Your letters - October 1

We enjoy reading your letters - e-mail them to [email protected]

1922 timetable please

BEXHILL Rail Action Group tells us that the train journey to London takes longer than it did 10 years ago. Well, it's worse than that.

I believe that the 1922 edition of Bradshaws Railway Guide gives a journey time of around one hour and 40 minutes. According to my latest rail timetables it is possible to reach Charing Cross in one hour and 38 minutes, but most journey times to either Charing Cross or Victoria are between one hour 45 minutes and 1 hour 52 minutes. Could we have the 1922 timetable, and possiblly the seemingly faster trains, back, please?

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Bearing in mind that these journey times are soon to be even longer, and the new road from nowhere to the middle of nowhere else else is likely to be cancelled, it seems that Bexhill will remain a remote backwater in terms of tourism and, even more importantly, an unemployment desert.

A dozen or so concrete balls and a few seafront shelters that won't shelter anyone aren't really going to crack it, are they?

Perhaps those responsible for the rejuvenation of the town should be made to sit for a few hours in December in their very own shelters, and those responsible for our train service could be condemned to ride up and down to London on their own trains for a week.

D D SHADWELL

De La Warr Road

Bexhill

Praise for station

SINCE returning to Bexhill five years ago I have written a number of letters to the paper. Some of these have been printed although, on occasions, they have been edited to a point where even I am confused by them. Most have been fairly derogatory so it is pleasant to be able to comment favourably on an item in the paper. I refer to the article about the richly deserved award given to Bexhill Railway Station '“ Bexhill station wins top railway accolade (September 24)

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Five years ago the station was dowdy, dirty and depressing. Now it sparkles in its new livery and the staff are always cheerful, helpful and polite. It must surely create an excellent impression on visitors to our town and it is nice to see those involved being given credit for it. And how was this achieved? They put it back the way it was and the staff work hard to ensure that it achieves the task for which it was conceived. No need for 'innovation'.

FRANK WOOD

Collington Lane East

Bexhill-on-Sea

Humour and unease

MY first outing to the Bexhill Town Forum at the De La Warr Pavilion was a humurous yet uneasy encounter with bullish councillors and disenfranchised residents.

The best moment of both humour and unease was when the council leadser Carl Maynard showed an unusual understanding of the public realm and how it should be designed, constructed and used, specifically in reference to the Next Wave seafront shelters.

When he made the statement that "fit for purpose is subjective" - like or dislike the design, personally I just think they are not that well designed.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

But to have a "subjective shelter" is a complex intellectual concept and one which isn't helpful if one wants to objectively shelter from the wind or rain.

ELISE LIVERSEDGE

Amherst Road

Bexhill-on-Sea

No time for question

My question to the Town Forum councillors Question Time panel had been rejected because there is "too much other business".

I had asked: "How do you justify spending millions of pounds of ratepayers' money on a dubious seafront scheme at this time of national need for restrain in public spending?"

They just will not face up to the dreadful waste that is now going on.

Jack Seabrook

Richmond Avenue

Matter of contention

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

AT their demonstration on Monday Bexhill residents soundly rejected the seafront shelter design as self-evidently unfit for purpose.

In the various radio and television reports of the demonstration the council put up as its spokesman Mr Tony Leonard, a senior officer of the council.

I felt some sympathy with Mr Leonard as he struggled so unconvincingly to convince us to the contrary. In the end he had to resort in desperation to saying that the promenade was in any case meant for walking!

With respect, it is not acceptable to be addressed by unelected officers on a matter of such contention.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The council spokesman on this occasion should have been the responsible councillor who with his fellows have produced the farcical outcome which prompted the demonstration.

Councillors taking cover behind a paid official does not chime well with the title of the council's published seafront strategy document which is called Leading From The Front.

Follow me men '“ I'm right behind you!

JOHN LEE

Chairman Bexhill Alliance

Dr Watson award

SHERLOCK Holmes once said of the faithful Dr Watson: "It may be that you are not yourself luminous, but you are a conductor of light. Some people, without possessing genius, have a remarkable power of stimulating it."

So step forward for a Dr Watson Award, Rother Council spokesperson Tony ("Bexhill is not just a town for old people") Leonard, commenting this week, as reported on the BBC News website, on the seafront shelter and refurbishment controversy: "We recognise that Bexhill seafront is probably the unique selling point for people promenading along the seafront."

Well that's neatly cleared up the whole matter then.

MICHAEL GREEN

Marina Arcade

Bexhill-on-Sea

Voters are to blame

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

With regards the Next Wave and the appalling bomb site along our once unique seafront:

If you voted for this council in the last and previous elections then you have only yourselves to blame. There were other choices, albeit not the way you might usually have voted, but if you really cared about local issues that much you could have done something about it come election time. Because this is a "safe seat" they have ridden roughshod over everyone and just went ahead with what some bright spark on the council thought was "a good idea".

After the fiasco in Devonshire Square you still went ahead and voted them in again, in fact re-elected Gubby! Had you voted for someone else, then perhaps we would still have our parking outside the Post Office instead of Gubby's Balls. I'm till not sure exactly what they are for but I know what I'd like to do with them. I expect many of the letters of protest posted in the Observer are from our present council's voters - me, I didn't vote them in, so I can complain.

Think on, when its election time again what are you going to do, vote for them yet again, and then in the "next phase" they could pull down our toilets. Might as well they closed them.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Finally, with regard to how much and who is paying for these new shelters the council's comment is that money is coming from "Rother's capital". So, just who put the money there in the first place? From the money tree in their back yard, or from Auntie Floss's legacy? No it came from you, the electorate, from our council tax payments and they have still failed to tell us how much!

Jean Tucker

Woodville Road

Bexhill

Not fit for purpose

As residents of Bexhill-on-Sea for the past 70 years, we would like to express our thoughts on the site of the West Parade.

The trashing of this once highly regarded and admired promenade is absolutely monstrous. The proposed shelters are ridiculous and not fit for purpose. What an insult to the residents and visitors who may wish to make use of them.

As the damage has now been done, why not go the whole hog and use the West Parade for landfill purposes.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

As for the money wasted on this project, it would have been more fair for a Pavilion In The Park to be built for local people to enjoy the entertainment once provided in the De La Warr Pavilion. Whether you decide to print this letter or not, we both feel a lot better to have offloaded our thoughts to you,

Mr and Mrs R Morter

Quebec Close

Bexhill

The wrong priority

Chris Lee's letter was one of many in last week's Observer expressing outrage at the cost of the Next Wave. Your note at the end of Mr Lee's letter said you had contacted Rother Council and had been told that as the project is from capital, there is no effect on the Council Tax.

The 4.5 million from Rother does indeed have an impact on our Council Tax.

In fact, even with much reduced interest rates, it means a loss of revenue of 202,000. The loss of this revenue increased last year's Council Tax by 3.2 per cent.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The shelters and the kiosk, the latter no longer affordable it appears, are being paid for by a grant of 1 million. Readers will recall that to get this grant, Rother had to spend 4.5 million of their own, our money.

We, the Lib Dems, have proposed on more than one occasion that this vanity project was the wrong priority for Bexhill. Indeed without it we would have been able to set a zero increase in Council Tax. I agree with Mr Lee's opinion that this misguided project is a 'cavalier' misuse of Rother's funds. And it is a project that every Conservative councillor has voted for. The Conservative manifesto of 'improve the seafront' was not a mandate to spend 4.5 million of taxpayers' money.

Cllr Sue Prochak

Leader Lib Dems

Corporate vandalism

TWO words - corporate vandalism '“ sum up the public's views of the designs and work carried out by Rother District Council on Bexhill's western promenade.

Thousands of pounds worth of benches donated by citizens that provided a respite from walking, or an opportunity to enjoy the sun, have been removed.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The design of the new shelters will fail to protect people from the wind and rain as adequately as the Edwardian-designed four-sided shelters, yet our planning officers and councillors failed to grasp this.

Is this a case of too many yes-men involved in the system? I would like to see the people who made these decisions named and shamed. Then, perhaps, the public would know who not to vote for at council elections and those planning officers who oversaw these mistakes could face the chop when the council finds it has to make job cuts.

NAME AND ADDRESS SUPPLIED

Safety issues

IN the recent spate of letters concerning the public disapproval of the Next Wave seafront gardens project, I have yet to see any issues of safety raised.

I think the idea of having play areas for children incorporated is an excellent one but I wonder who is responsible for designing them? Obviously not a parent.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

One of the horizontal poles intended for children to play on is perilously near to one of the monstrous "war-cemetery-style-tombstones" that have been erected throughout the gardens.

Children always think they are invincible and it doesn't take a genius to work out that it won't be long before one little Superman cracks his skull open by jumping off these poles and either landing directly on the "tombstone" or tripping as he lands and then hitting his head.

In addition to this, I have been informed that the workmen say there are no plans to either lay playground safety matting or bark chips around these play features... the area will just be grassed.

We all know what happens to grassed areas subjected to play wear... they rapidly become bare earth... hard bare earth.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

So if little Johnny doesn't fracture his skull on this stone monolith, he will fracture his ankle or wrist landing on the hard earth!

In this day and age we are constantly up against all sorts of "Elf and Safety" rules and regulations but when it really matters what do the Bexhill planners do about our children's safety? Absolutely nothing!

Yet another example of the utter disaster that our once lovely - and safe - seafront has become.

Christine Hamilton

Southcourt Avenue

Bexhill-on-Sea

What council thinks

I was overjoyed to see the design of the new cattle sheds that Sea Scape and our sublime council in their wisdom have knocked together for us. It really goes to show what this town hall lot thinks of ordinary Bexhill people. The DLWP is another example of an elitist, arrogant mindset that has stopped Bexhill reaching its full potential as a thriving seaside town. Keeping day trippers and tourists staying longer than a walk round the artworks at the DLWP and an expensive drink or snack at the bar, then back in the car and off to more amenable places, seems beyond the ingenuity, wit, and objective of town hall mandarins. No tourist information centre, of course not! The only thing Bexhill information centre could give out are other towns attractions and places of interest for family entertainment. Well done, council, you've done it again. Oh, I almost forgot, they do like spending our money on fanciful ideas, and lots of it!

H Jones

Bolebrook Road

Bexhill

Solution is simple

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Reading the adverse comments on the design of the new shelters on September 24, it occurs to me that the solution is really quite simple.

If the shelters do not provide full protection from the elements as specified and promised, then we council tax payers must insist that the council members responsible for approving their construction should reimburse us with the cost, including that of demolition and clearing away.

I do not jest.

John Hodson

Cooden Sea Road

Bexhill-on-Sea

The mind boggles

WOW! What wonderful designs have gone into the new seafront shelters at Bexhill. Such imaginative results, after such a long period of time. Is this really all that supposedly qualified professionals can come up with? Glorified sheds?

I am sure that primary school pupils could do better. And how much have these architectural abortions cost us, the council taxpayers? The mind boggles.

J TOLLETT

Bidwell Avenue

Bexhill-on-Sea

Please pick it up

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

AT the beginning of this year, we sadly had to have our lovely dog put to sleep. Instead of the usual walks, we went to visit different places. Two months ago we got our new little dog, and started to take her for walks round the streets and paths.

We were absolutely disgusted at the amount of "dog poo" that we saw, on paths, greens and pavements.

This is what gives responsible dog owners a bad name. If you don't want to pick up your "dog poo", don't get a dog, if you want a dog pick up the "dog poo".

MR and MRS ROGER DANIELS

College Road

Bexhill-on-Sea

Councillors' expenses

READING the letter from Marcia Linden in the Observer (Septemer 24) I was understandably incensed.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Well I would be wouldn't I? A factually accurate and well-reasoned argument usually wins the day, but you could be forgiven for finding the letter a bit confused.

Firstly, Rother District councillors do not get 10,500 basic allowance, it's 4,052. The decision about the minimum amount they receive is informed by a regular report by members of an Independent Remuneration Panel. Rother District Council is guided by their recommendations, but this year many councillors took a pay freeze. Councillors who take on extra duties and responsibilities like chairing committees and Leader of the council receive allowances which are decided in the same way, and take account of their time and the work involved.

Anyone wishing to see how much an individual councillor received can find this out without resorting to complex investigations '“ the Observer newspaper publishes all the figures annually.

East Sussex County Council pays a scale of allowances which, again, take account of the time and work involved, travelling to County Hall, Lewes, for example. These begin at 10,842.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

When deciding whether councillors are worth the allowances awarded it is important to remember the number of days and evenings demanded by their duties.

As for the picture of a gravy train portrayed in the letter '“ the reality is, as always, somewhat different. I suggest that anyone who is yet to be convinced should put up for election or at the very least come out and vote carefully at election time. The most recent by-election in Heathfield for Wealden District council attracted a mere 19 per cent of the electorate, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to find people to stand for election. Perhaps this is at the root of the problem?

Cllr Martyn Forster

St Michaels Ward

A great pity

Marcia Linden stood for the Liberal Democrats at a recent election, and lost. Prospective councillors need to be well informed, so that could be the reason. The Observer knows very well exactly how much councillors earn - the information is published every year in their newspaper. The extra monies Marcia Linden is talking about I imagine are expenses, which is money some councillors claim, mostly for travel. Rother is very widespread, some councillors have to travel in from Rye, or from the opposite direction, Hurst Green and the surrounding area, on a regular basis. Although I live in Bexhill, I often travel to all parts of Rother, money I lay out as do all councillors in advance, money I often do not claim back. I would also point out that the leader of all parties has to sign the claim forms, and are vigilant when they do so.

I think it is a great pity that Marcia Linden is trying to make a political point, which may I point out applies to her party as well as the other political groups.

Cllr Deirdre Williams

Sackville Ward

Our 21st birthday

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

MAY we, through your paper, say a huge thank you to all our customers in helping us celebrate our 21st birthday and for the many unexpected cards and presents we received.

We have enjoyed the past 21 years (most of the time!) so hopefully with the support of old and new customers we have got a few more years yet to come.

We also managed to raise 120 for St Michael's Hospice, so once again, thank you all.

BETH and JOHN OLIVER

The Oven Door Restaurant

Buckhurst Place

Bexhill-on-Sea

Thanks for support

I would like to thank, through your paper, everyone who nominated the Sidley Friendship Club for an award for Bexhill Achievers. At the presentation ceremony at the De La Warr Pavilion last Friday night we were rewarded a certificate for highly commended in the best community group category.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The club has only been going for two years and has a membership of nearly 60 people aged over 50 who enjoy meeting once a month. We have a variety of speakers, outings and go ten pin bowling. If anyone is interested in joining the club and live or have lived in Sidley please contact me for further details on 223748. Thank you all once again,

Jenny Wood

Chairperson Sidley Friendship Club

Whittaker House

Glovers Lane

Bexhill