Councillor Claire Stewart’s letter (‘Statistics do not paint true colours’, Opinion, December 3) attempts to belittle the essential question of night security in our core parks by conflating it with the social needs of the borough.
The two issues are not related at any level, but her filial dismissal of the parks security policy will doubtlessly raise her standing with colleagues, as it tanks among the many who are genuinely concerned about the issues.
Our concern stems from the cavalier way Cllr Chris Bond has attempted to slip through a decision important to many and without any consultation; when he was called before the scrutiny panel in October to substantiate his position, he merely asserted the savings of £1,200 per park each year were needed. Formidable advocacy indeed. He has never addressed the question of individual parks’ security needs and weeks later shows no sign of properly accounting for his stewardship. We draw our own conclusions. Is Cllr Stewart really proud to stand alongside this record?
Consultations, even belated, must be conducted in good faith and with objective regard to the facts. Policy determined at the whim of a councillor commands no respect, whatever the issue. It is hard to escape the conclusion that £26,000 of claimed security savings are not really the motivating force here – so what is?
Perhaps Cllr Stewart might enlighten us all, even if a Damascene moment is, temporarily, beyond her colleague’s grasp.
Peter Gibbs
Chairman of Federation of Enfield Residents & Allied Associations
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here