downsmail.co.uk Future of the NHS


WITH a general election due in May I have been thinking about the future of the NHS. At Maidstone and TunbridgeWells the


trust is so short of nursing staff it is proposing to bribe potential recruits with Ipads etc. As the Government has put legislation in place to enable easy privatisation without a mandate, they obviously think that is the way forward. This led me to consider the unpredicted consequences of past privatisations. Instead of a more efficient rail service


run by private British companies we now have one of the most expensive rail systems in the world, owned mainly by foreign companies. We have mainly foreign-owned energy companies who raise tariffs on a whim but when oil and gas prices fall, as at present, there is hardly a murmur. Is British Airways another privatisation success? What was once Britain’s flagship airline now shares headquarters in Madrid, Spain with its partner, Iberia. Imagine all the improvements after the


NHS is privatised. There are lots of NHS assets ripe for stripping. Think of all that land at Preston Hall! I think I prefer to stick with the NHS, of


which one of the founding principles was treatment according to need, not profit. Perhaps, in Maidstone, Helen Grant and the other parliamentary candidates could let us know how they would like to see a future NHS, either in private hands or properly funded and democratically accountable. Maybe they could hold a public debate! Tony Monk, Coxheath


Park noise around clock


Dear Sir –Residents in the Mote Park area of the town, including me, will be dismayed to learn that Cllr Malcolm Greer’s commiee, on Maidstone Council, has granted permission for a weekend rock event in Mote Park in July. The last time a similar prolonged assault


on our ears was approved – the Radio 1 BigWeekend – not only did residents as far away as Loose have to put up with unacceptable levels of noise, which almost certainly exceeded the agreed decibel limit, but I was told the town was faced with a bill of about £30,000 to clear up afterwards and re-instate the park. This was in spite of being reassured by Cllr FrancesWilson at a meeting at the grammar school before the weekend event that there would be no cost to ratepayers. Town traders did not benefit, as local people stayed away from the town and there were numerous problems of inconsiderate parking. For the Radio 1 event, the council did, at


least, have the courtesy to inform us well in advance and give assurances, which, in the event, it could not keep, but this proposed event in July seems to have crept


Contact our team ...


Stephen Eighteen Editor stephen@downsmail.co.uk 01622 734735 ext 231


Diane Nicholls


Assistant editor diane@downsmail.co.uk 01622 734735 ext 232


Jane Shotliff


Journalist jane@downsmail.co.uk 01622 734735 ext 233


Dawn Kingsford


Journalist dawn@downsmail.co.uk 01622 734735 ext 233


Maidstone South February 2015 33


in under the radar. Goodness knows what the justification is


for imposing this agony on a huge number of residents, but I only hope that when it comes to the next local election, those who will suffer in July will remember who was responsible. David Hacke, ParkWay, Maidstone


Need for homes is simple


Dear Sir – In respect that the housing question is complex (Leers, January, Military solution to homes, your response)I fundamentally disagree with you; house building has never been a complex domestic issue because our own statistics as far back as the 1930s to the 1950s prove we built far more council homes than today even after the crippling financial implications of the two world wars. If your home has been flooded in East Farleigh, Yalding, Marden or Tonbridge and you are stuck in a hotel or living with relatives, the lack of housing available might indeed be considered an emergency from the perspective of the families affected. There are thousands of families stuck in expensive bed and breakfasts tonight costing the British taxpayers millions of pounds a year. A massive expansion in the supply of housing is the only way to bring house prices down so that ratio between earnings and mortgage loans is sustainable for our young adults. Without these new builds our building industry might quickly fall into total collapse. Turnover is everything but so is employment from the Government’s point of view – another factor you don’t touch on in your response. Surely the salaries of the builders help purchase the goods in our towns and villages? In Britain we live on just 10-11% of our


land mass and those fiends in London plan to expand it to 12%. Your claim that these building developments will decimate huge areas of greenfield land is totally false and very misleading. It is all very well for councillors and indeed you to preach that we must maintain our green and pleasant land for the few who already enjoy it because their views might be slightly blighted or the traffic slightly increased. Most people had the opportunity to buy


or rent their homes after WorldWar II and up to the end of the 20th century, but today’s generation has got to stay at home indefinitely because Maidstone Council and our “caring” villagers don’t give a stuff about them. Constant referrals and rejections of these housing developments mean homeowners can enjoy their wonderful dog walks and that air of self-satisfaction that everything will stay the same. Isn’t it constant change that keeps our lives full? Otherwise we as a nation wither and die. I amindeed very angry concerning our national and local building policy because


we don’t build enough homes, period. By all means build on all brownfield sites, but given the pathetic numbers we actually build each year because the planning process is both a financial and emotional disaster it hardly maers. Brownfield sites are always more expensive to develop and therefore less aractive because the builders do find unseen horrors in the ground. I amcurrently clearing the shrubbery at


Loose Valley Nursing Home and have saved their ash, sycamore, horse chestnut and holly trees from the deathly ivy. I can assure you as I walk to Loose almost every weekend that our caring villagers may say and protest a great deal but actually do sweet nothing to protect our local and wonderful green fields and countryside. Richard Maryan, Coxheath


Election phone survey


Dear Sir – Last week I had a telephone call from amarketing company asking if I would take part in a survey regarding voting intention at the election and specifically about Maidstone and the Weald constituency. I agreed and after the first few questions


I suspected, due to the nature of the questions, that the survey was commissioned by the Lib Dems, so I asked the interviewer. He said he did not know – he was only required to ask the questions and note the answers. As the survey progressed, the questions became more biased towards the Lib Dems and how they could design their campaign based on people’s prejudices towards Helen Grant. I shall not be voting for either party, but


if indeed this was the work of the Lib Dems can I suggest to them that if they intend to embark on a campaign of muck- raking and mud-slinging, they at least could have the guts to admit to it. The point is that they are supposed to tell you who they are canvassing for. Peter Spearink, Staplehurst


Barrier for bays needed


Dear Sir – Regarding wider parking spaces for the elderly, although this is a fantastic idea in theory, the practice may be very different. There are many drivers who have no respect for the needs of others and will simply take advantage of these new larger spaces, in the same way as they do not baulk at parking in either disabled or parent and toddler bays at present. The simplest (but perhaps not cheapest) solution is to make it impossible for them to use such bays by using some kind of raised bar which can be lowered by a qualifying driver with the aid of some kind of remote control. Such devices could be dispensed by health professionals to those who are eligible. Morag Gaherty, Bearsted


Comment


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56