Dear Sir,..


I think some of your editorial was rather rude to the councillors of the CIIP (except it seems for John Anderson whom you praise?). We ALL tried our best to stop the tories voting ‘yes;’ but we all know, and people of this Island know, it was a done deal. 

Please do not criticise people who are only trying their very best for this Island. I used to sit at home and criticise, write letters, etc; but then I joined the  CIIP. I went out and got elected and re-elected and I do my very best. I give 110% for the residents I represent; but I cannot always get the result they or I want and, as the saying goes, ‘you cannot please all of the people, all of the time.’ BUT at least we are out there trying and fighting. 

Please Sir, I do not want praise nor medals; but neither I nor my colleagues deserved the severe, harsh words you blasted upon us. You could remove it completely if you so wish and tell the Islanders the TRUTH: we tried our best, the fight is NOT over, and we will do whatever we can to STOP the Tories concreting over this island.

Anne Wood
Councillor for East Ward

8 Responses

  1. It was just another example of how ineffective the Independents are for Islanders.

    They have no policies, allow the Town Council to be used as a political tool by the CIIP leadership, and are far more interested in playing to the public gallery and the press box than providing effective representation for residents.

    Whatever the rights and wrongs of the core strategy your editorial was correct, the Independents let residents down on every issue.

  2. It is not good enough to just put up your hands and proclaim it was a ‘done deal.’

    Politics is the art of civilised debate and persuasion; but your party proved on Tuesday that it was incapable of taking part in that process.

    I completely agree with Colin MacLean, the editorial was accurate and well deserved

  3. I’m afraid Mrs Wood does herself no favour at all with her letter coming across as petulant and childish.

    The CIIP had only one person who made any good points and that was, as already stated, Mr Anderson reasonable articulate and accurate.

    The rest were just a bunch of rabble-rousing fools who played to the rent-a-mob. Such a pity they displayed their closed minds for all to see. It wasn’t a pretty sight.

    One aspect that I found amusing was to see a CIIP member reading out a letter from the Conservative Secretary for Local Government.

    If you take what he said at face value then he was demanding that at the next election everybody should be voting for the Conservative Party in order to reduce the number of houses to be built, and to bring localism back into the council.

    Perhaps Mrs Wood should consider what he said and support the Conservatives at the next election in order to really preserve the Greenbelt.

  4. As the Labour Parliamentary Candidate for Castle Point perhaps I ought to run the CIIP down. I do have quarrels with them, not least because they were created out of a split in the local Labour Party. But on the issue debated I find myself agreeing with them – in spirit at least.

    Whilst defending government targets (we do need houses) I do not think that the green belt should be built on (at least, only as a last resort). Green belt on Canvey, on the eastern and occupied part of the island, is in short supply. The Conservatives in Castle Point do have a history of nibbling away at it and not always because their hand is forced. The Essex Auto Group site at the Rayleigh Weir is a good example.

    I do think infrastructure is important. This is not just about roads; drainage is an issue on the island. One also wonders why the County thinks to reduce the number of senior schools at a time when housing projects are given the go-ahead.

    I think there is a lack of joined up thinking. I also believe that maximising profit is also behind the choice of sites. Moving the Manor Trading Estate will relieve residents and meet a good portion of the housing targets. I also wonder whether moving Charfleets would also help.

    One thing is certain – the CIIP cannot win an argument at Kiln Road because they will always be a minority. If the islanders want an effective voice there they ought to be voting Labour.

    • I fail to understand the logic behind moving either trading estates, which both exist to provide local jobs for local people.

      If you move them you will rip the heart out of small businesses that rely on their workers for trade (like those in Church Road, Thundersley) – and surely the cost of relocating them will be prohibitive.

      On Canvey, moving Charfleets is simply a recipe for moving jobs off the island so what are we and local businesses that rely on their workers to do then? Add to the already log jammed rush hours pursuing jobs off the island?

      The Dutch Village location is a logical position for new island housing and as far as I am concerned the new 800 acre reserve will provide far better facilities for islanders leisure than a relatively small piece of waste ground that local youths seem intent on setting fire to.

      Maybe they are trying to tell us something.

      Your point about Furtherwick Park school, however, is well made and I cannot dispute your points regarding the island’s infrastructure.

      (I and many others agreed with John Anderson too. It was the other others we had a problem with :-)

      • I am not advocating the moving of Charfleets, merely floating the idea. I agree that we would not want to adversely affect local businesses, but wonder whether a bespoke business park near the Somerfields on the island would be a good place to put it. Then the Charfleets site could be utilised for housing.

        I stress that this is just an idea – I have done no research and am happy to put right if it is a silly idea.

        • I note that but I would sooner see that ‘extra money’ spent adding a community and youth centre to the proposed Dutch Village site to improve the immediate facilites for teenagers that are obviously uneasy about their surroundings.

          I think there are real social issues that need addressing there and its development could be a major step forward.

  5. I would just like to say that as a keen CIIP supporter I attended the Council Meeting referred to and found myself totally supporting their objections. Then, when I read your report on the meeting, I began to see their speeches in another light.

    The last time I contributed here it was to attack your crititicism of the CIIP and what I considered your tory views, but I found myself following your pages anyway and slowly coming to the same conclusions as yourself.

    I now realise that your views do not favour any political party and that you just present the facts for people to make up their own minds.

    I would like to thank you for that and say that I, for one, have now seen the light.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: