In just over two months (or somewhat less in the case of those with postal) votes we will be going to the polls to elect our town councillors and district councillors. These are important community posts and the decisions taken, while not as dramatic as the chancellor’s announcements in today’s budget, are nevertheless important and to a greater or lesser extent, will affect us all.
Rye News is going to repeat its policy of previous years and we will be giving every candidate an opportunity to make their case for election through these pages. So if you are proposing to stand for either council and are proposing to submit your nomination form to RDC in Bexhill (forms must be submitted between 10am March 27 and 4pm April 4), please contact Rye News by email – info@ryenews.org.uk.
Please note that between now and the election, party political statements, other than as mentioned above, submitted either as articles or comments, may well be restricted. There is only so much party politics that those not standing for election can take! Comments and discussion on the general working of either of our councils, however, is welcomed, as always.
Image Credits: Rye News library .
“There is only so much party politics that those not standing for election can take!”
Quite agree, John, and it’s great to know you’re the arbiter of balance.
PS, I love your article on the pool attributing the Chancellor’s measures to “Rye’s own MP, Sally Ann Hart”. I also particularly like the picture you’ve chosen, of Mrs Hart – “a vociferous supporter of the cause” – doing her best La Pasionara! She must be delighted… No Pasaran, eh, John?
PPS, As for articles, I wrote one last week and you didn’t publish it despite kindly saying it was ‘very good’, so forgive me if I don’t sprint to the laptop this instant!
In response to Guy Harris: I think it’s a little churlish not to give Sally-Ann Hart credit as she has, in fact, been a really vociferous advocate for keeping the swimming pool open. Well done to her for consistently promoting Rye’s issues. She has also been instrumental in bringing a private members’ bill forward on domestic violence and abuse.
It would be good to hear some positive political comments once in a while and not just denigrating from the sidelines.
She also voted in favour of allowing Water Companies to dump sewage in our coastal waters and rivers.
To put in context and in reply to Steve Blattman. This is the reason for MPs voting for this:
“To protect homes, schools and businesses from flooding, storm overflows act as a release valve to relieve the pressure – allowing excess flows to bypass treatment and enter rivers and the sea,” “These discharges are heavily diluted, typically being 95% rainwater, and are permitted by the Environment Agency”
I don’t think this is such a great idea but I come to this situation as an ordinary person not affiliated to a political party as the previous two people commenting are. We should question everything and discover a balanced viewpoint when given all the facts.
You obviously haven’t been watching any of the documentaries on the state of our rivers and the amount of sewage in our coastal waters on the BBC and ITV local news.
It’s a scandal that monopolies like water companies have been privatised and would rather pay shareholders than improve our environment.
The water companies release raw sewage into the sea because of a lack of investment in processing it properly.
Rye News must be impartial. Its editorial team should be careful not to censor contributors’ articles or readers’ comments. Some comments cannot be published, for reasons of libel, bad language and so on. The comments mediator sometimes fails to get decisions right. Journalists should not to let their own political views influence what they write. It’s true that photos accompanying a story can also favour one party or another. I don’t believe Rye News, or former Rye News editors, should act as arbiters on ‘party political comments’. This is censorship, plain and simple. Readers probably don’t wish to wade through numerous party political statements. But how does Rye News decide what’s political comment and what’s not? Any view that’s either critical or supportive of a particular policy could be described as ‘political’. All four of the above comments, as well as this one, could be seen as political. As for the water companies, the evidence of their egregious sewage polluting activities has been well documented. Arguably, this is because they’ve paid dividends to private shareholders rather than improve the sewage infrastructure. Is this a political comment or a factual one?