IN response to the comments by Cllr Clifford (Time wasters costing more than vandals, Farnborough News, February 15), I think it's absolutely appalling that these people are causing so much trouble.
Which people are you talking about, Mr Clifford? Farnborough Road Residents Association, Firgrove Court residents, Farnborough town centre retailers, Queensmead residents?
Then there's all that lot in Aldershot. How dare they, Mr Clifford? After all, the council is doing a far greater job of wrecking the town centre than any vandals so why would they object? After all, they only live there or work there.
The solution is of course to create the Rushmoor KGB, then anyone who even thinks about objecting could be dealt with in a speedy democratic way.
You could force them to stand and listen to the wonderful party politics in council chambers.
They might even get as brainwashed as some of the councillors and actually believe what they're saying.
Then there's that wonderful term that's frequently quoted by Rushmoor, "widespread consultation". But do you actually take any notice of anything that anyone has to say? Why should you? After all, that's not the objective.
This isn't about asking, this is about telling. And you know what's best.
What an insult to the unemployed to attack Mr Parkins for raising issue about safety on the airfield.
How dare people be concerned about such trivial things like planes crashing on their homes?
After all, we should be grateful for the airfield, we might have had more homes. More homes means more people and more objectors. That would never do, Mr Clifford.
Best we drive these people out of Rushmoor and punish them by sending them shopping somewhere really awful like Reading or Camberley or Guildford. They even have little shops there, most of them full. In fact, very few empty. Lots of them used to be in Queensmead.
In some of these places they even let the public speak at council meetings, God forbid.
When we come to the real issues, like why the business rates in Rushmoor are calculated totally differently to anywhere else in the country, don't ask why, otherwise we really are into trouble. We have to stamp out this kind of thing.
We can't have people asking questions — we might have to answer them.
The only people remotely interested in politics are the councillors in Rushmoor. The rest of us have better things to do, like living a life.
It really is terrible that people in Rushmoor should actually want to question just what is happening to the borough - the most affluent part of the country, with a town centre that might have come from a cowboy film in the Nevada desert.
Instead of blaming everyone else, it's time for Rushmoor to accept the fact that the buck lands on their doorstep.
Year five Mr Clifford, and not a brick has been laid. Seeing is believing. It's all talk and no action.
Peter Newman, Kingsmead, Farnborough.
THE letter from Mr Newman demonstrates perfectly the type of person we have to deal with from time to time.
These people try to use the democratic system for their own purposes, but would have you believe they are the "champion of the underdog".
However sad I find such people, I will continue to fight for, and defend, a transparent democratic system, which is sometimes subject to misuse.
Messrs Parkins and Newman are not unique, they are found in most communities throughout the world.
Unemployed Mr Parkins appears to spend his time and energy destructively.
He has no positive suggestions, but can spend hours finding faults with others and their ideas.
The one thing they both have in common is their ability to get the facts wrong on every issue they get involved in.
The council does not own Farnborough town centre.
In Aldershot regeneration has progressed quicker because the council owns some key sites. KPI, the developer which owns Farnborough, has been, and remains, under enormous pressure from us to urgently progress development.
Ironically some of the projects that would move the development forward have been blocked and opposed by Messrs Parkins and Newman.
Our council is run by elected residents. We spend the time many of you cannot or will not. We are continually talking to residents, regardless of party politics, on a variety of local issues.
We are very accessible and open. Most of our meetings, including cabinet meetings, are open to the public. A very few of our meetings are closed to the general public but attended by local community groups that feel more comfortable speaking at a meeting not open to the general public.
Residents showing an interest in particular meetings are frequently invited to participate by the various chairmen, who in turn are not always councillors.
This is an inclusive not exclusive council. But I recognise that some people just will not be happy whatever we do.
Cllr David E Clifford, Wellington House, Avenue Road, Farnborough.
YOUR front page article about the spate of legal actions costing the council more than vandals has an obvious solution.
Rushmoor should follow the government directives that insist on community involvement at planning level.
The community, the general public, have a right to discuss matters affecting where they live and where they shop.
Councillors are able and public-spirited people, or they would not be elected.
But that does not mean that the unelected public have no right to offer criticism where they see a danger to fellow citizens, or offer alternative solutions to planning problems for consideration by those supposedly representing us, Joe Public.
We should be allowed to speak on matters affecting us, perhaps if a quorum of councillors, having previously received a letter to all of the committee, considered its content a matter of import to the application under consideration.
To slur Keith Parkins as a "guy who is unemployed" is an insult to other unemployed people who would love a well-paid occupation but cannot find it.
His spending some of his spare time on public matters while unemployed is a matter for praise, not criticism. Jobs are scarce.
The councillor's remarks that "the council carried out endless consultations on development projects" is doubtless correct.
Whether those endless consultations are with the people who are affected by that planning discussed is the important aspect overlooked.
There was an "information" public meeting held by Rushmoor Council at the Catholic Hall, near Victoria Road cemetery, Farnborough, on Saturday (February 16).
On the wall, prominently displayed, was a plan of Firgrove Court, where I live, as a car park.
This plan to reduce our homes to a car park has been constantly deferred for month after month, on reading the planning agenda. Yet no discussion has taken place in public to explain why.
As a resident of that housing/car park project who could lose my home I, for one, have not been consulted. Nor, to my knowledge, have any of my neighbours in Firgrove who object to the scheme.
As involved citizens, we do not want to hold up our town's future, or oppose planning "frivolously".
Let Percy Planner and Joe Public listen to each other and plan new Farnborough around viable and government-approved options for housing and business. Not as warring factions, but amicably.
Derek Arker, Firgrove Court, Farnborough.