All the lights were on, the heating was turned up full, St Katharine's was buzzing and ready for the great debate - that never happened. Last night's parish meeting, called because of a request by eleven parishioners for a town referendum regarding out of town retail development, was well attended with over a hundred townspeople, councilors and local media present, but no representatives from the campaign group LESS, whose members had called the meeting.
Like England versus Sweden on the telly, it turned out to be a mostly friendly match, or mismatch, with nothing much to be gained by either side, so therefore little was exercised. Debate was played out in what appeared to be a yawning goaless draw, before an unfortunate and embarrasing own goal by a defender of the supermarkets led to a narrow, albeit meaningless victory for LOTS.
With Mayor Conway refusing to come off the bench to officiate, the meeting was refereed by Deputy Mayor Tony Bradford.
Residents made statements and asked questions pertaining to the Tesco/Sainsbury's hypermarket proposals. Those in favour of the grocers complained that they could not get what they wanted in Ledbury, particularly regarding clothes, cheap fuel and the choice of groceries. They said they preferred to shop in Malvern, Ross-on-Wye and Hereford.
Parking was also mentioned by residents saying it was a problem in Ledbury that made shopping in the town centre difficult.
Residents also said that Ledbury needed the employment boost that a hypermarket would deliver.
These arguments were countered by other Ledbury residents: They said the main problem with the proposals were the size and location of the stores. They supported Tesco expanding its existing site, which would then offer more consumer choice and retain its parking.
One resident said they shouldn't expect cheap petrol, if there was no competition.
A Gloucester Road resident spoke about employment claims. He said the supermarkets were here to help themselves, not to help Ledbury. They would not necessarily employ local people.
A Newbury Park resident suggested that more jobs could be lost than gained in the local economy, because the supermarket's presence would close down local retailers, having knock on negative effects to their suppliers and the local service industries.
A New Street resident feared for the smaller supermarkets, the Spar and the Co Op.
A Church Street resident predicted that if Tesco needed 6,000 shoppers a day at a new supermarket, then it would cause 'gridlock' to the town. "Forget parking, you won't be able to get into Ledbury."
Another resident told those assembled that the supermarkets' proposed locations were too far from the town centre - too far to walk, too far to carry groceries.
Local people would continue to shop in Malvern and Hereford because shopping was a leisure activity, someone said.
A member of the Transition movement attempted to talk about the environmental issues regarding these proposals, but the ref prevented her from speaking stating that her point was irrelevant. How discussing the creation of local, sustainable jobs is irrelevant was not made clear. To this writer it is astonishing that the single most important issue of our times, i.e. climate change, is not considered relevant to economic planning. What hope is there?
Finally, local resident Yvonne White proposed the referendum that she had been expecting at this meeting (she did not know that LESS members had withdrawn their request for a parish poll.) She was seconded, but only four residents stood up and were counted. The proposal failed, there will be no parish poll, which will save the tax payer £2,000.
With,apparently, none of the leaders of the LESS campaign group present, debate at this meeting was half-hearted, and with no support for a referendum - the very point of this meeting - it was difficult to see why these one hundred plus residents had turned up and wasted their time on a chilly November evening.
|
Some people are going off topic here and bordering on behaviour which is not acceptable to this administator. The Ledbury Portal is here for debate, discussion, the odd wise crack and hopefully inspired thinking and thoughtfulness. It is important to have some respect for each other here as well as having some dignity for oneself too.
Someone who is wholly pro-superstore, can't spell 'independent' (or 'Masefield' for that matter), uses the term 'no smoke without fire' and the pot-kettle analogy, while being either unable or unwilling to distinguish between a group and its individual members. A quick look at the LESS Facebook Group should give us some clues.
2. Sainsbury's have quoted the number of jobs they expect to be available based on similar stores of similar size .. however it really depends on what hours those who apply wish to work .. if the majority want only 10 hours or so then there will be more jobs available, however, if the majority want 30 hours or more then there will be less jobs avaialble .. its really quite simple.
2. Michael
I've read somewhere, and I'll try to find it, but off-hand I understand Sainsbury's are building a bigger store somewhere but with a far smaller number of jobs required. Makes me think that any jobs estimate is pure speculation at this stage by the company to endear itself to any future locale.