Home   News   Article

READERS’ LETTERS: From the Bury Free Press of Friday, March 25

Readers' letters
Readers' letters

A selection of readers’ letters from the Bury Free Press of Friday, March 25.


Having supplied the Abbey Gardens with plants for 20 odd years, until four years ago, working very closely with Steve Burgess and his team of gardeners, I was amazed to see that St Edmundsbury Borough Council was considering abolishing Steve Burgess’ position.

The park was always professionally managed due to Steve’s ability and knowledge of the park. A person totally dedicated to his job.

The result of this can be seen in the high esteem the visitors to the park regard the outcome of their hard work.

To even consider losing his expertise and knowlege, which should be passed on to apprentices and the next generation of gardeners, is a waste of talent.

While I appreciate that savings have to be made by the council, I do not believe the need to make a small saving on one of the ‘jewels in the crown’ of Bury St Edmunds when you consider the partnership council of Forest Heath Council can spend £140,000 on a solar farm which was never built.

It would seem, as always, the councillors are very quick to take credit for things like the Abbey Gardens but do not appreciate the hard work that is put in by the people actually doing the work.

-- Clive Sperrink, Sperrink’s Nursery, Gazeley


As there are teams of litter pickers doing their best to smarten up our local environment, and the general public have been asked to ‘Clean for The Queen’ in celebration of her 90th birthday, would it be too much to ask for whoever is responsible for the upkeep of the block of flats situated at the junction of Parkway and King’s Road, to do whatever is necessary to make this building look less of an eyesore?

It is, after all, in a very prominent position, and in its present state does nothing to enhance the overall picture of Bury St Edmunds.

-- Name and address supplied


I refer to the report (Bury Free Press, March 11) relating to the residents’ campaign to save oak woodland on Rougham Hill. the statement by Michael Hargreaves is very misleading and I would like to know when he carried out the survey on how many people used the wood.

A lot of people use the wood to enjoy the wildlife or walk their dogs, particularly in the summer. This area is an important community and environmental asset. It includes many trees, some possibly 200 years old, and it should be noted that, with the prospect of another 1,250 houses to be built, such assets become even more important.

Why do travellers need permanent sites? They could be sited on the old A45 road that is currently an eyesore.

The main purpose of the objection is to save the oak woods, that are clearly stated to have been preserved for public enjoyment, not to stop a travellers’ site.

The council has already rejected the site plans and agreed the wood should not be destroyed. Why destroy a nature wood and possibly replace it with a new woodland that will take 30-50 years to be of any beauty or benefit to the environment.

-- G J Cartwright, Bury St Edmunds


There are many issues to be considered before deciding which way to vote in the EU Referendum.

As the defence of the realm is accepted as being the first priority of government, defence and security must be a major factor in deciding where to put that all important cross.

Unfortunately, too many people, including John Wilkin (Letters, March 11), make the mistake of thinking that the EU has played an important part in keeping the peace since the Second World War when the credit must go to Nato. Going into too much detail is not possible in a short letter, but Nato has been the deterrent against Russia, and the EU has played no part in the Basque conflict, the troubles in Northern Ireland and the Turkish invasion of Cyprus.

The Croatian war of independence was resolved by the Nato- manned UN Force, the Bosnian war was resolved giving Nato authority for action, Kosovo was resolved by UN/Nato, as was the further unrest in that country.

The EU has actually done nothing useful in the defence field during its existence. Worse, it was EU diplomatic recklessness that kicked off the Ukraine crisis. The thought of our Armed Forces becoming part of an EU force, thus putting our servicemen at the whim of unelected EU bureaucrats, doesn’t bear thinking about.

On top of all this, there is the question of our borders. The only way we can fully control who comes into this country is to leave the EU. Meanwhile, do we know how many of the refugees from the Middle East are potential terrorists? We can only hope there aren’t many, but we would be naive to think there are none. Once they have an EU passport there is a good chance they can get to Britain. At the moment all we can do is keep our fingers crossed and hope that existing measures can stop them coming to our country, but it’s a lottery.

In the final analysis, our security and defence will be much better served by leaving the EU and sticking with the proven Nato Alliance.

-- David Wedgwood, Cowlinge


I am not sure if the two recent correspondents are part of ‘Project Fear’ regarding the EU referendum and ‘Brexit’, or whether they have succumbed to the propaganda spread by it.

It saddens me when I read in a letter, someone who resorts to name-calling. J K Apps called Ed Milliband a numbskull and those who support Brexit as Little Englanders – an old, worn-out, tired and stereotypical expression). To me, they have already lost the chance to convince me of their argument (Bury Free Press, March 4).

When one takes into consideration how many billions of pounds we give to the EU per year and how much of our own money we are permitted back (directed and regulated how to spend), and the amount of trade there is between us and the EU and vice-versa, it makes sense that we will not suffer, but will benefit from Brexit. Many believe that jobs would actually increase.

I for one, do not believe a British government, after Brexit, would not continue to support our farmers and farm-workers. To me, that would be illogical.

Among the many ‘out’ websites, I recommend the website betteroffout.net to J K Apps. Please read the sections, 10 myths, also 10 reasons to leave.

John Wilkin implies that it is the EU that has kept peace in Europe for decades (Bury Free Press, March 11). He clearly fails to give credit where credit is really due - to Nato.

-- Ian Smith, Bury St Edmunds


Let us clear the air about the referendum a bit shall we?

What will a post-Brexit Britain look like?

Well on June 24, after the massive vote for ‘leave’, we can expect ... nothing. Things are not going to suddenly change.

We can easily insist on our membership of the European Economic Area (aka the Common Market) being honoured for the time of the negotiations to leave. We could also go for the interim Norway option and join EFTA too. That would nail down our trading arrangements.

We then start to talk. We need to accept all the EU directives and then slowly start to sort through them. We need to deal with the problem of immigration tactfully and carefully. We need to discuss security both militarily and also with the police. There will be a lot to fix. And it will take time.

Even the ‘nuclear option’ of Article 50 takes a minimum of two years to work.

In a way, it will be rather a damp squib. But we can rely on our trade continuing just the same – while we negotiate. We will see the immigration rules slowly change so that they, at long last, become fair and reasonable. We can expect to see our banks flourish when they are free of control from Frankfurt. We will probably see our military at last become proper members of Nato. And, because of our EFTA and EEA membership, nobody who likes to live in, say, Greece or Spain will be really affected.

Our general direction of travel will be to leave. Meanwhile, the other states of Europe will be drawn into ever closer union as the Eurozone will suck them in.

Outside this inner ring, guaranteed by our membership of EFTA, safeguarded by the EEA, we can flourish as we strive for complete independence.

-- Mike Stallard, via email


Iliffe Media does not moderate comments. Please click here for our house rules.

People who post abusive comments about other users or those featured in articles will be banned.

Thank you. Your comment has been received and will appear on the site shortly.


Terms of Comments

We do not actively moderate, monitor or edit contributions to the reader comments but we may intervene and take such action as we think necessary, please click here for our house rules.

If you have any concerns over the contents on our site, please either register those concerns using the report abuse button, contact us here.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies - Learn More