As a local resident I have been following The Save the Romany campaign since I had a petition offered to me following church one Sunday. I was concerned when I read the petition but unlike a lot of people around me I didn't sign it, I just needed a bit more information. I left the public meeting on Thursday feeling deeply uncomfortable, and it isn't due to the obvious issue of re-development.
I am certainly not expecting this post to be popular but I do genuinely believe that it is the unsaid belief of some quiet local residents which leads me nicely on to my first point...
Debate is important, essential in fact. We live in a country where we are blessed with democracy and freedom of speech. The debate on this issue is one of the sanctity of community spaces and heated it certainly is. Debate has two, three, four sides, however, in the case of The Romany I think only one is being heard, why, because it is becoming so incredibly aggressive. The passion of the people has at times pushed into rude and often very aggressive attacks on anyone that doesn't tow the party line ('The Romany and everything in it is being destroyed by a nasty developer/Tennis Club)'. In doing my due diligence I asked some questions on social media of the campaign people, the response was very aggressive insinuating I was in some-way involved and certainly shouldn't be asking questions. On Thursday night one very hot-headed resident asked where the tennis club members that support of the purchase were. Well, I can tell you there is no way that any supporters would have 'fessed up in that meeting considering anger and aggression was pouring out of the walls. When a lady sitting next to me asked her seated neighbour to respect Mr David's right to speak instead of heckle and she was told 'to shut her face'. It is this animosity that has forced me to anonymously post on here rather than publically voice my concerns.
Which leads me onto my second point - 'the truth' and 'the facts'. Much of The Romany campaign has been based on the devastating loss of the Scout Hut, Playgroup, playground and all the groups that use the space (which I agree would be devastating if that is really the case). So imagine my relief (and that of my neighbours) when Mr David released his letter denying that he ever wanted to evict the Scouts or anyone else. Yes, he wants to build a nursery (phew, I had assumed it was flats) but everything else gets to stay along with some much needed investment. Plus he is actually local, in fact I know of him and his family, not the scary greedy developer I'd assumed, or the campaign had led me to believe, no Tesco's here. But immediately Mr David is branded a liar. Why? Assuming all developers are liars is not acceptable to me. When the petition webpage was 'hacked' the campaign inferred online that Mr David/Tennis Club was playing dirty tricks campaign - an accusation that was unfair totally unfounded. When did society become so suspicious? In fact all the evidence points to the contrary. Local, check. Dad with family that uses the playgroup, check. Runs family mental health and elderly care business, check. Mr David even went on to offer the Scouts a 150 year lease subject to some access across the land - again phew. So why is much of the campaign STILL being founded on the loss of all the groups and children's activities? This campaign is about a plot of land that brings together the community but it seems the same community have made their minds up about a family within said community and that friendship is dispensable.
'Change' is hard but it does have to happen as long it isn't to the detriment of our society and its values. I genuinely don't believe that is the case in this matter. I think we should see this as an opportunity. If Mr David wants to improve the community let's offer him our ideas, what else do we need, how can we make the plot of land work harder for us and for more people. At the moment the playgroup is massively oversubscribed and if I am honest has a real feeling on exclusivity - how can we expand it and can we make it more regular using some of Mr David's new facilities? Can Mr David's mental health business help expand the work with post-natal depression?
Whether the community gets to buy the land is still yet to be seen, the Tennis Club is now coming under an awful lot of pressure on the sale of the land and Mr David has a lot of hurdles to jump (Covenants etc) just yet even before making any planning applications - which I assume will require another public consultation anyway.
Whatever the outcome all I ask is that facts really are facts, complete transparency from all parties, no slinging of mud and the debate is with grace, dignity and respect.
Menu
