Sunday, 2 March 2008

A POTPOURRI OF SNIPPETS


Its D +21 of The Thanet Blog War and No-Mans Land is quiet with Simon, Dickie and One-Voice all nicely underground in their bunkers. Intelligence is pretty thin and as yet there is no news of 'legal-beavers' mounting fighting patrols.
=================================================
TDC needs to wake up to the allotments fence issue pretty quickly as sources report that not only do we have 'Tree-Huggers' annoyed in Culmers Land, Broadstairs and planning consent from KCC Highways neglected in Cecelia Road, Ramsgate but now we have Edward and Hazel Went starting a petition concerning the high fencing at St Peter's Footpath (Dane Valley Allotments). When you do not involve locals, as you should, is it surprising that the quiet growl of protest will grow into a serious chorus of outrage? My advice to Sandy & Co would be to have a pause for thought before you upset any more of your electorate on this issue.
=================================================
As I sit here in trepidation, waiting for the Council Tax details to land through the letter box with a thud that would make my prang at Maidstone Gaol seem insignificant, its not nice to be told by the Taxpayers Alliance, that £3oo of it is paying for inflated public service pensions at TDC and KCC and they haven't even mentioned Kent Police Pensions and Fire Service Pensions. When is a political party going to introduce a 'local tax' based on the ability to pay and linked to Income Tax?
====================================
I don't have sophisticated links to other media, but a taxi-driver told me that there was a murder at Lydden on Friday night or the early hours of Saturday with a gunman waiting by a house for the victim to come home by taxi. Another source tells me that the unfortunate victim may have been involved in the drug supply business. It makes Thanet Blog War seem tame by comparison.
====================================
The last item of this 'pot-pourri' warrants a special item when I am feeling stronger after Friday's prang. Are the powers that be really serious about allowing the flooding by the sea of the land behind the Reculver to Minnis Bay sea defences in a few years time? The cost of maintaining them will be cheaper than the causeways that would be required for the railway and Thanet Way! I am not a hydrographic specialist but I remain unconvinced that creating a sea-marsh around the Stour levels will some-how prevent flooding else-where on the Isle!

8 comments:

Little Weed said...

Being an ex allotment holder and involved in the fight for fencing, I am afraid that it is the fault of the local residents in being unable to stop the constant (and I mean constant) serious vandalism and theft of that which people spend a lot of time working on.

Bertie Biggles said...

I think the issue is not one of security but how it is being done. There seems to be a consensus on the need for improved security but turning areas of the Isle into mini Seuritas Depots is not the only answer to the problem and perhaps more thought by TDC would have been sensible as we will all have to live with the fences for many years to come.

Rick said...

Our allotments are self managed and we just got a grant of 8000 pounds from the coalfields regeneration fund for security fencing.

We will be planting the fencing up with various climbers etc from allotment funds. So the Stalag fencing appearance will disappear as foliage takes over.

But we live oop north now. We only have one unlet allotment out of 44 plots. That is going to be developed as a natural wildlife area. Pond etc.

We have a Japanese knotweed problem which the council must sort out on an area adjoining the allotments.

But everything seems straightforward compared to Thanet ....

We got ex industrial containers and two per plot so each plot has 500 gallons of water storage. I diverted the flow from adjoining industrial unit roofs so that is part of our water conservation (bit of a joke last year as there was wet a plenty)

Being oop north you have to take committee seriously it is their culture (attend meetings and work parties) but it all gets done.

We have one occasional thief but no vandalism. The PCOs know who the thief is so now we know too .....

Bertie Biggles said...

Rick, sounds like real involvement by the community going on 'oop north'. I wish some of the same was happening here!

sue said...

Little weed you are so right. People who are objecting to this fencing have obviously not lost hundreds of pounds in burned sheds and hours of sweat on vandalised crops. It's funny how people who do nothing to support victims of vandalism and anti social behaviour can't wait to get on their high horse about something that really will not affect them at all except their aesthetic sensibilities. Wake up! Peoples property is being vandalised and destroyed. Is your view as you walk past really more important than that? If you think so, you should be ashamed of yourselves.

sue said...

Let me put it in a way that might be more effective.
If the fence is not installed, people's sites will continue to be vandalised and their crops destroyed. This means that people will get fed up with working and sweating and spending hard earned money for nothing. This means that the site will fall into disuse, just about the only reason Statutory allotments can be developed. Then Edward and Hazel Went won't have to worry about the fence.They will be looking at a housing estate.

Bertie Biggles said...

Sue, everyone has the greatest understanding of your trauma last year with mindless vandalism on your allotment but the security you need and are entitled to does not need the deployment of fencing that is used to secure The Securitas Depot. Allotments should be attractive parts of our communities, surely, not industrially fenced eye-sores. That seems to me to be the basis of opposition; not what is needed but HOW it is being done so appallingly.

sue said...

I hear what you are saying but my understanding is that there will be hedgerow planted on the outside of the fence which should go a long way to concealing it once established. I and people at TDC suggested that the central path should be diverted and the site opened out into one, but this was not acceptable either. You can't have it all ways. A lower fence will not keep vandals out.