned which demonstrates common sense and consideration for the public to which it is accountable.
T Lee, Marston Moretaine
****
Wake-up call to improve security
SIR – Re: 'Fury as boy, 6, skips school (T&C, March 13).
My children also go to Goldington Green Lower School and, although it is very good in many ways, it also has its bad points, like any, and safety around the school is one of them.
I don't feel the school is as secure as it should be and have heard this is not the first time a child has fled the premises, although the last time was before the current headteacher was there.
I do not agree with what Mr Richardson said when suggesting the boy should apologise to the school for the inconvenience.
As far as I am concerned the boy should not have been able to flee the school; safety measures should be in place to prevent this happening.
After all the child was only six years old, the same age as one of my children, and the school is responsible for his welfare when he is there.
Would Mr Richardson have the same views if it was one of his children who fled the school or even worse, didn't make it home safely?
This should be a wake-up call to the school to create a more secure environment, not just to prevent children from fleeing but to prevent strangers from entering.
This incident was certainly not the child's fault.
Name and address supplied
****
Benefits of cafe society is sobering thought
SIR – When drinking times were extended, the idea of a Continental-style 'caf society' was talked about.
But did nobody realise this involved not just drinking but conversation and socialising, and that the volume of background music in many pubs makes intelligent talk extremely difficult?
It's not surprising that drinking goes up, along with the profits of the drinks industry, storing up present and future health and hearing problems for individuals and the NHS, not to mention trouble for the police now. Never mind, the poor taxpayer will pick up the tab.
If the decibels went down, young people might more easily discover new social possibilities and 'caf society' might become a reality.
Just imagine.
Heather Mitchell
Lely Close, Bedford
****
Railing over waste of taxpayers' money
SIR – What gives Network Rail, Bedford Borough Council and planning specialists Halcrow the right to waste taxpayers' money?
Network Rail wasted enough money when the present station was built in 1978/9, to replace the old station which only had two through-platforms with a maximum speed of 20mph. The present station has three through-platforms with a maximum speed of 50mph, and platform 4 at 100mph and one way only.
There is still plenty of room to extend all platforms to accept 12 car trains.
I wrote to a borough councillor last year but my comments were ignored, along with the fact that I had worked for the railways for more than 48 years.
But wasting taxpayers' money is nothing new.
We have bus lanes that are not bus lanes; rising bollards were installed at the junction of Greyfriars and Midland Road but not used because of damage caused to a bus. Also, Riverside car park, with a toilet block and clock tower, was developed when the market moved from St Paul's Square – only for it to move back to its original site.
And when Kingsway and Greyfriars was built, and River Street was widened, we were told a bridge was to be built over the river at Batts Ford to connect Kingsway with Greyfriars.
If this had been done then we would not have traffic queuing from St John's roundabout to the roundabout in Greyfriars, mostly caused by eight sets of pedestrian controlled traffic lights.
M Jeyes
Mowbray Road, Bedford
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Bedford
Tuesday 14 February 2012
Today
Sunny spells
Temperature: 4 C to 8 C
Wind Speed: 16 mph
Wind direction: North west
Tomorrow
Cloudy
Temperature: 3 C to 10 C
Wind Speed: 21 mph
Wind direction: North west
