DEMOCRACY INACTION OVER SHIRLEY PARK

26-09-2006

The Stirrer reported last week on a campaign in Shirley against the loss oflocal parkland to accommodate a new supermarket (yes, another one). John Horton went to the fateful meeting at Solihull Council where - all too predicatbly - residents wishes were ignored.

My wife and I arrived at the Civic Centre at 5.45, to see quite a crowd outside, making known their opposition to the planfor Shirley Park.Just before 6, we filed in and made our way to thecouncil chamber.

The Councillors gathered and all public seats were packed. The meeting was opened by Councillor Ted Richards and at item three -‘Questions and Deputations' - the developmentof the park was raised.Trevor Eames from Solihull Ratepayers Association spokeup, as well as our MP Lorely Burt and amember of the campaigning group‘Keep Shirley Alive'. While all the questions received an answer, it was clear to us that they were not being taken seriously.

Trevor Eames handed ina petition with 414 signatures, collected on just one Saturday afternoon, while Lorely Burtreminded the council that at the last election they had promised:

1 No loss of parkland or tress

2 A full and open community consultation

3 That any development must be suitable and not dominate Shirley

4 Solve traffic problems

5 To put residents of Shirley first

Promises that were all about to be broken.

There was also a school teacher who said that she and her children regularly used the park and was against building on it. Others joined in, young and old, making the same plea.

When item five - ‘the Proposed Disposal of Open Space Land at Haslucks Green Road and Shirley Park' - was reached,a Liberal Democrat councillor spoke against it. He showed the new Conservative logo, which, ironically is an oak tree.

The councillors had a discussion amid heckling and boos from the public who were threatened by the Chairman with eviction from the meeting. Then, as we knew would happen from the beginning,the motion to declare part of the parkland as "superfluous" was passed.

Most of the public then left, deeply frustrated and disappointed by the impossibility of influencing the plans for their home town.

Do you want to be a Stirrer eyewitness. Just write to editor@thestirrer.com