The author of a counter petition against Wokingham borough council’s perceived support of Wokingham Islamic Centre’s petition seeking its backing for the principle of establishing a mosque in Wokingham, has claimed the authority is biased.
Thomas Gillam, responding to Wokingham Today’s request for comment, said this week that although his petition had attracted more than 1,500 supporters, almost ten times more support than the 187 signatures supporting the original one that sought support for a mosque, Wokingham borough council acted quickly in meeting the petition authors, but has failed to engage with his petition.
He also cited current problems at other mosques, and objections to an application for a planned mosque in Winnersh last year. In that case, 334 objection were received during the consultation versus 389 in favour.
He said: “This is about our local community being ignored, and the needs of a minority being overly prioritised.
“Anyone who speaks out is dismissed as a racist or a bigot, and their opinions discounted as worthless.”
Although no planning application currently exists for a mosque in Wokingham, he said many of his supporters, including muslims, were concerned about additional traffic and parking issues that would accompany any development.
He claimed his petition is being dismissed as irrelevant, despite the council embracing the ‘pro’ petition, which was held on the same site and got only a fraction of the signature.
Again stressing how no application for a mosque exists, leader of the council Stephen Conway told Wokingham Today that the council had supported the Islamic Centre as they would any other group, religious or otherwise.
He said they met with the group and provided an introduction to the council’s commercial property agents.
He said:”The petition in favour of a mosque was not ‘supported by the council’, but I was invited to a meeting to discuss the aspirations of the local Muslim community, and attended to listen and learn, as I would for any group with aspirations for the community.”
He added :”There is no favouritism here. If and when a planning application is submitted, a consultation will happen, and traffic and parking will be part of that process.
“How can any of his ‘supporters’ be concerned about issues that would accompany any development, when they cannot possibly know what issues there might or might not be because there is no development proposed?”
He again emphasised how the “anti” petition could not be debated at council, as there was no way of knowing whether supporters are local, or otherwise.
Finally, he added that the authors’ comments suggest that the Muslim community is somehow not part of our local community, or that he and his supporters have the sole right to speak on behalf of local community.
“I would be happy to meet the organisers of the anti-petition, and would welcome the opportunity to address any concerns that they have.
“I would also wish to emphasise that their petition is based on the mistaken assumption that there is an application submitted to the council; there is not.”
The change.org website which hosted the petitions allows for people to sign without giving personal details, such as an address or contact telephone number.
In order for the council to debate a petition, it needs to be sure that at least 1,500 signatories are from people within Wokingham borough, as per local government legislation.
