Promises and projects fade

Having just received the Bexhill Conservative election leaflets, it set me thinking.

First – ‘Breaking News’, they are now suggesting a ‘Bexhill Community Council’. There is no suggestion this would have executive powers, so it would be a renamed Bexhill Committee answerable to Rother Cabinet and Maynard, which was rejected in 2017.

Readers will by now have seen in their Council Tax bill for 2019, that Bexhill’s funding has been cut by 8.7 per cent plus inflation, say 11 per cent, by our current Conservative run Rother District Council.

Our area is the only one cut in Rother District. They refer to Bexhill Developers infrastructure payments to Rother (CIL Contribution) being diverted to this new ‘council’. It is highly unlikely, despite the inference that the total CIL payments would be passed to the new ‘council’.

No mention is made of the continued control on decisions that would be imposed by Maynard’s Cabinet.

It would ‘divide and rule’ Bexhill’s wards and community. It would set those who want extra funding for Bexhill against those residents who for valid reasons might oppose development in their different wards.

Conclusion – Bexhill having received an 11 per cent cut in 2019, will have helped fund the Minimalist Council Tax priorities of this current Cabinet. It would only then recover that funding if further development in Bexhill is approved. Very clever, Mr. Maynard.

Second – the oft repeated untruth that a Bexhill Town Council would ‘be too expensive’. Since the admin costs for a Town Council are typically stable, whatever the population, our Conservative leaders appear to be inferring that the Town Councils of Battle and Rye set up in 1974 are also too expensive.

Since they have existed for 45 years that cannot be true.

As the population of Bexhill is vastly larger than Battle or Rye, the cost per head of a Bexhill Town Council will be considerably less per head than our two existing Town Councils in Rother.

Now onto the Conservative leaflet claims! 1. ‘Encourage and support local? Tourism’. Mmm, but without the Tourist information Centre they closed, the Help Centre they closed and the closed or filthy public toilets in Bexhill.

2. Review off street parking! The Conservatives introduced charging at Little Common Car Park, despite reasoned protests. So now it is rarely used, the surrounding roads are choked, the Co-op shop closed and has remained empty for many years. ‘Support Local Businesses’ – really?

3. ‘Tough on crime and anti-social behaviour’. A police matter surely, what has Rother Council contributed?

4. ‘Development in the right places’ – (a bit of a self-induced problem in Barnhorn Road? Finally at election time, acknowledged too late).

5. ‘A new £20m Leisure Centre in Bexhill’ – ? Privately funded? So how has RDC contributed to this project (apart from selling the land)?

6. ‘Bexhill seafront shelter restoration’ – lucky they were finally listed! As no repairs had been carried out on these attractive buildings for years.

7. ‘Encouraging Sports and Recreational Facilities’ – Mmm, how long have the Sidley facilities been abandoned? It’s more than encouragement that is expected of a progressive council.

All these problems have occurred under Conservative Rother Control over decades. Beware vague and inaccurate promises made a few weeks before our May 2 Local Election. Such promises and projects fade very quickly here in Bexhill! Anyone can make promises, its enacting them that our current councillors find so difficult.

Bexhill readers, look around you, remember the RDC Conservatives closed the toilets near Sainsbury’s because of a £3,000 repair bill, they refused to fund the £14,000 necessary for information distribution during the Bexhill Town Council ‘consultation’. Do you really believe they will allow a new Bexhill non-executive group (Bexhill Community Council) to spend adequately to bring Bexhill back to its rightful condition? Do you really believe Maynard and ‘family’ will pass all the developer’s contributions to a Bexhill controlled group – they haven’t in the past!