Express & Echo
This page has been posted by Jim, writing in the first person.
I have submitted a letter to the Express & Echo which the Editor is unwilling to publish on the “Points of view” page.
The text of the unacceptable letter is as follows:
Cllr Peter Edwards is quoted as saying, “... it comes at the expense of local democracy and the ability to have any sort of meaningful relationship with local people.” Analysts rule plan for enlarged city council is ‘financially risky’, Echo, November 22.
I cannot believe Cllr Edwards said that, knowing the way he and the city council have behaved towards our children’s tennis club. It seems he is a master of doublethink. If not, he is either trying to deceive, or has lost touch with reality.
Our committee emailed all county and city councillors in January 2006, desperate
for a response to our requests for the renewal of our lease, due to expire at the
end of March. We had endured several years of procrastination and being ignored.
Cllr Edwards’ response was, “I don't like threatening emails that I know nothing
about. Any sympathy that I may of had is certainly gone ...” Having re-
Dialogue about the lease was ongoing following its expiry. I emailed the city’s Leisure Manager early in 2007 with a series of reasonable points and questions. The officer replied, “I am not going to respond to the points in your 6 February email as you would doubtless pick over everything I say, word by word, and the matter could go on indefinitely ... but I am happy to discuss ... with the other members of the club's committee. I have relayed this to the club's Secretary, indicating that we don't want to deal with you any more ...”
Emails to my local ward councillors in June 2007 about failures in democracy and the attitude of council officers, with reminders in July, were neither acknowledged nor answered. In June, a member of the executive informed other officers, “Pete edwards is most concerned that we don’t have any discussions involving Jim ...”
In July, Cllr Edwards wrote in an email to officers and another councillor, “I would not like any correspondence with Mr Harle as it only encourages him.” I had no idea this was going on behind my back, only discovering it later under the Freedom of Information Act. Bizarrely, we have never met nor discussed issues, which emphasises the council’s disregard for any opinion other than its own.
By August, officers were refusing to debate even with the club itself. Subsequent shameful bullying only served to highlight the council’s lack of respect for democracy. Actions speak louder than words.
By his own admission, Cllr Edwards knew nothing about the club’s concerns and was prejudiced from the start. I can understand him not liking my website and the opinions of the club, but victimising and excluding me simply for holding different views is extremely undemocratic. All the quotes above are guaranteed word for word.
Everyone who knows me would be aware that I bear no animosity towards the city council or any individual. I am a friendly, altruistic person concerned about our children and community. My local authority is denying us a say and meaningful relationship with it. If the former Leader of the Council imagines this is democracy, no wonder we are afflicted with serious errors of judgement.
Jim Harle
Whipton, Exeter
(by email)
Yesterday, 24th November 2008, I telephoned the Express & Echo and was passed to Stuart, who works on the “Points of view” page.
My letter had been passed on to the News Desk, as it was felt that it was unsuitable for publishing because there was only my word for the truth of the contents, and some of the expressions used might be rather strong. It was agreed that I would provide proof by forwarding our emails, and PDFs of the internal Council emails released to us under the Freedom of Information Act. This would enable the Express & Echo to justify publication if sued by the Council. I gave Stuart our campaign website address, which he offered to look at.
Accordingly, I emailed Stuart yesterday evening, as shown below, with the two relevant PDFs attached, and forwarded our three emails immediately after.
Dear Stuart,
Thank you for your time on the telephone this morning. In a world that often makes uninformed decisions based on impression and whim, and muscles them through regardless, I respect your rigour in requiring evidence before publishing my letter. This I am happy to provide.
Please understand my letter is not an attack on Cllr Edwards personally, but only
on his frequently expressed assumption that the City Council practises democracy.
That is not our experience. I could easily embarrass Cllr Edwards by pointing out
errors in both of his emails, but I have no wish to humiliate him. Everything I seek
to achieve is considerate of any individuals involved, and I have no wish for anyone
to be hurt in our efforts to improve government and benefit community. I dislike
it when government, big business, the media or any other large organisation apes
a steamroller and flattens all in the path of its self-
Regarding the strength of language used by the Committee, it is essential to understand
the degree of frustration caused by the Councils’ inertia. They almost resembled
celestial black holes -
www.summerway.org website pages reflect circumstances at the time they are posted. The date of posting is given on the Updates noticeboard, where pages are ordered chronologically.
With no meaningful consultation and no involvement in the decision making process, we don’t know to this day whether the damage suffered by the Club and community originates from Community & Environment, the City Planners or from some other source within the Council. The Summerway saga is quite complex, and we have felt totally excluded as the Councils pleased themselves.
Regarding my use of the expression “shameful bullying”, there are a number of examples. The one to which I was particularly referring was the demolition of the clubhouse, which the Council failed to protect from vandals as the change in status of the school playing field was implemented without adequate provision. We had a large investment in the clubhouse which the Council failed to honour, preferring legality to morality. Click this link and judge for yourself whether the use of ‘shameful’ is justified. Our structural engineer’s offer to inspect the clubhouse with the City’s surveyor was declined, presumably because it might prejudice ECC’s seemingly obvious wish to remove an obstacle obstructing its own agenda. The Council is strong and we are weak, and to use its power to exclude and trample on us is surely ‘bullying’. Some vehemently believe the Council was being vindictive. This is only an opinion but, in the light of my extensive knowledge of the situation, one with which I have considerable sympathy.
The Leisure Manager’s email to me is posted on the website, as are my points and
questions, but I will forward the originals to you anyway. Please see my subsequent
reply to him on the same website page to ensure no false assumptions are made from
his other comments. It is not true that the terms were negotiable as Ian claimed.
Only some were. The more significant ones were non-
Its length may deter some from working through it, but anyone who carefully studies the email to which Ian refused to respond must agree that it is extremely relevant to the ongoing dialogue concerning the Club. Ian was representing the Council, and I feel sure that the real problem was the Council’s untenable position when faced with rigorous examination. Had it ever consulted meaningfully or properly assessed the Club, its position might well have been different.
Two PDFs are attached, and I will forward the three emails after this. The originals of the PDFs may be obtained from the Council under the Freedom of Information Act. From P012107.pdf, you will see the lower case ‘e’ for Edwards is Hazel’s, not mine. I endeavour to be strictly accurate when quoting others, and also try to avoid being misleading by quoting out of context.
I hope this meets all your requirements to publish my letter on the ‘Points of view’ page as submitted. I would like the Express & Echo to give us fair representation. Others will be able to respond in like manner if they so wish. If anything else is needed, please let me know. I’m sorry this has been a bit slow in coming due to its length and identifying the relevant PDFs amongst many hundreds. I have yet to index them.
Yours sincerely,
Jim.
I received a civil telephone call from Stuart this morning to tell me that the Editor (Marc Astley) was not prepared to publish my letter on the “Points of view” page.
Instead, I would be hearing from a reporter who would be able to write an article based on what I have to say and what the Council has to say in response.
This alarms me in the light of past experience but, before I explain why, I would like to draw your attention to a laudable paragraph which appears regularly on p.2 col.1 of each E&E.
Express & Echo
Serving Exeter for over 100 years
We are committed to championing our communities’ aspirations and bringing profound and lasting benefits to local life. We believe in celebrating and giving voice to local people, enriching lives and encouraging vibrant community spirit.
Over the years, articles published in the Express & Echo have represented the Club well, and are a credit to all involved.
There have been two articles since the expiry of our lease, published 20th April 2006 and 2nd February 2007.
On both occasions, the overriding opinion of Club members and supporters was that the Council’s case had been put clearly, while essential aspects of the Club’s position went unstated. This is not consistent with the E&E’s claims in the paragraph above. No way was community being championed.
On each occasion I emailed the E&E’s reporter expressing my disappointment and the reasons for it. She replied to neither. My email to Marc, the Editor, on the day the second article was published, did receive a reply, saying he was deeply offended and wishing, “Good luck with your campaign.”
None of these emails, nor those supporting my comments, are posted on this website. I do not wish to provoke, and would prefer the E&E to be neutral rather than antagonistic. Whatever position it chooses to adopt, however, is very much a part of the Summerway saga.
‘Once bitten, twice shy’ runs the proverb. We have already allowed ourselves to be bitten a second time. How can we be expected to have any confidence that an E&E reporter will live up to the newspaper’s claims on this occasion?
Cllr Edwards has unjustifiably singled me out personally from amongst the Committee, and pursued a personal clandestine vendetta against me without ever making my acquaintance. What right has he to speak of democracy and meaningful relationships if this is the way he behaves?
The Editor is unwilling to publish my letter exposing this, for which he must have his own reasons. The time when the E&E had the power to assist the Club is long gone. I feel no benefit will ensue for either Club or community by speaking to a reporter, and who can blame me? Our campaign has moved on to weightier issues resulting from Summerway.
I don’t know how this will work out, or what the E&E will publish. While I am willing to stand up and be counted, I value my privacy, and have no wish to feature personally in a newspaper article. I anticipate being attacked for my hope to encourage more meaningful democracy. I would like to see local government being less autocratic and bureaucratic, and more receptive to its citizens.
I am posting this on the website in advance of any further developments. I await my humiliation with resignation, and hope to arise afterwards like the phoenix.