• Home
• News
• Sport
• Entertainment
• Comment
• Property
• Property News
• Commercial Property

• Jobs
• Motors
• Motoring
• Family Notices
• Dating
• Free Ads
• Archive Search
• Local Directory
• Business Bid

• Horoscopes
• Competitions
• TV Guide
• Vouchers
• Charities
• Local Links
• Buy Photos

It's your shout..... Readers' Letters

I was shocked and dismayed to read the letter entitled "Disgusted by BNP's inclusion" on the 6th of May.
I am very proud to live in Great Britain because it is a democracy- and part of being a democracy is that everyone's views should be respected. These candidates would not stand in a constituency if noone there was likely to vote for them- likewise, had people not voted for the BNP there would not currently be two MEP's from their party.
I am not saying that I personally support the BNP or their policies, but as a first-time voter I would prefer to read what every candidate has to say and draw my own conclusions from that, rather than have a candidate censored because other people did not like what they had heard. As the writer correctly said, these candidates have every right to stand, and if an individual disagrees, then they can just not pay them any attention and vote for someone else.
So thank you, Solihull Observer, for ensuring that all candidates received an equal opportunity to express themselves in your newspaper.
From a Shirley 18-year-old

Despite last week’s election results seeing local issues sidelined by National concerns over the very serious position faced by our country, we in the Solihull and Meriden Residents Association (SAMRA), which was formed only in March specifically to provide a locally based choice, were pleased that our democratic system did allow us to provide that option.
Services provided by our Council actually have a greater impact on the daily lives of residents than Central Government and we all appreciate that maintaining high standards in more difficult times will be harder than ever.
We would congratulate the successful council candidates and wish them well and especially thank all those residents who supported SAMRA in the Council Elections and assure your readers both we and Solihull Ratepayers will continue to pursue the many local community issues raised with us during and prior to the Election Period.
Trevor Eames
Local Government Spokesman
Solihull and Meriden Residents Association (SAMRA)

In the four-page advertisement the Solihull & Meriden Residents Association wrapped around your 29 April edition, SAMRA claimed it was "set to make history". Indeed it could: with just 658 parliamentary votes in Meriden and only 319 in Solihull, it's poised to become the UK's 'national' political party with the shortest lifespan ever.
Steve Green
Solihull

Through the Solihull Observer I would like to personally thank the 23,460 residents who voted Conservative last Thursday. I would also like to say a huge thank you to my dedicated helpers who gave so much of their time and energy throughout the hard-fought campaign.
Conservatives here in Solihull can be proud of themselves and can hold our heads high knowing we ran a clean and positive campaign about policies not personalities. Rest assured, the Conservatives in Solihull will continue to work on behalf of every resident on the issues that really matter.
Maggie Throup

Re: Bungalows not just for the elderly (Observer - April 29)
THE WRITER refers to the proposed Waitrose development in Knowle and the letters on the subject.
As a resident of one of the bungalows involved in the proposed plan I was shocked and horrified by this letter.
We residents understand and sympathise with the dismay of any residents who would be adversely affected by the new bungalows.
Let me make it quite clear that we do not want to lose our nice houses which we have cared for, with their pleasant view of the green and secluded back gardens.
We do not want to be rehoused actually in a Waitrose carpark, surrounded by buildings on three sides an with little sunlight on gardens to the rear.
The residents of the bungalows in question are all elderly, disabled only by increasing age and we are all of sound mind.
We care about and help each other, are quiet and cause no trouble.
I have twice suffered verbal abuse from people opposed to the plans.
The publication of this vitriolic letter, which in my opinion is discriminatory and inflammatory, has caused anxiety for elderly people who are already stressed enough.
Will the writer have the decency to call and discuss the issues involved raised with the residents concerned, rather than writing hurtful comments and making threats.
A council spokesperson assures us that no representation has been made to them on this subject.
I refer the writer to their closing paragraph - "If people are going to write opposing or supporting an issue they should first make sure of the facts".
Name and address withheld by request

Re: Letter regarding bungalow
IS IT possible for you to understand what we as people owning the bungalows are going through?
We will be living in Waitrose's concrete jungle penned in a corner like cattle (just throw us a little food as you pass by).
Your remark as to the age of people in bungalows is ludicrous.
The fact you have tarred us all with the same brush of being mental with anti-social behaviour is ridiculous.
Middlefield Hospital closed some many years ago or perhaps it didn't with your views on us old-age pensioners.
Perhaps you should sell up and move out of Knowle as you don't seem to be happy here. Or are you just trying to beat the Jones'?
Two Knowle residents
Names and addresses withheld

Re: Bungalows not just for elderly now (Observer - April 29)
I WRITE in response to 'name supplied' who managed to pen what has to be one of the most ill-informed pieces of prejudiced propaganda I've read in years.
The old people you refer to in such a derogatory manner are exactly that. Old people. Not these supposed howling lunatics you like to label them as.
Even if what you say is correct - that these bungalow schemes are used to house people with "medical or mental health issues" - then this is exactly the reason we should discuss these proposals in an even more sensitive manner.
Regardless of the fact you are wrong, you are also bigoted, narrow-minded and cowardly.
Print your name and address, as you seem to have such strong views.
I know there is none of this "increased disruption" you allude to, unless you mean the "disruption" caused by caring relatives visiting the area. How mean spirited of you.
Who from the local community has "demanded" this meeting with the council and the police aside from, obviously, yourself?
My suggestion would be no-one, as I am friendly with a lot of the people living in and around the bungalows and not one person has mentioned getting the police involved in, what can only be described as, a delightful group of elderly residents happily living amongst one another.
You also mention anti-social behaviour. I think one visit would suffice in proving the exact opposite: social and caring behaviour. Like neighbours really.
Finally, you write about people expressing their views when they are misinformed, then "propagating a common myth". You really couldn't have undermined your own argument and views more succinctly if you tried.
Unfortunately, the irony will be completely lost on you.
Knowle resident, via email

I AM writing to thank the lady and her two children that helped me in Brueton park a couple of weeks ago.
My buggy, with two children in it, rolled into the water near to where they were feeding the ducks.
Without their help I don't know how I would have got the buggy out and I dread to think what would have happened.
Both children were fine after a warm bath and I think it is only Mum who is traumatised by the experience.
Lottie and Charlie were wonderful and very helpful and deserve a gold star each.
Nelson the dog will remain on the lead in the park from now on!
Thank you again from Amy, Katie and William.
Amy Skinner
via email

I would like to congratulate Lorely Burt and all the Lib Dem volunteers whose efforts helped secure the re-election of Lorely by a small majority. Well done.
I do sympathise with the losing Tory candidate, but bear in mind that in the election for every one per cent share of the national vote the Tories received it gave them 8.4 MPs but for each Lib Dem one per cent share of the vote Lib Dems got only 2.4 MP's.
How can that remotely be fair or logical - more like medieval hocus pocus.
Oh I just remembered, the one virtue of our existing system is that it gives a clear result.
Bring on a more proportional system as soon as you like.
Duncan Hartley
Damsonwood

• | More
• «Back
• «Home
• Contact the Editor about this story