WHY ARE WE PAYING FOR THIS WALL?

From Flooding danger.

From Flooding danger.

From Flooding danger.

From Flooding danger.

From Flooding danger.

From Flooding danger.

From Flooding danger.

From Flooding danger.

From Flooding danger.

From Flooding danger.

From Flooding danger.

From Flooding danger.

From Flooding danger.

Our very young MP has replied to my mail saying this wall is to protect residential properties. He doesn't appear to be aware there are no residential properties on the brewery side of the river.At the last general election I stood just to get shot of the last MP and at the next general election it looks like I will have to stand again just to get shot of the fool we have now. This wall only benefits Associated British Ports who want to develop the island site of the dock. They now want us to pay to have a Thames Barrier arrangement across the New Cut. Altogether this will cost us 70GBP! Why aren't ABP paying instead of us? Is the fact ABP lead shareholder is the worlds biggest bank, Goldman Sachs? I believe that is the only reason so what benefit is there to the Civil Servants running DEFRA. Surely there must be a reason why they are giving Goldman Sachs such a lot of our money? I have been fighting this for about three years now but still they press on giving our money to the worlds biggest bank and the result will be to flood Ipswich. They keep on about protection from a Tidal Surge. That is b****** and they know it. Any flooding danger to our town will be caused by fluvial flooding where rain water drains into the river at a particularly unusual spring tide after weeks of heavy rain which is what happened in 1953. Now the so called flood protection being built will actually cause flooding especially along the Wherstead side of the town and we are paying for that to happen! Time for young Ben Gummer to find another occupation preferably a long way from Ipswich. Meanwhile I have to go to the High Court in an attempt to stop this nonsense and this is being carried out under the Transport and Works Act which I have no experience of so if anyone wants to off me advice please mail me. peterturtill@gmail.com

ABOUT JUDY AND ME.

We spend our spare time sailing with other disabled people. When Judy and I are not working on Rights of Way and Disabled Rights we are sailing with disabled people:-)
Just click on the picture.

Sailability

THE LEONARD WOOLF POSTCARD COLLECTION

Click on the picture. Best seen using google picasa a free download. Use the magnify
symbol to study details.

Woolf Dock Archive.

pete and judy

NEWS LETTER 10.

The latest newsletter is out now. Unfortunately our cash is running out too
so if you would like to help please do.
Suffolk Rights Of Way, Cooperative Bank 08-92-99 A/C 69304158

From 2010-11-04

From 2010-11-04

We have access to the best RoW expert there is but it is expensive. We need that
sort of help now but we do not have the cash so please help out if you can.

Pete and Judy

DOCK HEARING AT LAST

The link below will take you to the Rights of Way Committee hearing last year when it was
decided there are some Public Rights of Way around and through the dock
http://apps2.suffolk.gov.uk/cgi-bin/committee_xml.cgi?p=doc&id=1_12459&format=doc

This matter is coming to a head now so I will start updating this blog again.

pete
turtill@gmail.com

Bridleway/Cycle Track creation attempt.

The Ipswich problem.

Is the County Council who are responsible for PRoW in Suffolk. In theory
Ipswich Borough Council is their agent but IBC are not going to spend
cash doing a job SCC should be doing. Andrew Woodin the SCC countryside
manager hasn't sufficient resources and he appears unable to raise his
game and acquire additional funding outside of SCC. Instead IBC take
advantage of the fact there is no Definitive Map of Public Rights of Way
in Ipswich and they allow developers to build on them. The Planning
Committee is completely political and take political decisions when
judging planning applications. I last went to a planning committee a few
weeks ago now. I was interested in an application to build on the Drift
between Reading Road and Jupiter Road. I opposed it as there is a PRoW
running from Rushmere Road to Woodbridge Road across the Drift.
Unfortunately the local residents had a known conservative stating their
case for them. Most of the conservatives on the Planning Committee
that day left the room as they knew the speaker. That left one as she
didn't know the person so the decision was taken by four labour
councillors who took advantage of the open goal to score points and they
allowed the application much to the bewilderment of the residents who
very obviously were not labour voters. I am but I know when I see
something wrong happening. Of course my objection about the PRoW
wasn't even discussed. Councillors Martin, Jones, Smart and another
I cannot name as I am not sure I remember correctly had free hit.
Peter Turtill