Tesco still wants a new store in town

The EADT reported on the 7th: A Supermarket  giant will not challenge a decision to refuse it permission to build a new store in Hadleigh, the EADT can reveal. Tesco had been widely expected to appeal after Babergh councillors expressed concern over whether their grounds for refusal were strong enough. But with the deadline looming for challenging the July decision, Tesco said it would instead return to the drawing board to come up with a better design. It means the long-running saga will rumble on for some time yet despite the supermarket chain expressing hope it will have new designs ready by the end of the year. A spokeswoman for Tesco said: “We’d like to build a supermarket that is acceptable to the council and local people and therefore we will not be lodging an appeal. “We are now working on a different design and look forward to consulting the council and the local community in due course, on how we can improve this. “We have appointed some expert designers – a range of them – to come up with some ideas and we have started putting together some draft plans. “These independent experts will tell us whether they think it is compatible with the heritage and feel of Hadleigh. “We don’t want it to stall any longer, it’s been a long process already. But we don’t want to rush things and make another mistake.” Tesco’s plans for a 2,500 sq metre store on the former Brett Works site were narrowly rejected in July, despite Babergh District Council planning officers recommending approval. Planning members refused the proposals because of the store’s design after being told concerns over its impact on traffic and independent stores were not valid reasons for rejection. Brian Haylock, owner of independent bookshop The Idler, said: “If they put in a design like the Taj Mahal we could say we don’t like it. But I don’t suppose we’ll do that, I fear Tesco will get their way. “I think it would change the whole nature of the town, which at the moment is a typical thriving British town. “We shall go on fighting it, we’re not going to give in. “But it does look disheartening sometimes especially when our objections are dismissed, such as those about the effects a Tesco will have on trade. “I still feel the same about Tesco – I can’t accept them coming into the town. There are very persistent and I suppose we should be on our guard against them.” http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/hadleigh_tesco_still_wants_a_new_store_in_town_1_1171186

So we continue to live and fight another day.

Who wears the dog collar?

Today’s column by Damien Thompson in the Telegraph  (http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100128028/opus-dei-and-the-patron-saint-of-electronic-eavesdroppers/)  reports  as follows:
More trouble in the Anglican Communion, I’m sorry to relate. Traditionalists in Canada have taken offence because a woman priest, the Rev Marguerite Rea of St Peter’s, Toronto, gave communion to a dog – specifically, a German Shepherd cross called Trapper. Ms Rea explained that this was “a simple act of reaching out” to a new congregation member and his pet. Alas, the Synod has yet to approve extending the sacrament to dogs – and I predict a fuss when the proposal does come up, not least from cat owners who will feel excluded. Also, as my Catholic priest friend Fr Tim Finigan points out on his blog, (http://the-hermeneutic-of-continuity.blogspot.com/ ) “an incidental problem for trendies wanting to give the wafer to dogs is that they are not likely to follow the more modern practice of receiving in the hand”.

It makes the Paris Bourse look like a parish council

An open letter to German Chancellor Angela Merkel (Published in the Express – see below for a link to the original and the comments).
Tuesday December 13,2011
By Frederick Forsyth Dear Madame Chancellor,
Permit me to begin this letter with a brief description of my knowledge of, and affection for, your country.
I first came to Germany as a boy student aged 13 in 1952, two years before you were born. After three extended vacations with German families who spoke no English. I found at the age of 16, and to my pleasure, that I could pass for German among Germans.In my 20s I was posted as a foreign correspondent to East Germany. in 1963, when you would have been a schoolgirl, just north of East Berlin where I lived.
I know Germany, Frau Merkel, from the alleys of Hamburg to the spires of Dresden, from the Rhine to the Oder, from the bleak Baltic coast to the snows of the Bavarian Alps I say this only to show you that I am neither ignoramus nor enemy.
I also had occasion in those years to visit the many thousands of my countrymen who held the line of the Elbe against 50,000 Soviet main battle tanks and thus kept Germany free to recover, modernise and prosper at no defence cost to herself. And from inside the Cold War I saw our decades of effort to defeat the Soviet empire and set your East Germany free.
I was therefore disappointed last Friday to see you take the part of a small and vindictive Frenchman in what can only be seen as a targeted attack on the land of my fathers.
We both know that every country has at least one aspect of its society or economy that is so crucial, so vital that it simply cannot be conceded. For Germany it is surely your automotive sector, your car industry. Any foreign-sourced measure to target German cars and render them unsaleable would have to be opposed to veto point by a German chancellor.
For France it is the agricultural sector. For more than 50 years members of the EU have been taxed under the terms of the Common Agricultural Policy in order to subsidise France ‘s agriculture. Indeed, the CAP has been the cornerstone of every EU budget since the first day. Attack it and France fights back.
For us the crucial corner of our economy is the financial services industry. Although parts of it exist all over the country it is concentrated in that part of London known, even internationally, as “The City”.It is not just a few greedy bankers; we both have those, but the City is far more. It is indeed a vast banking agglomeration of more banks than anywhere else in the world.
But that is the tip of the iceberg. Also in the City is the world’s greatest concentration of insurance companies. Add to that the brokers, traders in stocks and shares worldwide, second only, and then maybe not, to Wall Street. But it is not just stocks. The City is also home to the exchanges of gold and precious metals, diamonds, base metals, commodities, futures, derivatives, coffee, cocoa… the list goes on and on. And it does not yet touch upon shipping, aviation, fuels, energy, textiles… enough.
Suffice to say the City is the biggest and busiest marketplace in the world. It makes the Paris Bourse look like a parish council set against the United Nations and even dwarfs your Frankfurt many times.
That, surely, is the point of what happened in Brussels. The French wish to wreck it and you seem to have agreed. Its contribution to the British economy is not simply useful nor even merely valuable. It is absolutely crucial. The financial services industry contributes 10 per cent of our Gross Domestic Product and 17.5 per cent of our taxation revenue. A direct and targeted attack on the City is an attack on my country. But that, although devised in Paris, is what you have chosen to support. You seem to have decided that Britain is once again Germany’s enemy, a situation that has not existed since 1945. I deeply regret this but the choice was yours and entirely yours. The Transaction Tax or Tobin Tax, you reserve the right to impose, would not even generate money for Brussels. It would simply lead to massive emigration from London to other havens. Long ago it was necessary to live in a city to trade in it. In the days when deals can flash across the world in a nano-second all a major brokerage needs is a suite of rooms, computers, telephones and the talent of the young people barking offers and agreements down the phone. Such a suite of rooms could be in Berne, Thun, Zurich or even Singapore. Under your Tobin Tax tens of thousands would leave London. This would not help Brussels, it would simply help destroy the British economy. Your conference did not even save the Euro. Permit me a few home truths about it.
The euro is a Franco-German construct. It was a German chancellor (Kohl) who ordered a German banker (Karl Otto Pohl) to get together with a French civil servant (Delors) on the orders of a French president (Mitterrand) and create a common currency. Which they did. It was a flawed construct. Like a ship with a twisted hull it might float in calm water but if it ever hit a force eight it would probably founder. Even then it might have worked for it was launched with a manual of rules, the Growth And Stability Pact. If the terms of that book of rules had been complied with the Good Ship Euro might have survived. But compliance was entrusted to the European Central Bank which catastrophically failed to insist on that compliance. Rules governing the growing of cucumbers are more zealously enforced. This was an European Bank in a German city under a French president and it failed in its primary, even its sole, duty. This had everything to do with France and Germany and nothing whatever to do with Britain. Yet in Brussels last week the EU pack seemed intent only on venting its spleen on the country that wisely refused to abolish its pound. You did not even address yourselves to saving the Euro but only to seeking a way to ensure it might work in some future time. But the Euro will not be saved. It is crumbling now. And since you have now turned against my country, from this side of the Channel, Madame Chancellor, one can only say of the euro: YOU MADE IT, YOU MEND IT.
The full article (and the comments) may be found  on http://www.express.co.uk/ourcomments/view/289553/Frederick-ForsythAn-open-letter-to-German-Chancellor-Angela-MerkelAn-open-letter-to-German-Chancellor-Angela-MerkelAn-open-letter-to-German-Chancellor-Angela-Merkel

Car Parking & Other Matters

On Tuesday 13th  (December) I took part in Babergh’s Joint Overview & Scrutiny (Community Services) and (Stewardship) meeting. I appointed myself as initial chairman of the meeting so that we could elect a chairman (not me!). The chief purpose of this meeting was to recommend to the Strategic Financial Planning Task Group the key options for the draft budget. The Council faces a substantial reduction in Government funding. After some considerable debate the Committee overwhelmingly opted for the following recommendations:

  • ·         Council Tax to rise by 3.5%. This will increase our tax base, give us additional revenue of £45,000 and will ameliorate future shortfalls. After the increase we will still have the second lowest Band D in Suffolk. The additional cost will be less than £5 per year per Band D property.
  • ·         To leave the present car parking regime unchanged.(The Portas review was published this morning). (see http://www.bis.gov.uk/highstreet).
  • ·         To use up to £3000,000 (s.t.c.) of the £924,000 received from  the Government as a New Homes Bonus (based upon past performance) to balance budgets – or to put it another way to invest and support the social investments represented by our car parks.

The recommendations were all against the Executive’s recommendations (which would have been cleared beforehand with members of more senior committees) and have yet to make their way through the various decision channels before coming to the full council in February.

So it remains to be seen how far democratic principles will prevail and the New Year promises to be interesting.

À la recherche du temps perdu

For Proust it was the taste of a madeleine cake dipped in tea which inspired a nostalgic incident of involuntary memory. For me it is the aroma of mushy peas and chips in Norwich market which reminds me of boyhood holidays in East Anglia. Recently Hadleigh’s Friday fishmonger has been stocking Nile Perch steaks which with a Pernod Sauce instantly reminds me of the Mamba Point restaurant in Kampala. –Oh happy memories! (http://www.mamba-point.com/. But last week’s involuntary memory was brought about by a trip to Calais for Christmas shopping and a break with good friends of long standing. I handled the Eurotunnel travel arrangements (no cross channel voyages in December!) and Adrian sourced the hotel. Which is how we came to stay at the nuit d’ailleurs (http://www.nuit-dailleurs.com/modulosite2/accueil-chambres-hotes.htm). It is a small B&B in the heart of Calais with four themed rooms (the Pekin, the Bombay, the Agadir and the Phuket). Apart from my allergy to feather pillows it all went well. We stayed in the Bombay and our friends had the Pekin. We were the only visitors. The B&B is well rated. My involuntary memory was that it reminded me of the hotel in What’s New Pussy Cat. Our conclusion on the way home was that it was a nice place for married couples (before they were married).

 

The Stowupland Cockerels

One problem of many communities is  that of incomers who wish to change a world which has gone on for centuries. A good example is people who complain about Church bells being too loud and intrusive.
Normally, people (including Councils) just shrug their shoulders and tell the complainants to get on with their lives. Sometimes the spirit of live and let live prevails and everything goes on as normal. At other times the local council feels obliged to serve noise abatement orders on the offending parties.
One such case reached the newspapers last month when Nick Stutchbury  was fined £50 plus £300 costs for noise from his cockerels.
And then the Small/Big society came into its own. The East Anglian Daily Times reports that Mr. Stutchbury’s supporters at his local pub have raised the money needed to pay the fine and the court costs. Mr. Stutchbury is described as “a gentle fellow who  makes bit of a living from selling eggs.”

It’s what living in the countryside is all about and if you do not like it – then look to live somewhere else.

The original report was on the 3rd November. See http://www.eadt.co.uk/news/stowmarket_man_is_fined_over_his_noisy_cockerels_1_1115836 for more details – especially the comments

Time to Make Noise (2)

I copied my correspondence on noise with the Ministry of Culture, Media and Sport to Tim  Yeo, my M.P.
I received the following e-mail response:

Dear Cllr Riley,
Tim is currently in Suffolk so has asked me to thank you for sending him a copy of your letter to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport regarding your concerns about its proposal to deregulate Section One of the Licensing Act 2003.
Tim has written to the relevant Minister about this.
Yours sincerely
Sarah Williams
Parliamentary Assistant to Tim Yeo MP

It’s nice to receive support from a high level.

Ideas before their time

It is no secret that every year Babergh District Council faces a difficult time balancing its budget and during the course of the year the problem is resolved by cutting costs, using reserves, deferring expenditure etc. This year is no different, despite the savings being achieved by amalgamating departments with Mid Suffolk District Council. One interesting idea this year was to defer some of the pay-down of the pensions deficit. The deficit which was mainly caused by previously contribution holidays soaks up just under a million pounds a year. Deficit fluctuations in the past have been as high as  a positive  £19 million which completely dwarfed anything we might do on an annual basis using current funds. All was going well and there was a good head of steam developing behind the idea of seeking a review of the contribution schedule. Alas between the 31st March valuation and 30th September’s (made available to us at the end of November ) the deficit had grown from 19.8%  to 30.5% of the fund’s liabilities. Any review of the contribution schedule would have to take into account the deficit increase and on a cash flow basis we could end up being worse off. So we need to wait and hope that the markets recover by 2013 when the actuary once again consults the auguries and issues his pronouncements. (Unless of course we can find another reason to change current arrangements).