Climate emergency? Please don’t call one here!
Reading Borough Council has declared a “climate emergency” but I hope Wokingham will not follow suit.
I have much more confidence in Britain’s Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) than in the over-hyped Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
The GWPF examines all the forces that contribute to global warming (most of which are unconnected with human activity) while the IPCC concentrates almost exclusively on man-made greenhouse gases and dismisses other factors as insignificant. In my view, the IPCC’s alarmist predictions are questionable and are not a sound basis for policy-making.
We will have to stop burning fossil fuels eventually, because they will run out, but that will not happen soon so there is plenty of time to prepare for it.
The main effects of the “climate emergency” declaration will be higher taxes and more restrictions on fossil fuels. Councils are planning various schemes for taxing non-electric cars and the UK Committee on Climate Change has stated: “From 2025 at the latest, no new homes should be connected to the gas grid”. This means new homes will have to be heated by electricity, which will cost about four times as much.
I don’t think I’ll be much affected by this because I’m retired, I have no car and I’m highly unlikely to buy a new house. However, younger people might like to think about it before endorsing the “climate emergency”.
Rex Hora, Earley
A Broken Country
I find it appalling that in one of the wealthiest countries in the world, we are short of adequate funds to pay for many fundamental requirements for the general population!
If one analyses the actual use of public funds, it is quite obvious that much is misspent.
Classic unnecessary expenditure is on promotion of individuals who know the right people, to the Lords etc. PMs who award their friends to their £300 per day, such as David Cameron, show what a travesty of justice and expenditure that is – perhaps the PMs should pay out of their own pockets! The Police Commissioner role should never have been even thought of – the funding of that alone would support a lot of care for the elderly.
Then there is the wasteful and over bureaucratic NHS – I mean Foundation Hospitals, and the number of expensive managers that structure has added to the financial burden. Doctors, Consultants, Nurses etc., are relegated to the ‘bottom of the pile’ instead of being considered the actual productive staff in the system, who in my view should be the best paid and run the hospitals via Matrons etc.
Additionally with the NHS, centralised procurement and the hiring of temporary staff, is surely the first place to look for very large savings. We also have far too many quangos or collections of people with their noses in the NHS trough. Hospitals should be run by those actually providing the medical services – that for one thing may reduce the awful level of professional ‘losses’ (especially Junior Doctors) to other countries or private money.
That leads to the placing of any contract by the government, e.g what they call outsourcing, and I include the PFI disaster; the International Aid system and the ‘oh so comfortable’ jobs that it provides; schemes such as ‘help to buy’ – which appear to have benefited many wealthy investors. Contracts should be professionally examined and approved, keeping in mind they are going to be viewed by recipients as a source of profit. Never allow ‘loopholes’ in any contracts!
When I was in the Defence Industry 50 years ago, MOD contracts were quite tightly monitored and allowed for a reasonable return of around 10% to a contractor. So why do we see businesses paying vast bonuses these days?
Why am I making a fuss?
Looking at the needs of the population as a whole, the country has a duty of care and protection for all. Consider protection to start with, which for many has to mean an effective Police force, let alone adequate Armed Forces. Regarding the Police, a Home Secretary decided to cut-back, quite an unbelievable decision given the rapid growth of our population and crime. Logic demands a continual growth in policing to match population – on the streets at least. Police Stations are needed.
To keep this letter short, I have to mention care. Care for the elderly, the sick, disabled, those suffering mental problems, those domestically threatened, the genuinely poor, the homeless and those young people who need a place to live – who cannot afford to buy, or when they finally can, get taken for a ride by builders and Leases.
(Impossible to précis all the subjects I mention!)
Reg Clifton, Wokingham
Unhappy with the roads
Many residents across the borough have been telling Lib Dems that they are unhappy that their roads and pavements have been neglected for many years. They are telling us that potholes are not filled in properly and many roads and pavements need to be resurfaced. These are assets that belong to us the residents of Wokingham and they are not being looked after properly by the Conservatives.
For the next financial year, the government has given Wokingham Borough council an extra £1,100,000 to spend on road repairs in the borough. This is, of course, very welcome.
As part of the budget process at Wokingham Borough Council Liberal Democrats wanted to spend an extra £300,000 on the resurfacing of roads and pavements. Our plan was easily affordable and was checked by senior officers at the council.
Sadly, Conservative and Labour councillors refused to support the Lib Dems proposals. If they had, many more of your roads and pavements could have been repaired in the next 12 months.
Remember this when they next tell you they are doing all they can to repair your roads and pavements. Clearly, they are not.
Cllr Clive Jones
Deputy Leader of the Liberal Democrat group on Wokingham Borough Council
The will of the people
Sheeplands owner Rob Scott has gone public in saying he would like to rebuild his business – the business that all local people loved and supported. That employed over 100 local people, but most of those lost their jobs. A local business that over 12,000 people signed petitions to keep it going. A local business that supported charities.
I hope that in the future all Wokingham Borough Council dealings with HHS will be harmonious so that this precious place can grow from strength to strength.
I was at both the WBC meetings last month, the Executive Meeting and Council Meeting. I listened to Christopher Neale ask his question regarding the Court of Appeal quoting that the Council had “not acted with integrity towards Mr Scott” and went on to say they had acted in a way that was “unjust and unfair”.
Mr Weeks said that focusing on court processes misses the point that WBC has protected the Green Belt from unlawful development. He is clearly blinkered – you are missing the point. Spending over £72,000 of taxpayers’ money on court processes is OK? Losing all of those local people’s jobs is OK? Making a business man nearly lose his business and home is OK?
At the second meeting Philip Meadowcroft asked us to focus on the implications of what the three Court of Appeal judges said. He spoke again of the “unjust and unfair” comment made by the judge, the damning email evidence of the exchanges between members and officers over a lengthy period and that WBC failed to follow the Code for Crown Prosecutors as shown by email evidence.
He asked Cllr McGhee-Sumner to give urgent consideration to suspending from office all those members and officials named and shamed by the Court of Appeal.
At the time Cllr McGhee-Sumner felt he could not make a comment until he had read the transcript that had not been released at that time but that the inhouse Barrister had felt there was not anything untoward.
The transcript is now in circulation and I am sure everyone has had time to digest it.
It is time now for those members and officials to be called to task.
They have acted in a totally unprofessional manner that reflects poorly on WBC and I ask that you have an internal inquiry that is reported and openly published, then open for debate at a Full Council Meeting so that contributions may be made by WBC council tax payers if they wish.
Patricia Miller, Twyford
Sheeplands again
Having now had the opportunity to scrutinise the “Judgment” of the Court of Appeal in relation to the case of WBC v Keith Scott & Others, in conjunction with the original court hearing in 2018, I am astounded at the damning indictments contained throughout those judgments in relation to the conduct of WBC and a number of its employees.
It is blatantly obvious to any rational person that a number of individuals employed by WBC have gone far beyond what was required to protect the Green Belt. So far in fact that questions must be raised as to their true intentions. Despite claims made to the contrary WBC has worked over a long period to frustrate the operation of this lawful business by any means possible. A fact that was clearly not lost on either Court Hearings – the Appeal Court judgement containing such phrases as “…WBC had induced Mr. Scott to act to his prejudice”, “…Mr Scott had been been denied the opportunity to have the matter tested in the appropriate planning forum and most importantly they (i.e. WBC) had sought to take advantage of the situation … without the recourse to the appeal process” and “That situation so offended her sense of justice that she decided proceedings had to be stayed to protect the integrity of the criminal justice system”.
In their dealings with Harehatch Sheeplands WBC seemed to have totally ‘lost sight’ of the fact that they operate within a democracy and that they are there to represent the interests of the residents. Interests which have been expressed by the signing of a petition by 12000+ people in support of HHS! It is clear that a Local Authority has a certain amount of discretion when it comes to implementing “Green Belt” legislation. Something which was reiterated by a government inspector when, on ‘Granting an Appeal” for this site, indicated as part of the justification for his decision that “special circumstances applied”. Something which WBC have repeatedly and wilfully failed to implement or even acknowledge!
The individuals involved have acted in a thoroughly disreputable, deceitful and unprofessional manner, which has not only brought HHS to the brink of closure, rendered 100 plus individuals unemployed and decimated a valuable local amenity. Not to mention bringing the reputation of WBC into disrepute!
It is imperative that WBC now institutes an in-depth and far reaching inquiry not only to establish how and why a number of WBC employees have acted in the way they have but to re-establish some sort of credibility with the electorate and to ensure that future dealings with HHS are conducted on a professionally and with integrity.
Mike Shattock, Wokingham
5G technology fears
“We already know the current 4G technology which is in widespread use causes cancer and immune disease” The Wokingham Paper, March 7.
No we don’t. This is wrong. There haven’t been any concrete long term studies, that I can find anyway, that prove this. Some scientists say it MIGHT have some effect, but they only say this because the technology hasn’t been around long enough to confirm the long term effects. 4G and 5G use non-ionising radiation, which doesn’t have enough energy to alter molecules in the body. Cell phone technology has been around since the early ’80s, and the technology remains largely the same as it was then.
You can’t claim “scientific fact” when it objectively isn’t. Anybody can say that ‘leading scientists prove X’ without citing actual studies. Its this kind of thing that causes scientific fear-mongering, like anti-vaxination.
I’m not saying its 100% safe, because I obviously can’t prove that. I sympathise that his wife went through something awful, but its a bit presumptuous to say its down to 4G radiation in a bedroom. How do you even remove 4G from a bedroom? Did he line his house with 5cm of Lead?
Toby Hodges, via website
Waitrose blues
We are an elderly couple we have shopped at Waitrose for years we cannot possibly have a snack and shop in 90minutes – it is very unfair to discriminate against the elderly we can’t rush around anymore and we like to have a meal in the cafe.
Surely you could make concessions for your elderly loyal customers.
Anne Harris, via website
Don’t take away our car park
The insistence of local part-time politicians to place self-serving party political considerations ahead of the interests of the borough and those they are in office to represent has led to an unsustainable over supply of new housing, a number of behind schedule allegedly over budget infrastructure and other projects, destruction of much of the local environment, continuing traffic congestion, rising levels of pollution, uncontrolled vandalism, increased pressure on local primary healthcare provision – the list continues unabated.
The latest reported plan to build 80 new homes (The Wokingham Paper, February 28) off Denmark Street makes one wonder if the inmates really have taken over the asylum.
The proposals from an unnamed developer would strip the town centre of yet another of its car parks and adding to the chaos at an existing traffic bottleneck.
The executive’s apparent inability to grasp what is going around it in the real world, and its lack of political courage to do anything about it has become the cause for concern among businesses and residents alike, prompting questions to be asked, with local elections on the horizon, as to its credibility and commitment.
Finally, my thanks to the editor for enlightening me on the protocols relating to meetings of planning committees (letters, February 28).
J W Blaney, Wokingham
80 new homes for Denmark Street?
Millions are being spent on re-vamping the town centre, new shops and Peach Place, who and what for?? If a desperately needed car park is to be built upon. There are workers in the town who need to park and to have places for customers to park to do their shopping.
This is total insanity in action. Some years ago, I had warned my local councillor, who frankly took no notice. We now have a town many want to move away from and there’s nothing to come into town for!
Angela Rawlins, via website
So disappointed with this plan! Wokingham Council is trying to encourage people to come to this town and are covering up our carparks! How ridiculous is that? I think people will stop coming if there is no where to park and will go elsewhere, which totally defeats the object! Stop developing, we have more than enough going on with all the houses being built around what used to be a lovely little market town. Such a shame!
Shelia Lawrence, via website
Surely there are enough houses being built in the area as it is. It seems any scrap of land anywhere is being developed.
We don’t have the infrastructure to support the already increasing traffic. Wokingham is being ruined. In five years it will be unrecognisable.
Jon, via website
Why bother regenerating the town, if potential shoppers have to hike from Carnival Pool to the shops and restaurants. I would question if the over capacity of parking referred to is based on today’s visitor numbers or those projected after regeneration. This car park is always busy and a good location for ‘popping’ into town, something that people will stop doing if car parks are too far away.
Mark Trepte, via website
I honestly don’t understand the hate for the new houses. Places grow over time. It’s the way things have always been. Many of the people complaining about new houses live in housing estates that didn’t exist 30/40 years ago, which seems kind of hypocritical to me.
It’s about time people realised that Wokingham won’t, and shouldn’t, remain a small market town like it once was.
More people just means more money for local businesses! Nobody gave a damn about any of the land until plans to actually do something with it were announced, then its all of a sudden ‘beloved green space’?
I also wouldn’t say walking from the multi-story carpark is that awful. Its maybe 100 meters to the town centre. I do understand that for elderly and disabled people this can be difficult. Hopefully the bus routes get expanded/updated to compensate.
Toby Hodges, via website
