READERS’ LETTERS: From the Bury Free Press of Friday, November 6
A selection of letters from the Bury Free Press of Friday, November 6.
DANDELION HAS WILTED
In his letter (Bury Free Press October 30), Cllr Trevor Beckwith mentioned the controversial and expensive dandelion puff balls situated in St Andrew’s Street. have noticed that one of these has been neglected. It has ‘wilted’ and needs watering.
-- I Smith, Bury St Edmunds
CONCERNS FOR COUNTRY PARK
As a resident of Culford and a regular user of West Stow Country Park, I am horrified that St Edmundsbury Council is still pursuing the development of a 100 pitch camp site on the Country Park. (Reduced from the initial 180 pitches proposed)
My initial reaction was concern for the wildlife; the water voles and breeding otters in the River Lark, the owls, night jars and other birds that hunt on the park, not to mention the ground-nesting birds that are currently protected.
My second reaction was indignation; that’s our park!
My main concern is the council’s complete lack of a democratic discussion on this matter. As I understand it, the planning department will make the decision. Surely such a sensitive matter should go before the Planning Committee where it can be discussed openly? The astounding number of objections on the councils planning website shows how unpopular it is.
Maybe the biggest question of all is why our country park has to be destroyed to prop up the financially failing West Stow Anglo Saxon Village? Surely that should be explained; why is an interesting, unique tourist attraction losing so much money?
-- Sam Reynolds, Culford
The Bury Free Press recently published some of the photographs that I sent to James Finch, cabinet member for Highways and Transport, at Suffolk County Council (Letters September 25). They showed how bad our local pavements and pedestrian areas currently are.
The answer I got back was rather weak and frankly very disappointing, given the facts and figures from the ambulance service given to me under the Freedom of Information Act, about the trips and falls in town (though they did include some trips and falls in homes) – 1,300 in six months.
I did expect at least the offer to send a representative to Bury, who I could show the extent and damage to our streets and other areas, but no offer was forthcoming, just a rather perfunctory reply, no action.
I also recently sent a letter to police commissioner Tim Passmore, about the accidents caused by cyclists using our pavements illegally at some speed. I included pictures of a young lady recently seriously injured. No mention or comment was made about the pictures and once again the letter seemed, frankly, to pass the buck, in the case of cyclists to the Safer Neighbourhood team. As for the constrant flow of unauthorised traffic on St Andrew’s Street South, the buck was passed to Suffolk County Council to install No Entry signs to augment the existing, but constantly ignored, signs. No police action was mentioned.
I have sent copies with photographs to Cllr Nettleton and Cllr Mark Ereira – they are our county council representatives – perhaps they might have more luck than I did.
We all know police resources are stretched, but the letter says PCSOs cannot stop cyclists and issue penalty notices unless, if asked, the cyclist dismounts. How stupid a rule is that?
My concern, as a new town councillor, is that a cyclist will seriously injure a pedestrian and that a fatality may occur because of our really poorly maintained pavements and pedestrain areas – then sorry will be too late.
-- Tom Murray, Bury St Edmunds
TOM SHOULD BE APPLAUDED
Referring to Tom Murray’s letter (Bury Free Press, October 16), I have always been of the opinion that ‘Readers’ Views’ gives everyone the opportunity to express their own particular take on any local topic which would be of concern to people living in Bury and the surrounding areas. From what I have read, Tom Murray has only ever written about local issues and – in my opinion – should be applauded for his continuing interest in matters that concern most, if not all of us. If his critic is bold enough to send in his own letter laying out why he takes offence at what Mr Murray has to say (providing, of course, that he is not offensive), I’m sure the Bury Free would publish his criticism along with other people’s views.
-- Brian Davies, Bury St Edmunds
INSULATION CAN CAUSE PROBLEMS
At last someone has raised the problem of damp houses caused by cavity wall insulation (CWI) in Parliament and the huge health problems caused by it.
For some 30 odd years now people have been persuaded by various governments to have this installed and sadly this was very bad advice. We are seeing more people at doctors and hospitals with breathing problems and the value of property will be affected – who wants to by a damp house?
And landlords are reluctant to spend money solving this problem for their tenants. We see new properties now being built with CWI already in place, this is madness, the pressure this will put on GPs and the NHS will be enormous. This issue needs to put on the front pages to make more people aware they might be doing themselves harm if they have CWI. The Prime Minister’s response seemed to indicate that he would take the issue seriously.
-- R M Shepherd, via email
TRYING TO DRAW PEOPLE TO TOWNS
Bury...parking fees to rise.
King’s Lynn... £3.70 all day (two minutes from town centre).
Great Yarmouth..trialling free parking at weekends.
Ipswich/Norwich...Park and Ride.
Don’t you get the feeling other councils are trying to draw customers into their towns?
-- David Baldry, Rougham
A WHIFF OF A PROBLEM
Just a concern – they have built a beautiful new McDonald’s on Barton Mills roundabout, near Mildenhall. We should be pleased, but on passing this very morning to go to work, I have noticed the smell of sewage, as you approach the junction for the roundabout you get a beautiful waft, I think there is definitely a problem, or I have a serious nose odour problem. So they build a new food takeaway and a petrol station, and now we have the stink of sewage whenever we enter the zone. Has anyone else smelt it I wonder?
-- Estelle Raeper, via email
DON’T GIVE PETS AWAY ONLINE
I am writing to voice my concern regarding the free exchange of pets online, facilitated by social media and sites such as Gumtree.
People who advertise their pet as ‘free to a good home’ do so with the faith that their pet will be well looked after. Some of these pets will be lucky and go to a good home. However, there are so many cases where people pose as decent, caring people wanting to take the animal in, when what they are actually interested in is cruelly exploiting animals for their own ends. Given the anonymity of an online platform, it is difficult to verify if the person who volunteers to take in a ‘free pet’, is really worthy of animal companionship. There have been accounts in the area where pets ended up being horrifically exploited; such as in the case of dogs, being forced to participate in cruel and unethical dog fighting. I would urge people to reconsider if they are contemplating offering their companion pet ‘free to a good home’ and instead take their pet to an animal sanctuary, which as part of their re-homing procedure, will properly vet a potential owner before handing the animal over.
-- M Roberts, Thetford