Will the people have to pay up if Friargate fails?
THE report on the progress of the Friargate project in the Coventry Telegraph (‘How new mayor could rescue Friargate’, May 4) painted a depressing picture. Not one of the candidates interviewed had a positive suggestion as to how the project can be rescued. Ideas as to how the building might be used, or where money might come from, are not solutions. Even the £50 million pledged by the West Midlands Combined Authority is only that, a pledge that can be withdrawn. The people of Coventry should be aware that Private Finance Initiatives such as this are effectively mortgages that the city council take out in our name. At the end of the day, we the people must pay back the loan. The people best able to pre-judge the viability of such projects as this are the financiers themselves, and they, we observe, clearly think it is a bad risk since they will not invest. Should we not have trusted their judgment in the first place? We have a right to know how the financial arrangements stand in hard figures at present. How much has been borrowed, how much has been committed so far, what is the present interest rate, over what time must the debt be repaid? Above all, the people of Coventry should be aware that if the project fails to be self-financing, the debt will have to be repaid by the city council, and that is bound to affect the level of the community charge.
We have a right to know how the community charge may be affected if the whole project results in a net loss. Surely the city council has a responsibility to warn us of the worst possible scenario? It was their idea in the first place. Terry Button Coventry
PM’s halo dropped over fox hunting
DESPITE the Crosby catchphrases, silky controlled interviews and appearances on The One Show to persuade us that Theresa May is a suitable candidate for PM, the halo dropped a little this week when she reaffirmed the Conservative pledge to allow a free vote on fox hunting, saying she had always personally been in favour of hunting.
What “strong and stable leadership” chooses to ignore 84 per cent of the total population, 72 per cent of Conservative voters, and 80 per cent of the rural community, who have suffered havoc and mayhem for years at the hands of the hunts, all totally opposed to such a move? Choosing instead to give in to her rich and powerful friends in the hunting lobby who now see a real chance to bring back this barbaric activity.
The Hunting Act would be scrapped and foxes, deer and hares would legally fall prey to the those that hunt them.
While most of your readers will be more concerned about Brexit, cuts in the NHS and education, if the Conservatives go on to achieve the predicted landslide, people should not be surprised when the nasty party reaffirms its credentials on other issues over the next five years with Cruella de Vil at the helm. Bryan Griffiths Bedworth
Refurb care centre – don’t sell it off
HOW is it, when the local hospitals have elderly patients bed blocking because they have nowhere to recuperate, the council can sell a purpose-built intermediate care centre for yet more student accommodation (‘Former care centre may be demolished for student bedsits’, May 8)?
By the look of the building it certainly needs refurbishment but why not do that and ease the pressure that our hospitals are facing, by giving temporary care until a permanent solution for the patient is agreed? Sue Jeffs Binley