03/11/10….Could we have handled the consultation better? asks councillor

Dear Editor, I feel I must respond to recent letters which seem to question the integrity of the Thame Town council with regards to the Core Strategy in specific, but also with more general overtones.

I am the newest Town Councillor, being elected in July 2008 and the last month has been the most challenging so far. I have never expected to get everything right or that decisions taken will be universally popular, but along with the other councillors, I do aim to serve our town as best I can.

I just wanted to share my own thoughts and motivations over the last few weeks. They are open to criticism and interpretation but do reflect my own thinking. These can be crystallised in the four questions I have asked myself.

Could we have handled this consultation process better? Yes, if we had not had unrealistic time constraints, not of our making. I felt that the crucial thing was that the Town Council engage the town and raise awareness as quickly as possible, and that the real crime would have been not to consult. To pull together such a process in such a short time does leave us open to criticism on style and presentation, which will have to be reflected on.

However, I went into this process with an open mind, and think that the level of debate generated, particularly at the Town meeting was well balanced, considered and did the town credit. I felt my role was to listen and take those arguments into the meeting the following day. My conscience is clear that I discharged that responsibility.

Was it right to include Site F in the consultation? Yes it was. The Town Councillors did feel that Site F did have merits, but also some down sides, but I am clear that my motivation in wanting this included was to ask the question as part of a consultation, not champion it. This option had been talked about in the town in much wider circles than the council, and not to have given it due consideration would have seemed negligent on our part.

Has this process split the town? Yes, I have never heard so much spoken about ‘them’ and ‘us’ whether that is Site F or D or the town council. I am pleased that there is some common ground questioning the wisdom, content and conclusions of the core strategy and that is what we should unite around. My own personal reflection is to ask whether the town is so divided between the two sites that we have further diluted our voice with SODC. It is regrettable if this has happened and perhaps something to which we have all been guilty.

What could we have done better? When the original timeline for the Core Strategy was scrapped in the summer, we should have perhaps been far more proactive in trying to draw up our alternative core strategy, which took account of infrastructure and the longer term needs of the town, with housing as being only one element. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but doing the above together with earlier engagement with local organisations may have helped.

Any elected Public Body is open to scrutiny on how it conducts itself. In my view this should concentrate on the issues for which it is responsible. The making of personal comments about individuals will always lower the level of debate.

I would encourage anyone with a heart after our town to consider standing for Thame Town Council. We are not perfect; we do not always agree but I am struck by a strong sense of the pride we all have in our town. This is, however, based on mutual respect for each other and our different opinions.

Town Cllr, Cliff Baker