Tory claims 2 & 3

We have worked to have an improved Strand layout in the centre of Exmouth.
We have worked to obtain the views of residents on what things are wanted, what things should stay as they are, and what should be changed.


     The Exmouth Journal has recently carried a stream of letters and complaints that demonstrate clearly that the ruling bodies (I believe all three councils are implicated, all of the same colour) do not listen to what the public wants, and that even when they delude themselves that they have run a public consultation they do not wait for a straightforward conclusion.

     The Strand development plans were originally well meaning. I can remember the three alternative suggestions and the final suggested paper plan.

     I don't remember being told a decision had been taken, and I don't remember hearing that an accurate scale model was available for comments. I assumed that this would be a given for any major public open space work. I was aware that we were waiting for the design for the 'performance stage', and presumed that would be the final piece of planning before we would be able to see and approve what we were going to get.

     I remember being shocked at the savaging of the trees, and reading that the work had been recommended as essential by experts. Some residents spoke to the contractors, who contradicted this official view. I do not remember any announcement at the time that the work was related to the redevelopment.

     That became clear shortly afterwards, when the Strand was turned into a construction site. How convenient it was that the diseased trees fitted the plans so well, and how surprising that the apparently more diseased trees at The Knowle had not been condemned by the same consultant.

     By far the biggest surprise came when it was publicised that the use of the building was now to be changed. It is no surprise that there is such anger when the public have been treated with such contempt.

Who took the decision to start the work before the consultation/planning process was complete, and for what reason?

How were the contracts advertised and awarded without a big fanfare to alert the grateful public to the impending works?

Was someone concerned that the proposed changes were likely to prompt unwelcome outbreak of democracy giving a big thumbs down to the whole project?

And of course why were the three councils so desperate to spend this money in the current climate?

     Somehow, our ruling party have convinced themselves that these events are an achievement worth advertising in their election literature.

     Now, a group of adversely affected traders, having been denied a referendum, are trying to raise funds to bring the issue to judicial review.

     I would say enough of our money has been wasted on Sara Randall-Johnson's frivolous legal adventure to preserve their one party state. Save your own money and the public purse.

     Use the upcoming local elections as your referendum on this issue. Quiz all the candidates as to their position on what has been done, the way it has been done, and how they would resolve the situation.

     Kick out as many as possible of those responsible. Ring fence the money and give the final decision to the people of Exmouth.