The Conservatives on the council are highly experienced (with one exception), and all are fully committed councillors. On the Liberal Democrat side, there are some councillors who didn't think they were going to win their seats, and consequently probably had no idea how much time it takes.

The trouble is – if they didn't want the job, they shouldn't have put up for it. It does take a lot of time, especially if you want to do a good job.

Of course there are times when people can't make an occasional meeting, but I've heard on the grapevine that at a recent meeting, seven, yes SEVEN libdem councillors failed to show. I don't think that's acceptable.

When I was on the council, and particularly on cabinet, and then as Leader, it became almost a full time job. It needs to be if you're truly committed and want to do a good job.

I, and I'm sure the rest of Eastbourne will be looking for all councillors to be putting full effort into their roles, and not become 'token' councillors.

If they don't, but then a couple of months before the next election they start shouting about how hard they've been working, then local residents will soon show them the door!


Sovereign Harbour
It seems the recent planning application that was turned down by the Eastbourne planning committee for more flats has been overturned by the planning inspectorate.

No surprise in that, it happens far too often.

But the thing that worries me, is that in a recent letter to the Herald, a resident of the Harbour says that he has been told that it isn't council policy to restrict residential development. Well that's not how I see it.

Going back 18 months or so, I proposed a motion to council, seconded by the leader of the opposition (and subsequently passed unanimously), about restricting future development at the harbour, and in particular calling for an investment in the community facilities that the area has been denied over the years.

Furthermore there was a working group set up with developers and landowners, councillors and council officers to come forward with joint proposals acceptable to all.

I've no idea if those meetings are still happening, but I personally haven't seen much evidence of it.

It's been mentioned that the policy of the council is dictated by national policy, not the policy decided by councillors.

That's not how I see it at all.

I know, as we all do, that the government dictates planning policy far too much, and they overrule what they want to. But that isn't the point. It is the policy of the council to allow no further residential development, because that is what the motion I put to council, which was passed unanimously, said.

If that's overruled by the Government that's a different issue, but it doesn't change what Eastbourne Council's policy is.

Look at the recent decision by the council to give money to the fighting fund for the DGH should there be a judicial review. That was passed as a motion to council, and is now the policy of the council to give that money to that cause. It's no different.

Policy is dictated by the locally elected members, and if the heavy hand of the Government overrules it, then the people can do what they should in a democracy and remove them. Let's hope that happy day isn't too far off.

Ian Lucas writes his own blog at www.iloveeastbourne.co.uk