Memory is an awful thing in a post-truthworld

Millions are livid over Mr Cummings’s lockdown violations because they remember the government’s simple instruction to “Stay Home, Protect the NHS, Save Lives”.

The fact that the government and the area’s Conservative MPs line up behind such deliberately outrageous lies about “judgment” and “eyesight tests” shows their utter contempt for the public they serve.

It’s only important to keep the loyalists on side, and they choose not to remember.

Tragically, my MP has written that his stance is mainly based on loyalty to the Prime Minister, with barely a mention of the public health or public trust.

Will we remember the breach of public trust come the next General Election?

Will we remember the handshake bragging, March’s Cheltenham Festival, the lack of PPE, the PM in hospital “for tests” and the woefully late and inadequate test/trace programme?

Will we remember the 38,000 dead (or is it 60,000)?

Messrs Johnson and Cummings, backed by their press baron friends, are certain they can distract us from remembering.

A simple three-word slogan gave the Tories a thumping win despite a decade of austerity, food banks, Windrush, Grenfell and other scandals.

I understand it is easier to quit when power refuses to be held to account.

But sadly, I remember the inevitable outcome of authoritarians. And, I cannot quit because I remember. Tom Ross, WokinghamWithout

Hypocrite councillor

What a hypocrite Cllr Gary "Cowangate" Cowan is. He accuses a Goverment adviser of abiding by a different set of rules to himself. (Your Letters, Wokingham Paper, May 28).

I think that Cllr "Cowangate" Cowan needs reminding about the Blue Badge incidents that he has been involved in within the last few months.

He didn't mind rules being broken then. He did everything he could to get the Blue Badge rules overturned.

I hope that Cllr "Cowangate" Cowan will be resigning from the Council very shortly, to set an example. Thereby sending the clear message to us all that NOBODY, not even him, is above any rules.

Why do we have to put up with this egotistical, holier than thou councillor? Paul Clarke, Wokingham

Biased view

Your correspondent, Dr Peter Hornsby, gave a considerably biased and negative view of our Prime Minister, Boris Johnson.

The majority of the country obviously completely disagrees with his assessment of Boris as a “compulsive liar and adulterer” and “treating the entire country with contempt” and he should reflect that our Prime Minister was elected by a very large majority of our countrymen and is having to deal with the biggest crisis since the Second World War.

Instead of taking such a negative view of life Dr Hornsby and others should be seen to act in his own words “as if we are all in this together” and support each other and the government to successfully move on and defeat this virus.

Likewise, we have elected John Redwood who devotes his life to supporting his constituents – if we didn’t think so, we have not re-elected him so often. David Lumsden, Wokingham

Broken process

I have long thought that the UK planning process was broken, with an almost total bias towards the big developers.

This view was enormously substantiated by the Government’s Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick’s recent decision to overrule Docklands Council, and the Planning Inspectorate, to authorise the building of 1,500 properties in Docklands.

Not only did Robert Jenrick agree the housing he also put the boot into the local council’s plan to get

£40 million in developer contributions to improve the infrastructure and deliver affordable homes by authorising the housing plan just before the council’s new policy on Community Infrastructure Levy (Developer funding) became live.

A huge saving for the developer and its shareholders. A huge loss to the community.

This decision ignores residents, communities, local council, planning officers and even the planning inspectorate. In simple terms forget the planning process, forget consultation, forget local plans. It’s one rule for all of you and one (different) set of rules for us, when it comes to looking after our friends.

This seems to be a bit of a current trend. The concrete and bulldozer threat to all of Wokingham’s Southern Parishes greenfield has increased enormously by this decision of 1,500 properties in Docklands.

What does the future hold for Wokingham when Tower Hamlets Council and the Planning Inspectorate say no to 1,500 houses but are simply overruled?

We are looking at as many as 15,000 houses in Grazeley alone plus the continuous and ongoing development of Shinfield, Arborfield and some, but not all, other parts of Wokingham.

When the Planning Inspectors, who we all love to hate, actually say no, (a rarity for them not to back developers) and are overruled, then what hope do we have for any green fields in our area?

Is the planning process simply an expensive smokescreen?

Is it one set of rules for us and one for them? Cllr Jim Frewin, independent councillor for Shinfield South, Wokingham Borough Council

Another form of hypocrisy

Over the past few weeks, I have only made the odd comment about what has happened during this pandemic, as I felt it was not appropriate to make political comments.

I have praised borough council officers and other local people including local councillors, who have run and manned the Local Hub based at St Crispin's School and I have particularly welcomed the Care Home Protocol put together by the council to protect our vulnerable residents from discharges without testing for the virus from our local hospitals.

However, I do now feel I need to make comment. I refer to the front page article titled “Government accused of breaking Covid Cash promise” (May 28).

At the start of the pandemic in March, the Conservative

Government's Communities Secretary Robert Jenrick MP committed the Government to covering the financial cost of Covid-19 incurred by all Local Councils (in England). He even said , “We will do whatever it takes”. Now, in early June, this commitment is no longer worth the paper it was written on. The Government has back tracked. Not the only issue that they have done, I hear people saying to themselves.

This has meant that local councils, including WBC, have committed funds to actions to deal with the Covid-19 pandemic on the premise that they would be financially covered. Now councils will not be able to cover all the costs (unless there is a change of Heart) and as a result this additional increase in costs will fall on you the local Council Tax payer. This is grossly unfair.

If no commitment had been made then councils will have been much more cautious. Imagine how you would feel if your employers said they would cover your additional costs, only to find that after the event, they would not.

The Government has however provided some income to WBC.

The first tranche was I admit rather

disappointing, but the second tranche was much more significant, in fact the Leader of the Council said he was rather pleased with this amount of financial support. The total monies received by WBC was close to that received by a number of our neighbouring councils. So I query whether WBC has been treated as badly as he is making out.

No, what I believe is happening is that the Conservative leader of the Council is starting to shift the blame for the poor financial position WBC is going to be in over the next few months, when in fact the local Conservative administrations of the past four-five years have built up a massive debt.

Back in 2017, when I first highlighted concern about the levels of debt being accumulated by WBC Conservatives, the debt level stood at around £350 million, now in 2020, this figure has jumped to an eye - watering £700 million.

Remember it is you the Council Tax payer that picks up the bill should anything go wrong, and with a worsening economy anything could happen. This level of exposure equates to around £10k on average per WBC Council Tax payer.

Many projects including Wokingham Town Centre Regeneration now have contracts signed (i.e. WBC is committed to pay) that have used borrowing to fund them based on the premise that WBC will receive income in the future. One source of income are the new houses on Elms Field. At the time of writing this letter, no house has sold. Also no one knows how the Housing market will perform over the coming months/ year. However if I were looking for a new property now, I would be asking for a sizeable discount. So where is WBC going to get its income from to cover these costs? It is clear that WBC will now need to review all its programmes of work to assess what is now affordable and what is not.

The mismanagement of Wokingham Borough Council’s budget will rest fairly and squarely with the local Conservatives, but added to by the Conservative Government since it reneged on its promises. Again, it will be you the local Council Tax payer who would end up picking up the shortfall.

No, Cllr John Halsall, you cannot have your cake and eat it. The blame rests largely on the various Conservative Administrations who have wracked up these massive debts over the past few years, and many local people know it. Cllr Lindsay Ferris, Leader of the Liberal Democrats on Wokingham Borough Council & Member for Twyford

Apology first

Our Editor has high standards and does not expect untruths, so I have to plead guilty to an unintentional error in my last week’s letter.

Firstly, I am grateful to Michael

Story for being kind enough not to accuse me of lying about my cat insurance. Since that letter, it has been reduced to a little over £40 per month NOT per week, but I am still unable to get an answer as to why an increase at all (he is a lovely cat).

Insurance companies are a law unto themselves, and by writing a ‘book’ of T&Cs – every company’s written individually – appear to want to avoid liability to pay out anything. Another business I would like to see operating to a national standard not written by them. Lawyers please note, I provide my view from personal experiences.

Changing the subject, I am gravely concerned with the escalating crime rate, and include Road Traffic offences in many cases. I witnessed a BMW leaving Wokingham town centre last week, which luckily had green lights at the Station Road junction, proceeding at between 50mph and 60mph towards Reading. In a 30mph area.

Speeding is now rife in our area, just as is hooliganism; rubbish including glass bottles thrown around; property damaged, and so on.

All of these aspects of our lives are of course down to the lack of police. Last year we were promised 20,000 more police officers. In keeping with the level of incompetence in government these days, it needs to be noted that a requirement (by the way I do not accept the figure mentioned) must be multiplied by three in order to allow for three shifts (assumption) per day. Using the government’s promise that means 60,000.

Given the decline of our society, I would like to see 100,000.

A final and necessary comment: Some time ago I challenged the Wokingham councils to provide a way of removing traffic from the town centre. This is due to the unacceptable and dangerous level of atmospheric pollution, especially throughout the summer and or under the climate conditions pertaining recently.

There is now a government recommendation that such action should be taken, although based on virus avoidance, our need should be based on that, plus the pollution caused by traffic. An answer is still awaited from the Councils. Reg Cliﬞ on, Wokingham

I want a kebab

When I moved to Wokingham in 1982 one of the pluses was that I lived within 200 yards of the Kebab Van.

Open seven days a week it was very popular. Since then I have lived in Finchampstead, but last August we moved for the last time and now are living even closer to the Kebab man.

Its location has varied, sometimes within the car park of the Youth Centre and sometimes outside, at the moment it's outside but whatever the weather the Kebab man is a constant.

I walk my dog every night past the stall and I am impressed with the way the customers organise themselves into social distancing queues.

Now I understand that there is a meeting at Shute End next week to determine whether it can continue to trade.

It would be a great shame if it was forced to close after 27 years, doing harm to no one and providing outstanding service to all.