OPINION: Letters to the editor of the Newbury Weekly News
Surely Monks Lane was replacement pitch
A couple of weeks ago you reported on the scrutiny committee’s report into the Faraday Road/Sports Hub debacle.
Under normal circumstances the report would have been approved by officers and discussed at the executive meeting on April 3.
However, it wasn’t.
I believe this is due to the fact that there was a line that said either the officers misled the courts or the executive misled the public and that the council should refer itself to the ombudsman.
Both options are potentially a criminal offence if true.
The only thing I can see wrong in the statement is that it is an either-or wording, and I think there is a possibility that it could be both the courts and the public were misled.
All along the planning process, the Monks Lane pitch was designed as a replacement for Faraday Road.
Why else would you need an extra clubhouse in competition to the rugby club’s more than ample clubhouse? Why new stands for just an ordinary pitch?
It is obvious to me it was going to end up as a replacement for Faraday Road.
It all fell apart at the western area planning committee, which failed to pass the plans because it was not shown to be better or equal to what it was replacing.
Presumably out of desperation, the same plans were sent to the district planning committee, but this time it was now miraculously a stand-alone pitch (which Sport England couldn’t object to) but still costing well over £3m.
Still with stands and a new clubhouse.
No other stand-alone pitch would cost that much.
In fact you could provide five or six all-weather pitches for the same amount of money.
It got a new name. It was now a Sports Hub.
This was misleading in itself since it was just for rugby and football; no other sports.
It also wasn’t really a ‘hub’, as they had to replace the lost pitch with another somewhere else.
No consultation that I know of regarding the change, so I think people were definitely misled.
The council will say it won the judicial review, but that was in an administrative court and not a criminal court where this sad debacle may end up, in time.
Misleading the public or the courts is serious, and if the scrutiny committee hadn’t published the report, then they would have possibly been guilty of a cover-up.
I think it is sad that our council is, in my opinion, still trying to wriggle out of the problem instead of putting their hands up and accepting the consequences.
I think the council should refer itself to the ombudsman, who can look at this independently.
John Gotelee
London Road, Newbury
Why is sewage still being discharged?
Driest March on record, now April starting the same way, yet Thames Water are currently discharging (April 6) untreated sewage into the River Lambourn at two of its sites.
Tony Fenton
Speen
I’m insulted by article on Greenham Common
Yet again, it astounds me, the length supposedly respectable journalism goes to score a few cheap points for headlines.
To say that Greenham Common was reopened to the public after decades of “military occupation” is an insult to any service person or civilian of whatever flag they served under (Newbury Weekly News, April 3).
Twice in less than 50 years Greenham Common served as a military installation from where tyranny confronted.
Be it brave men who climbed into gliders or parachuted into the night sky to liberate Europe from the scourge of the Nazis, or to take on the Russian bear and the Warsaw Pact.
Military occupation, also called belligerent occupation or simply occupation, is temporary hostile control exerted by a ruling power’s military apparatus over a sovereign territory that is outside of the legal boundaries of that ruling power’s own sovereign territory.
If history serves me correctly, this occupying power, the United States, was invited to come to RAF Greenham Common to help prepare and liberate Europe.
During the Cold War, NATO requested the cruise missiles to counter the threat of SS-20 missiles.
Again, Greenham Common was in the front line to defend Europe, and again, victory was won.
Does the person who wrote this ‘piece’ of ‘non biased’ journalism feel that he has done any sort of justice to the thousands of men and women who worked as served on the base, defending his liberty, to write such a ‘hack’ piece?
FYI, the base didn't “close” in September 1992.
On September 11th (pretty poignant date in history), the USAF handed the ceremonial keys back to the RAF.
In 1997 Greenham Common was designated as public parkland, effectively returning it to its pre-Second World War status but with restrictions, but the fences didn’t come down until 2000.
Again, sensationalist journalism to score points.
To say I am insulted goes beyond words.
Philip J De Monte
Former staff sergeant, United States Air Force
Please be considerate when playing music
Playing loud music in your garden is fun, but not for those around you in neighbouring houses or roads, who can’t open their windows on nice days due to the music being so loud.
They can still hear it inside, with the windows shut.
Please can we ask that people become a bit more considerate to other, especially whilst the weather is so nice.
Name and address supplied
Everyone used to cut their hedges back
Are you aware that West Berkshire Council don’t know what year it is?
They told me off for cutting hedges back. They are still using 1971 rules just to get out of the job of keeping the walkway clear and safe.
I was brought up in the country and we had to walk on the road wherever we went but everyone cut their hedges back to their boundary. But not now.
Many of you will know this but when Newbury & District bus company first bought their double decker buses they also had an open-top one and they went all round the route where their bus would go and cut all the overhanging branches so it was clear for the bus and they didn’t go and ask the owner if it was OK. They just did it.
The councils did a lot more in those days with a lot less cash than what they have now.
Keith Haines
Poplar Place, Newbury
