Skip to main content

I'M ADDRESSING A LARGE MEETING OF COUNCILLORS IN THE LOWESTOFT AREA ABOUT THE FUTURE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN NORFOLK AND SUFFOLK, LATER TODAY...

 

A meeting is being held at Lound Parish Hall today [at 7.30], Thursday 4th September for all Parish Councillors and Clerks from: Ashby, Blundeston & Flixton, Carlton Colville, Corton, Gisleham, Herringfleet, Lound, Oulton, Somerleyton and Hopton. [The purpose of the meeting is to give all the Parish Councillors the opportunity to learn about the Boundary Committee proposals and about various Parties' views of them, before returning to their respective Parishes to discuss the proposal and submit their views to the Committee.]

 

In my speech to the meeting I will be stressing the commitment of Norwich and Norfolk Green Parties to local government and to resisting any drive towards centralisation / toward overly large administrative areas for local government. This implies very strong reservations about the 1- or 2- or 3- unitary models currently being proposed for Norfolk (and Lowestoft).

 

The Green Party strongly believes that Lowestoft should have a far more local council than any of the Boundary Committee proposals would give it; that means that we would back either a 'Yartoft' Council (comprising Yarmouth and Lowestoft, a mostly-urban area with mostly urban needs, in common) or simply the status quo. Preserving the status quo would be far preferable than taking all the power away to somewhere remote in Norfolk.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Reasonable manners, in the blogosphere

Dear readers of Rupert's Read; One thing I am pleased about about this blog is that when we have had debates or disagreements here, they have virtually always been good-tempered. Because the norm out there in the blogosphere is often not like that. Take 'Comment is Free', for example, on the Guardian Unlimited site: the level of debate on CIF is pretty awful, frankly, in terms of civility. It is a very unpleasant place to take part in any debate, generally, unless perhaps (as most commenters do) one hides behind the veil of anonymity (which 'ain't allowed' here). And the truth is, in case any fellow commenters reading this don't realise it, that there are many many people who get put off even reading (let alone posting to) CIF because of the volume of plain nasty comments that they risk getting, when they do. I am slightly singling out CIF here, because I believe that this is actually one of the worst places on the blogosphere in terms of this kind of ...
15 comments
Read more

Medialens under the lens, over Syria and Libya: Becoming the new Dave Sparts?

I have long been an active supporter of Medialens ( http://www.medialens.org/ ). Like many others, I have supported them with money, time, tips, and I have been proud to have done so. For they have done very important groundbreaking work over the years challenging the inanities and distortions of the 'mainstream' media. They have for example written important critiques of mainstream media coverage of dangerous climate change, of Iraq Body Count, of the corporate nature of most of our media, and much more besides. They have held the corporate media to account time and again. They ought to be saluted for all of that. It is therefore with a sense of deep regret (as well as of some foreboding) that I have finally to write to address the ways in which, lately, some of the wheels seem to be coming off their wagon. An early warning sign perhaps was their long-running spat with George Monbiot, over the Rwandan genocide and the terrible atr...
16 comments
Read more