With regards the Core Strategy story with the headline ‘People to have their say’
Name and address supplied
WITH regards the Core Strategy story with the headline ‘People to have their say’ on August 12 I ask ‘A referendum?’.
I thought we had one in October 2010- it came out in favour of Site D.
The council then voted on Site F vs Site D and with a majority of just one vote (and several abstentions), ignored the “say of the people”, and went ahead and backed site F.
Why is the council again wasting our money on this travesty of democracy? If they did not listen last year, will they listen now?
The choice of question and wording of the “referendum” will be configured so as to guarantee their preferred outcome.
We will be asked A) “Do you support the SODC plan”, or B) “Do you support the TTC plan”? They amount to the same thing- 600 houses on site F, and 175 on the Lower School site.
We, “the people” were denied our “say” right from the start, last October.
This referendum will not address the question we really need to ask- not WHERE? , but HOW?
As local district ratepayers, we deserve a town plan for Thame – not one imposed on us by SODC, and one based on “Joined-up Thinking”.
We need to look at the end before we start the beginning. What will Thame be like in 20 years, with a population at least 30 per cent higher than today?
Wherever these houses are built, there will be thousands more people of all ages, and thousands more daily car journeys in and around Thame.
To avoid a daily gridlock, we need to revisit the completion of the ring-road around the town – the section from Thame Park Road to near the Oxford Road roundabout. This is essential.
We also need to consider the whole local infrastructure- doctors, schools, social welfare, sewage, drainage, flooding, and more. Surely we will need more schools, both primary and secondary- so why take the short-term route, demolish perfectly good buildings and obliterate the schools and playing fields within the town that we will need in the future.
In this time of economic crisis, surely we should use what we have wisely, rather than short-sightedly throwing it all away.
We must not rule out future choices by being rushed now to build in the wrong place, at the wrong time, and for all the wrong reasons
Save our pubs? No-one uses them
Handymanphil, address supplied
THE only way for John Howell, to enthusiastically back a government review intended to help local pubs is fully back the much needed amendment to the smoking ban which is slowly but surely killing our pubs and clubs.
He said: “Pubs are the hubs of community life, as important to the local social scene as they are to the local economy.”
“That I think has been a very clear message from the Standard’s Drink Local campaign.
“But time is being called at too many of our ‘locals’, depriving people of treasured places to get together in the community.”
He is quite right but it is no good saving hundreds of pubs from the developers if there is no one to actually go in them! Derrrrrrr?