King's Lynn Town Plan, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Lord Geidt/Boris Johnson/partygate in Lynn News readers' letters June 17, 2022

Two points. Firstly, ignore claims by the current crop of political leaders that they are responsible for this grant. They are not. Indeed, their failure to get any grants under the previous “Future High Streets Fund” indicates that their contribution is at best inept.

Secondly, and more worryingly, I cannot see that the two lead projects fulfil the aspirations of the Town Plan Fund. The projects are:

• The renovation of the Guildhall (£12.2m) – original cost October 2020 £3m

• The conversion of the old Argos building to a “Community Hub” (£12.4m)- original cost October 2020 £6.0m, which it is claimed will “bring together the library, adult learning, and careers and employability support in one building”.

These are vanity projects, which I can see are of benefit to the borough and county councils but in reality represent a wasted opportunity, and will consume a staggering amount of public money. And what I think is happening is that there is no coherent political vision of where Lynn could be in 20 years time and in this vacuum, the officers have dusted down old schemes (which were rejected in the application for Future High Streets Fund monies) and forced these on a somewhat disinterested political leadership.

In “scrutiny” by councillors, the point was made again and again that in spite of massive cost increases, councillors were not invited to question the projects put forward. I even asked the Cabinet to put on the brakes and really think about the direction of travel. No response.

So let me put forward other ideas.

• Southgate access improvement

• Comprehensive support for skilling up local people (not just a small School of Nursing)

• Inner city housing to replace derelict shops and excess car parking

• Targeted support for deprived areas – North Lynn, Fairstead, South Lynn, Gaywood Park,Hillington Square. I would prefer to see one stop service centres (ie the Multi-User Hub reduced) in these areas to support local need

• A waterfront hotel development

It will be our own fault if Lynn squanders this Government support through an unimaginative set of recycled proposals because our leaders have demonstrated a startling lack of original vision and a tendency to fall in line with officer proposals.

Tom Ryves,

Independent borough councillor, Methwold ward

QEH

We need to be united

Oh dear, just when I thought Jo Rust was starting to act in a responsible way, she has returned to launching a whole series of vindictive attacks on our hard-working MP, James Wild.

There was that lovely photo in the Lynn News a few weeks ago, appearing to show the various groups working together in London as they continued to campaign hard for our new hospital. But no sooner had that photo been printed when Jo Rust wrote a tirade of spiteful comments in the Lynn News, completely contrary to the appearance in London.

I think this will dismay many people in West Norfolk, as they will feel such divisive public behaviour at a crucial time will not do the campaign any good. As the wise saying goes: “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

Mr Wild is working as hard as anyone with the hard job we have given him. Her increasing disrespect of him does neither her or the campaign any good.

I was at the local public meeting on the QE issue in South Lynn last week. It was called at short notice and unfortunately Mr Wild could not attend, for whatever reason, but he was ridiculed for not being there, which I thought was very cowardly. As it was, the Liberal Democrat councillor, Rob Colwell, was also unable to attend but no-one ridiculed him!

At the beginning of the meeting the chair, Jo Rust, promised that the meeting would not descend into a political fight but as the evening wore on she certainly did encourage a political assassination of our MP’s reputation. The only main speaker I truly respected that night was our hard-working South Lynn county councillor, Alex Kemp, who gave a very passionate but unbiased message to us.

A true independent. Then there was the usual jibe from Jo about Tory ‘partygate’ which I think the public are getting very sick of hearing about. There are much more serious things to deal with, like a possible world war.

Now she thinks it is right to defend lawless people such as Extinction Rebellion, Insulate Britain and BLM. No wonder the majority of law-abiding British people agree that the law on protests needs to be strengthened.

So, Jo, you condescendingly say that our MP ‘needs to do better’ as if he were a schoolboy.

It is you who must do better’ otherwise your Marxist militancy may derail the whole hospital project.

If the new hospital is awarded to us, it will be because of a great team effort, not selfish ambition.

Sheridan Payne,

South Lynn

COUNTY

Changes are not good

The suite of changes to the council’s constitution, all proposed by the administration, would massively decrease accountability and transparency in the county council. They represent a grinding down of democracy to the lowest common denominator.

The changes, if implemented, will give the public the impression that Norfolk councillors do not have much to say, have little staying power and even less commitment to the electorate, with cabinet members drawing back and insulating themselves from being accountable to the public.

This does not represent the county council I know. It is shameful.

The proposals are the wrong direction of travel completely as they include fewer questions to cabinet members, and just on the reports on the agenda instead of on their whole portfolio, shorter time to speak in debates, big obstacles on bringing motions, an unfair, discriminatory hierarchy for motions, always largest group first, more questions having to be lodged days before the meeting, a secret ballot for voting put on a permanent footing. But special time made for “announcements from the leader, chair or head of paid service”. This is not appropriate for the upper tier of local democracy in Norfolk.

Full council is the place where members who are not on the executive must have the opportunity to ask questions of the executive and hold them to account, and debate issues of local concern.

But there would also be huge new barriers to bringing motions and even a need to justify bringing a motion at all. Motions are important as we can do a lot of good as councillors just by speaking up.

It is good practice to answer questions put spontaneously at full council. The proposal for questions on notice to the leader at full council does not make sense. The last time this was an issue, was when the previous leader was ill and became unable to cope with answering questions. This does not apply here at all.

Mistakes have been made before at this council because the administration did not listen to opposition members before making changes to the constitution.

If the council’s constitution is limited in the way proposed, Vital questions will go unasked and unanswered. Vulnerable residents could have their lives put at risk because this council is responsible for critical services.

Full council needs more meetings. The issue of motions not being debated is because the newly-elected Conservatives want to go home after three hours.

None of these changes would benefit the public. They are cobbled together and are only fit for the waste basket.

Alexandra Kemp,

Independent, Clenchwarton and Lynn South

POLITICS

Lord Geidt resignation

If I may be forgiven for misquoting Oscar Wilde when he said “to lose one ethics advisor may be regarded as misfortune, to lose two looks like carelessness”.

The latest resignation by a top Government ethics advisor/watchdog might suggest something isn’t right at the heart of UK politics. Lord Geidt is the second ‘ethics’ advisor to jump ship in the light of the Sue Gray investigation into the fandango surrounding the booze and cake-fuelled ‘meetings’ in lockdown.

Clearly decency, morality and a sense of propriety are no longer a prerequisite for being a Prime Minister and these resignations can only suggest an increasing number see his tenure as toxic for them and the nation. Tory MPs who’ve expressed 100 per cent support for Boris obviously feel that a liar, a twister and a squirmer is entirely acceptable with the office of PM and I’ll leave others to reflect on what this says about their moral compasses. When the guardians of our government’s ethical behaviour resign it must be significant surely?

Unless of course you’re in complete and utterly denial about this degrading debacle.

Steve Mackinder,

Denver