Golfers pay council taxes, too - and fees
I’VE read claims coming out of Derby City Council cabinet group that I find disturbing and dubious.
Councillor Nicola Roulstone claims the park has seen an increase in visitors since the golf course closed. I have been to the park several times and it has been deserted with very few members of the public obvious.
Secondly, we have a claim from Jonathan Smale that the public wants the site to be parkland and not just for 90 golfers.
He might have missed the fact that those 90 golfers are part of the Derby public and contributed around £40,000 in fees to the council for the privilege of playing there.
What evidence does Mr Smales have for his claims about the views of the public?
Thirdly. Planting 500,000 trees is not a silver bullet to de-carbonise the council’s activities. Trees emit carbon dioxide at night as do their root systems as part of their respiration processes.
Certainly in the early growth years, trees do absorb more carbon dioxide than they release. However, this absorbed is released back into the atmosphere through biological action when the tree dies.
Furthermore, I hardly see how a forested landscape can be called a parkland. Even less certain is that the claimed increased numbers of Derby public will want to fight their way through such an area.
The real suspicion is that this elitist Conservative cabinet group wanted the golf course shut down for their own – as yet – unclear and unjustifiable reasons.
Chris Clark, by email