WHAT right has Councillor Gary Allport (Solihull News) to tell the public inquiry into Parkgate that:
1 More and more locals had lost patience over the delays.
2 A “considerable number” of Shirley residents are very, very, angry that this development has not gone through before now.
What does he call a considerable number? Where does he get his facts from?
No mention of the considerable number against the development, have the residents of Shirley been given the opportunity to vote on whether they want Parkgate?
Now that the Tories are back in power on the council we can expect more muscle flexing, and being told what is good for us.
The Tories want this development at all costs, now watch them go for it.
Residents are only pawns in this game.
K Macdonald, Coton Grove, Shirley
COULD it be that the proportion of the electorate that have been voting for the Lib Dems (and in the past SDP and Liberals) have done so as a “neither Conservative or Labour” protest vote?
As the Lib Dems knew they had no chance of winning, they could make irrational promises because they were never expected to have to deliver.
The electorate thought the same but now the Lib Dems have some power it is abundantly clear they cannot deliver and they are no longer a valid protest vote. (Hence the AV vote result.)
RIP Lib Dem revival.
Paul Gilbert, Langfield Rd, Knowle
Their own fault
NOT surprisingly Solihull local Lib/Dem councillors and candidates suffered heavy defeats - including in their former Shirley strongholds - even though most of them are fairly progressive and keen - so the borough returns to Tory control.
They also ran an ‘economical with the truth’ campaign against generally moderate local Tories. In fairness, I say this as a lifelong Labour person.
Nationwide many previous supporters felt badly let down by their weak cabinet members of the Coalition.
In return for fictional power they gladly acted as whipping boys/girls in support of unduly harsh and ill thought-out right wing cuts.
Thus people refused to vote for them and the Tories benefitted. Recovery economies are needed, but these must be fair and spread over time.
Initially LD leaders seemed even more Tory than the Tories on subjects like health reforms, treatment of disabled, higher unemployment, with poor and lower middle class suffering more than rich.
Too late they only belatedly opened their mouths when realising they would pay a heavy price for grovellingly backing Tory dogma.
In England and Wales Labour nationally did well, but still they have much to do to convince the public we are once again fit to govern with the finances firmly based on the long held Labour ideals of responsible social improvement for everyone.
I believe we can and will succeed.
Don Bargery, Alston Road, Solihull
No thank you
I NOTE that the Prime Minister is relaunching his idea of the “Big Society”.
Apparently the problem is that we do not understand what he means.
On the contrary many of us understand perfectly well. I feel quite insulted by the phrase as I, and many people I know, have done various volunteer roles over a number of years and will continue to do so.
However I want to be free to chose what those roles are, in my case conservation work, helping organise a walking group and and supporting an elderly relative.
I do not want to run my local school, hospital, elderly services etc. and I certainly do not want my volunteer work to replace essential public sector jobs.
Carol Martin, Robin Hood Lane, B28
THANK you ‘Querulous’ of School Lane (Letters), for voicing my own long held concerns regarding the vandalising of the green verges in the Borough.
Conker Lane is but one prime example; as soon as the lines of chestnut trees are covered in their white ‘candle flowers’ and the mass of cow parsley comes into bloom beneath, the destruction team arrive with their cutters and leave the borders bare of all but the brambles, nettles and weeds (the difficult bit).
According to the Council, the vegetation is a potential fire hazard and depository for litter.
In reality, the absence of vegetation has no effect at all on the number of wrappers, broken bottles and the remains of fires, which are cleared up by local residents on a daily basis.
How does this policy help the environment and our rapidly declining populations of bees, butterflies, etc who rely on pollen, seeds, etc for their existence.
Perhaps, while the contractors are enjoying their tea breaks and snoozes they could exchange their newspapers for the compulsory reading of a basic gardening and wildlife manual.
Dismayed Resident, Mill Lane, Dorridge
PERHAPS David Lee (Letters) would like to let us have his address so that we might park outide his house all day long.
Residential roads are not for long term parking. Residents in a couple of roads around where we live got fed up with these selfish people leaving their cars outside their houses from 8am until gone 6pm every working day. They did just what D Lee suggested. The result? Yellow lines and no more free parking!
Grow up and park your car in official car parks, Mr Lee.
JC via e-mail
What an interesting letter from David Lee regarding his all day parking in Monkspath.
I’d just like to correct him on the roads being a public car park. To prove the point I suggest he tries parking all day in Homer Road. He would learn very quickly that his car would have a parking ticket within minutes and it would be towed away smartly after that, no matter how correctly he parked it.
The roads are in fact a public highway and whilst the law is a little unclear about parking on them, it is illegal to ‘obstruct’ the highway. If leaving his car blocks a road unnecessarily for long periods, potentially causing a problem for emergency vehicles or other services it could be construed as obstruction. Highways Act 1980 Section 148 (c).
Paul W via e-mail