Economical with the truth

I ATTENDED the public meeting concerning the application to license Five Acre Field for events.

I assume the events department hadn’t realised the extent of concern this is causing the local residents.

An indication of this was the 40 chairs set out in readiness for the meeting when approximately 100 attended.

I am sure the events department manager would know precisely as he was head counting towards the end, even though we had all signed in.

I also found it belittling to be given a map of Five Acre field - after all, we were only there because it forms part of our community.

Maybe the council representative should have looked at the map more closely as when questioning public safety, a resident asked about the river, the events representative said “What river?” followed by “What about the river?”

It was pointed out to him that it was an unfenced water hazard that could cause drowning.

He said he would inform the circus that they would need to fence it.

How would they police this? If it was unsatisfactory would the performance be cancelled?

When asked if a risk assessment had been undertaken there wasn’t a positive or negative reply.

The council officer claimed that the ground at Five Acre Field is flat - so why won’t the council allow organised sport on it claiming it is uneven and dangerous?

We were informed that the circus pay the events department £7,000 but there was no answer to where the money comes from for extra policing, traffic control and clean-up costs - but it was clear that it’s not the events budget.

Towards the end of the meeting we were passed a map of where they would place the Big Top showing measurements between that and residential boundaries.

How fascinating that the circus this year will not be bringing any caravans, generators, booking office, lorries etc.

Am I being naïve, or are the council being devious when leaving this and the car parking area off?


Queens Crescent