Name Your Feedback Pat Bellay I Wish to Put on Record My
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Name Your feedback Pat Bellay I wish to put on record my support, as a Suffolk Business [Pat Bellay Designers Ltd], for the East Suffolk, West Suffolk + North Haven 3 way split of Suffolk as being proposed by St Edmundsbury; Forest Heath + Waveney District Councils. One Suffolk would be far to large an area controlled from Ipswich + there is a definite clear difference between East + West Suffolk going way back beyond the reorganisation in 74 + this difference should be recognised + restored. I knew + regularly visited Suffiolk from Essex in the 50's, moved here to live + work in Suffolk in 1968, + have been in business on my own account since 1976 [firstly based in Ipswich, in Needham Market from 1982]. Re-organistion is well overdue, the District/County mix has not worked at all well + District Authorities have become extremely parochial. Hopefuly whatever comes out of this review will have sufficient scope to be less parochial as currently with the Districts but not too remote as would be the likely case with the whole of Suffolk centred on Ipswich. Ideally I would probably go even further than this 3 way proposal [not proposed by anyone that I know of - but to get away from connection with Ipswich] to a 2 way split centred on Bury St Edmunds - with the dividing line running South to North from the 'North Haven' western edge as East Suffolk centred on Ipswich, West Suffolk with Stowmarket + Needham Market along with as far as current MSDC areas of 'Barking+Somersham'; Helmingham+Coddenham'; 'Debenham'; Worlingworth, + Hoxne. The latter 2 way split alternative being essentially a very personal view - but with considerable merit I feel derived from my own experience of dealing with most of the past + existing Suffolk Authorities since June 1968. Gary Butler I have watched the various changes in direction regarding the structure of local government in Suffolk over recent years with wonderment. I am an ex local government at service management level. As a member of the public, I now have as much information on the subject as I am likely to have. The conclusion I have reached is that it would be madness to have any solution other than one unitary Suffolk Council. Why should local government in Suffolk be any different from that in Norfolk? It must also produce not only the greatest financial savings but also bring the people of Suffolk together, which is to be desired in what is predominantly a rural county. We will receive better service if our services are not split. Yours sincerely Gary Butler s I think that the whole of suffolk option will be more cost effective and hopkinson efficient. Much is organised like that already, such as: schools, police, fire service. To really make the system unitary, ie one authority Suffolk County Council do an extremely good job already. Splitting Suffolk as proposed will be bad for all the rural areas taken over by Ipswich with which they have nothing in common. There will be too little representation for a rural area which is not part of the development area of the Haven Gateway, whereas with a whole suffolk there would be a better balance of rural and urban. This must be less efficient and more expensive for the poll tax payers. Susan This planextends the distance from the voter to the local authority, and will Mason further alienate the less articulate voter from their representatives. Gone will be the day when people felt thay could call on their councillor with problems, or the councillor could recognise constituents in the stree. Democracy must ensure that governemt keeps within reach of the electors. Of course, this will suit those who donot care about the underprivelged, who already have a poor polling record. Ultimately, the function of the council will be to commission business consortia to carry oyt local government functiond. Then the councillors will have no rsponsibility, will always be able to blame the company for shortcomings, and will claim that they arewatchdogs. This is not demcoracy, but will aid the increase of private profiteers who will take on othe profitable jobs, and further disadvantage the underprivileged. Eventually locasl governemnt will go the way of the NHS and the increase in private services. Working is it? I hope you don't have toothache. John I have been a resident of Bury St Edmunds for more than 30 years; I was Williams an elected member of St Edmundsbury Borough Council for 20 years; I am closely involved with the running of a local sports ground, which is owned by the Borough Council, but managed by a not-for-profit company with the aid of a grant from the council. I am in favour of the establishment of unitary authorities; the public do not understand the difference between District and County Councils, and why should they. I want to see a Council that is connected with and represents the area where I live, work, and play; this is Bury St Edmunds and the surrounding area. My first preference would be for 3 separate unitary authorities for West Suffolk, East Suffolk, and 'Greater' Ipswich If this is not possible on economic grounds then the published proposal for 'rural' Suffolk and 'North Haven'is the best solution. I rarely visit Ipswich, which I see as remote and a different sort of place; I am strongly opposed to a single Unitary Authority for the whole of Suffolk Jackie I have lived in hte middle of Suffolk for 29 years, and practised as a Ward chartered town planner in four of the district council areas, and my views are similar to those expressed by St Edmundsbury and Forest Heath councils. A single giant unitary council for Suffolk would be too large and remote with any claimed benefits outweighed by the loss of local accountability; East Suffolk, West Suffolk and North Haven have distinctly different priorities and needs which one council would struggle to balance; All three councils will be of sufficient size to offer strategic leadership, economy and value for money, but will be much closer to, and empower, local people; The East and West are very different places, with different futures because: landscapes, heritage, age profiles, housing, growth, patterns of deprivation, learning and skills needs, densities and patterns of settlement are all different; economically they look in different sub-regional directions: West Suffolk to Cambridge; East Suffolk to Ipswich, the Haven Gateway and Norwich; both areas demand different and innovative approaches to environmental management, growth, transport, and the way in which services are actually delivered in local communities; Under an East Suffolk, West Suffolk and North Haven split, Lowestoft should stay in Suffolk Jackie Ward B A(Hons), Tip TP, MBA, MRTPI S Lambirth Very strongly opposed to the idea of Ipswich expanding to include rural parishes/villages. This will mean representation of the rural areas will be minimal and completely swamped by the urban members. I don't think this was made clear in any of the publicity material put out promoting the scheme by Ipswich Council. Please throw out this bad idea. If savings are to be made, why not reduce the number of rural councils, perhaps amalgamating neighbouring ones, but keeping them in charge of all rural areas. I can see no benefit for villages just outside Ipswich being part of a huge authority. Michael I first lived and worked in Suffolk, in 1974 and know it very well. Anyone Munt who has lived in the county will almost certainly agree that the East/West division, which before 1974 was reflected by the two county administrations is still very relevant to the social, economic, spatial and cultural character of Suffolk and the way in which it functions. The communications network in east Suffolk is focused on Ipswich. In the west Bury is an important hub, although many residents look to Cambridge for work, education and leisure. Any reorganisation which ignores such a fundamental trait is unlikely to provide an efficient, sustainable or locally accessible form of government. It therefore suggests two uniitary authorities based in Ipswich and Bury. There is a strong arguement for Lowestoft becoming part of a Norfolk authority, reflecting the strong links that Lowestoft has with Yarmouth e.g. through the 1st East URC, and Norwich as its most accessible regional centre . Under the present proposals Bredfield, where I live would be served by a council based in Bury St. Edmunds about 35 miles away, rather than Woodbridge (3 miles) or Ipswich (10 miles). This can only be a retrograde step. For towns such as Aldeburgh or Halesworth it would be a nonesense. If the Haven Gateway is to be used as a base for a new authority then it should cover the whole designation including Colchester and Tendring. "North Haven" has no basis historically or in socio-economic terms with a boundary still running through Harwich Harbour. Michael Munt Dip TP, MRTPI, Grad Dipl Cons, IDBE, IHBC Allan I both live in Ipswich and work for SCC in CYP services. My children attend Cadzow SCC schools. I favour the Unitary Suffolk option including Lowestoft. Whilst I believe a North Haven and a Rural Suffolk could survive I feel only a unitary Suffolk can thrive. As well as believing a Unitary Suffolk will be cheapest, easist and closest Suffolk needs as strong a voice as possible regionally, nationally and in Europe and this is most easily acheived with One Suffolk. Ipswich and Felixstowe need the rest of Suffolk and vice versa - they will be stronger with each other and weaker without. I do not want my address made public - I manage sensitive services.