The Beverley Party Ask : Whose Town is it Anyway?

The Beverley Party have released a statement ahead of the local elections without questioning who the town belongs to and also the decisions being made that are impacting the lives of the residents.

The statement reads;

“We are justly proud that Beverley regularly gains national recognition for being a great place to live. Let’s keep it that way.”

“However, “a great place to live” means different things to different people. To many, ‘community’ is what it is all about. Houses, jobs and shops are essentials, but it is community facilities that help build and support a community.”

“So why do we find ourselves in a position where our community facilities are being eroded away at every turn?”

“Why is the Burden Road Youth Centre, once hailed as a major achievement in youth provision in the East Riding, now largely restricted to the use of a boxing club?”

“Why was youth support cut?”

“Why does our council want to put Longcroft playing fields forward for development?”

“As for green spaces, one look at the proposed local development plan will tell you that these are mostly considered an asset ready for the stripping.”

“We believe that the people of Beverley have not been consulted properly on the plans for the future of their town. The local development plan is not easily accessible and largely incomprehensible. Surely, when a council wants to see houses built on school playing fields, they should consult the residents properly AND take their views on board?”

“What about the young people in Beverley? Nowhere to go, nothing to do… Just because they aren’t voting yet, doesn’t mean their needs should be ignored. Young people are an important part of our community, and their views and needs ought to be considered like everyone else’s. A decent youth club, proper youth support and playing fields surely aren’t too much to ask for in a town this size.”

“The erosion of public services, especially the provision for young people, with threats to popular social and recreational facilities is a major cause for concern: to be a thriving community, we need community spaces and facilities.”

“The Beverley Party would like to see the old St Nicholas school building considered for community use, rather than being bulldozed and the land sold to developers, the fate suffered by so many others of our publicly-owned properties. It’s ours so, for once, let’s keep it.”

“The land surrounding it should also remain for community use in an area where at present there is little green community space. Children, dog-walkers and visitors to the new Flemingate development, including the college students, would all enjoy what could be a beautiful green space in a rather built-up area.”

“We want playing fields to remain playing fields, even more so when proposed new houses will bring more pupils to our schools, with an increased need for sporting facilities.”

“Beverley residents are blessed with wonderful public open spaces surrounding much of the town, the Figham, Swinemoor and Westwood Commons – pastureland for centuries, and enjoyed by generations of visitors and local people alike. These environmental assets are rightly cherished and fiercely defended against the envious eyes of would-be developers.”

“But we should also be mindful of the smaller open spaces, green plots, and popular areas of recreation land dotted around our neighbourhoods if we want to avoid the encroachment of careless development driven mostly by speculative financial gain. This type of land is generally less well protected, so The Beverley Party, a grass-roots community inspired movement, is keen to adopt the recommendations of the Localism Act, 2012 for a more democratic planning system giving increased rights and powers to individuals and their local communities.”

“There are sites such as the Grovehill Road Site, where residentsʼ proposals and ideas for a ʻLaurels & Lilacs Community Parkʼ are not given due consideration. We would like amenity value to be given a fighting chance against commercial interests. Our community facilities are being diminished at every turn, when we ought to be enhancing them. A growing town needs more community facilities, not less.”

“The Beverley Party is not opposed to change, but we do want to ensure that any new development is sympathetic to its location and that the views of people most affected are properly taken into consideration. Superficial consultation has little value. Local people bring valuable knowledge and opinions. They are entitled to be more fully involved, but it is not surprising that many think they are not being listened to and doubt their contribution will make any difference.”

“The Beverley Party intends to change the culture of an established political climate that disregards the views of ordinary people. We are promoting democratic participation, encouraging the exchange of ideas at street level, proving that individuals and their neighbours have a part to play. The Beverley Party believes that ordinary people, especially those most directly affected, have just as much, if not more, right to participate in the decision-making processes that help shape our community as the elected members and paid officers employed to act on our behalf.”

“The Beverley Party is committed to encouraging community participation, improving public scrutiny, increasing transparency and accountability.”

“So, whose land is it anyway?”

“The Beverley Party believes that public land is a shared environmental resource to be used carefully and treated with respect. It is certainly not just a cash asset to be disposed of by officials who seem to know the cost of everything but the value of nothing.”