Part 11. Social Responsibility and The Salvation Army

The Salvation Army originated as an offshoot of Methodism and initially was active in East London. It has grown to be an international organisation. Its main focus is bringing individuals to seek forgiveness of sins and acceptance, through grace, of Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. Its major activity is to bring sustenance to the most needy in society and show God's love for them. It is engaged in what the authors of Faith in the City describe as ambulance work.

The work of The Salvation Army is well recognised by the UK population to the extent that there are those who believe it is an organisation engaged in good works and not a religious organisation.

One of the reasons I became an Adherent was my admiration of the work in the UK being undertaken by The Salvation Army with individuals in communities often suffering from multiple deprivation. An issue the Army faces is that it is not in a position to provide services in all the places they are needed. Also in some areas corps do not have the capacity to engage and this has led to a new way of working called Fresh Expressions. 

In the current economic climate of rampant inflation and cuts in public services the Army is sorely pressed to deal with the needs of individuals and the pressure placed on it as statutory support services are overwhelmed.

This is a consequence in part of years of failure by central and local government to tackle in depth the causes of deprivation. In my experience The Salvation Army has been slow to criticise, to demand change and propose remedies in concerted programmes of campaigning. However that is not to diminish the work it does undertake.

Next: JK Galbraith and the Underclass

Part 10. Social Responsibility: Theology and Engagement.

in 1996 I was elected to my local borough council. The council appointed me as its representative to the local Churches' Social Responsibility Group, an inter denominational body and a registered charity independent of any organisation.

Thus began my interest and involvement in social responsibility issues in a faith context.  In time I became secretary, then chairman and finally a part-time paid project developer. 

Underpinning my engagement was the belief that Christians are commanded to love our neighbour. How does this relate to social responsibility? What is the theology? What does it mean in terms of action?

My starting point was a Church of England report published in 1985 entitled Faith in the City. Sadly the disturbing evidence it presented of life for many in major cities has not changed significantly in the years that followed. Injustice, poverty, bad housing, poor education, inadequate medical facilities et al still feature in areas of deprivation and are not limited to cities. Pockets of deprivation exist in many urban and rural areas.

Other influences on my opinions have been the works of the economist JK Galbraith, the work of The Salvation Army and the impact of Liberation Theology on the Roman Catholic Church.

When I read Faith in the City one paragraph (3.7) reflected my own experience then and now.

Yet while many members of the Church of England have generally found it more congenial to express their discipleship by helping individual victims of misfortune or oppression, fewer are willing to rectify injustices in the structures of society. There is a number of reasons for this preference for 'ambulance work'. No-one minds being cast in the role of protector and helper of the weak and powerless: there is no threat here to one's superior position of free decision. But to be a protagonist of social change may involve challenging those in power and risking the loss of one's own power. Helping a victim or sufferer seldom involves conflict; working for structural change can hardly avoid it. Direct personal assistance to an individual may seem relatively straightforward, uncontroversial and rewarding, involvement in social issues implies choosing between complicated alternatives and accepting compromises which seem remote from any moral position. We have little tradition of initiating conflict and coping with it creatively. We are not at home in the tough  secular milieu of social and political activism.

Before considering this passage it is my plan to consider other influences on me. In the next part: The Salvation Army.

.

 

Part 9. The Parable of the Good Samaritan

The Parable of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) begins by stating the two Great Commandments, both taken from the Old Testament. The remainder of the parable is an illustration of the second Great Commandment in action.

A number of conclusions may be drawn from the passage.  I make no claim to any original thought in this regard.

The first of the Great Commandments comes from Deuteronomy 6:5, the second from Leviticus 19:18. Jesus tells us that obeying the two commandments will confer on us eternal life.  It may be noted that Jesus states  that these are the only provisions of the Law it is necessary for us to follow for eternal life. Therefore we may regard the rest of the Law as irrelevant to salvation?  I believe so.   

As we have noted before the Great Commandments are statements of principles encompassing all the Law and the Prophets.

In the parable we have the stark contrast between the  behaviour of the priest and the  Levite and that of the Samaritan. The Samaritan shows selfless love and sacrifice. The priest and Levite show no love at all  considering themselves bound by the Law and its interpretation.

Elsewhere in the gospels we have Jesus railing against the inadequacies of the teachers of the Law and the Pharisees in applying the Law. Thus in Luke 6:1-11 Jesus says at v.9, addressing the Pharisees and the teachers of the Law:

I ask you which is lawful on the Sabbath: to do good or to do evil, to save life or destroy it?

Thus the Levite, the priest, the teachers of the Law and the Pharisees are all accused of misapplication of the Law, of using it to stop actions based on concern,  love and practical assistance for fellow humans.

Today we should not interpret the Old Testament  in order to deny full inclusion. It is the old covenant and for Christians has been replaced  by the new. I recognise that for the followers of Judaism what Christians call the Old Testament is still very much alive. As Christians we should recognise that our faith is an independent faith and not a sect of Judaism, indeed Paaul  claimed it was its fulfillment. This was the battle fought by Paul. We should let go the chains which seek to tie us to the old covenant.

Future posts will consider christianity and social responsibility .

Part 8. The Gospel of Love.

Jesus tells us to love  your neighbour as yourself. Matthew 22:39

What could be easier to understand and apply? Its meaning is plain. it is not limited by exclusions, conditions or restrictions. It tells of God's all-embracing love for all humanity. It speaks to us of oneness in a fractured world. And yet......on the issue of inclusion it generates discord between Christians. It generates pain and hurt. How can it be that we have this sad and damaging state of affairs?

Let's start by considering the concept of neighbour.  Who is my neighbour?  Fertile ground for imposing restrictions.  Clearly people we live close to are our neighbours. We have near neighbours and people who live in our neighbourhood. But what about people who live five, or ten or twenty miles way? Stretching things somewhat?

But help is at hand.  

A case in British law is Donoghue v Stevenson 1932 (British as it was on appeal from a Scottish Court but also set a precedent in English law.). The facts of the case needn't concern us but the grounds of the decision do. Lord Atkin delivered the main judgment. In this he stated the Neighbour Principle. This holds that a defendant must avoid acts or omissions which will foreseably harm persons who are so closely and directly affected by his acts or omissions that he ought to have them in mind as being so affected.

For our purposes we should note that there is no geographical limitation nor do the persons involved have to know each other for them to be our neighbour.

An important aspect of the case is that the court considered a number of earlier cases and from them came up with a new principle which superceded the earlier cases

Put it another way. When I bake a cake I take the ingredients and turn them into something new. The ingredients have been changed and no longer exist in the form they were before mixing and baking.

Jesus tells us that all the Law and Prophets hang on these two commandments. Matthew 22;40  the new covenant principle has superceded the old covenant rules and we are guided by the new principle. The new is limitless, enabling, inclusive and based on love. This is the good news. 

A further consideration. We should not read Paul's letters and to seek to limit or restrict the principles set out by Jesus. Jesus speaks to all humanity  Paul's letters were addressed to specific churches in  specific contexts.

Bible literalists and fundamentalists will decry all this. So be it. 

In Part 9 we look at the Parable of the Good Samaritan.

Part 7. It's all about love.

Those of us of a certain age remember The Beatles bursting on the music scene. (I preferred The Rolling Stones.) Memorable lyrics but none more so than love is all you need, all you need is love.

As we saw in Part 1 love is the basis of the two Great Commandents,  summarised by The Salvation Army as love God, love others. 

It all sounds so simple and it is. However the principle that we must love our neighbour has been swamped by arguments for and against inclusion.  The battleground is mostly but not exclusively over  full inclusion of LGBTQ+ people in faith organisations. In some faith groups there is partial inclusion but also restrictions to stop progress to positions of leadership, or even membership: but you are welcome to turn up and contribute to the collection.

Refusal to agree to full inclusion of LGBTQ+ individuals is based on  a mixture of dodgy theology, scientific ignorance and prejudice. Faith groups engaging in exclusion should be ashamed. Hardly seems to be love  in action. 

I support campaigns for full inclusion in faith groups and specifically in The Salvation Army to which I belong as an Adherent. I do not intend to present a balanced opinion on the theological grounds for full inclusion or full or partial exclusion. My thoughts are directed entirely to the promotion of full inclusion and the scriptural basis for so doing.  I trust this expresses my opinion in clear  simple and unequivocal language. Nailing the rainbow to the mast.

(I should make it clear that I agree with the view that Luke's Gospel is, as the Roman Catholic Church puts it: a positive option for the poor. Inclusion is for all and as well as LGBTQ+ individuals includes those on the margins of society as a consequence of poverty, homelessness, relationship breakdown, alcoholism, drug dependency, physical abuse, gambling etc.)

So, to the second Great Commandment. I wish to keep each of my jottings short. Therefore I shall consider the subject in Part 8.

Part 6. Studying the motor car...and the bible.

I say motor car, you think and say? Ford, Renault, racing car , 4x4, your first car etc. Two words evoking quite different responses, all of which may be different to what I think. Communication has inherent ambiguity. Should a person make a statement that something is clear or obvious it may be to that person but should we accept their interpretation or consider alternative meanings?

How do we interpret words such as justice,  inclusion,  love, hope, faith?  The reality surely is that we see words through the perspective of our experiences, prejudices and preferences and not by someone telling us what they mean. Beware the gatekeepers who seek to control our thoughts. Be free to hold your own opinion. Look up Liberation Theology on your search engine

Back to the car. A few observations:

1. Some people study how the car operates: what the component are, how they are put together, how they work and how they are serviced and repaired. Some may concentrate on mechanical components, others on bodywork.

2. For some people what is under the bonnet is a mystery. They are interested only in how the car is driven and understanding the rules relating to driving on the public highway.

3. For some people what is important is to study the impact of the car on our individual lifestyle. What purpose does it serve? What does it enable us to do that otherwise would not be possible or very difficult to achieve? The car may have extended the geographical area in which we can work, made it easier to attend events, visit relatives, go touring etc.etc.

4. For some people the area of study is to determine the impact the car has had and will have in the future. Out-of-town retail parks, multistorey car parks, motorways are physical manifestations but the car has a much wider individual, social,  public and environmental impact on how we live and plan for the future. How has the car changed society and what will be its influence in the future?

Note that the four categories are not mutually exclusive and there other ways of studying the motor car. For example:the history of the development of the car.

Instead of motor car think bible. How do you approach reading the bible? 

Part 5. Reading the bible.

Hello. Still with me! You must be a glutton for punishment. Before I launch into consideration of the synoptic gospels and particularly the Great Commandments a few disjointed thoughts on the minefield of biblical interpretation.

There is no uniform or agreed method on how to read scripture. Acres of verbiage are devoted to the subject in books and on the Internet. 

Some methods: (note that I am not presenting an exhaustive list nor am I presenting details of each approach. This is simply raising issues. I refrain from jargon such as exegesis and hermeneutics.)

1. The bible is God given, is infallible, inerrant and should be read literally.

2. The bible is God inspired and open to interpretation.

3. The bible should be understood in its historical context.

4. The bible should be read to discern unchanging principles.

5. The bible is written by individuals inspired to record their understanding of God.

One problem is how do we know what the author of a text means? For example one school of thought suggests that when we read a text it means what the reader thinks it means. The text takes on meaning Independent of the author.

In the UK when judges are asked to interpret a statute it's not permissible for them to consult Hansard (verbatim reports of proceedings) to determine what the words mean. The meaning ascribed to the words in Parliament is irrelevant. The meaning has be gleaned from the words themselves. Is the bible to be read in like manner?

Another issue is that the gospels were written many years after Jesus was on earth. Paul's letters predate the gospels. It is probable that the words of the synoptic gospels in particular are the result of committing an oral tradition to writing. How can we be certain that the words and their meaning have not changed during the course of transmission?

Another thought. I cannot remember verbatim words uttered by another person. I remember the ideas the words are intended to convey but in so doing there is the risk that I might add my own 'spin'.

Problems arise with a literal approach based on the premis that the bible is God's infallible word. How are contradictions and inconsistences to be explained? Which version of the bible do we use as our source?

So I tiptoe away from the subject. 

Part 4. Reading the Bible.

Reading the Bible.  Easy, start at Genesis and finish with Revelation.  End result? You might in turn  have been excited, bored, curious, exasperated, confused and probably thinking the author of Revelation had been on magic mushrooms. What is the sum total of the experience? Put off religion for life, wishing to understand more, deeply moved and desiring to have faith or something else?

Where to turn to next? A trip to the library, bookshop, the internet or a visit to a church to attend a service? All are problematic. There is a vast range of books about the Bible, some clear and concise,  others long and opaque. It can be  bewildering.  The internet is awash with posts and equally confusing. So,   attend a church service and hopefully find someone to talk to.

Which church to attend? So much choice. Probably best to try a number of churches. Not only do churches differ considerably in the way services are conducted but also in their theology. It may be that geography and transport determine your choice.  Some churches have congregations drawn from wide areas, others from the immediate locality. Once you have lit upon a church you find congenial how much do you learn about faith from sermons or Bible studies?

Does all this look daunting? It can be. My advice is: take your time.

Having considered the pitfalls and traps how does a person move forward positively? May l suggest you acquire two volumes: a study Bible which is a bible with explanatory notes and secondly The Messenger written in colloquial English.

My first port of call would be Mark's Gospel followed by Matthew and then Luke, the synoptic gospels as they tell of the life and message of Jesus. There is much similarity in the three gospels but they are by no means identical. Together they provide an excellent introduction to what is means to be a Christian. Or a follower of Jesus?

A simple faith or a simplistic theology? Part 3

This is the final part of my brief introduction to how  I perceive the Bible. It is my ramblings and I make no claim to authority.  I suggest all readers of scripture should concentrate on the text and context and not unthinkingly parrot uncritically the opinions of theologians and preachers.

So far I have considered the Old Testament to be open to different interpretations and that the Christian interpretation has been read back into it. The Old Testament cannot be read as pointing to Jesus to the exclusion of all other interpretations.

I have noted the centrality of the two Great Commandments to our understanding of Jesus. Now I move on to looking At the work of Paul as outlined in the Book of Acts and Paul's letters.

 Paul emphasises the divine nature of Jesus. Jesus is the Christ.  Paul makes it clear that being a Christian (note the term postdates Paul) is a complete break from Judaism. It is a separate faith and does not require adherence to any of the customs, practices or laws of the Old Testament or Judaism. In keeping with the second Great Commandment it is open to all, Jews and Gentiles, men and women.

Paul's letters were to individual churches and contain a mixture of encouragement, admonishment, advice and education. However I believe it is a mistake to elevate Paul's statements to one of equal status to those of Jesus. In my opinion where there is tension between the views of Paul and Jesus the latter must prevail always.

We must uderstand the context of Paul's letters. His audience was the church to which a letter was addressed and therefore should be read in that context and also with due regard to the societies of his time. Thus slavery and the inferior status of women is not condemned as it is today. We read Paul accordingly and not literally (although some churches do not recognise the equality of women).

In these short pieces I have attempted to state very briefly what I consider to be a biblical interpretation that is easy to understand and to outline a theology that places the emphasis on the centrality of Jesus. We must escape from the albatross of bible literalism which can and does distort the meaning of Jesus by its insistence that all the Old and New Testament is of equal importance and unerringly true. It isn't. There has to be discernment.

A simple faith or a simplistic theology? Part 2

You made it to the end of my initial post? Commiserations.  As promised, I shall consider the relationship between the Old and New Testaments and in particular how Christianity has approached the Old Testament.

 The subject is a minefield. There are competing and compelling claims made by theology scholars.  It is safe to say that no one opinion is 'right".  You dear reader must reach your own conclusion as I have mine. 

One body of thinking asserts the Old Testament is aimed at the New Testament and that Judaism's claims to the Old Testament are swept away by Christian claims. The theologian Bultmann claims the Old Testament is a history of failure.  

A contrary opinion (with which I agree) is that of Brueggemann. He states:

Such a way of presenting the Old Testament proceeds as if the community of Judaism was only an interim community which existed until the New Testament and then withered into non-existence and insignificance.

Christians read back into the Old Testament from the standpoint of the New Testament to claim it is a pointer to Jesus. However the Old Testament does not clearly point solely to Jesus. 

Taken on its own the Old Testament may be interpreted in different ways, one of which is the Christian interpretation looking back into it for scriptural evidence for Jesus.  Put bluntly Christianity has hijacked the Old Testament for its own ends. Judaism however continues to use the Old Testament by  different names.

As I have indicated this is a complicated subject which I do not consider I can do justice to. For my part I think it is unnecessary to delve into the Old Testament to understand and act upon the message of Jesus.  This is not to say I consider the Old Testament to be unimportant.  On the contrary, for Judaism it is of central importance. It is Christianity's misguided arrogance which seeks to  assert its superiority through a misunderstanding of the Old Testament.

Part 1. A simple faith or a simplistic theology?

Looking for something new or a pearl of profound wisdom? You won't find either here. Instead my incoherent rambling is on public display.  You have been warned!

Many years ago I read the bible from beginning to end. I was struck by the tedium of much of the Old Testament and couldn't work out why Paul's letters carried the same weight as the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke). I did not understand why Christianity, which is based on the person (nature), life and sayings of Jesus, should require us to understand the Old Testament or why the writings of Paul are granted equal status or even preference by some interpreters of scripture.

In the intervening years I like to think I have made some sense of the bible but I regret to inform you dear reader, assuming you are still with me, that the conclusions I have reached might be unpalatable and  dismissed as simplistic, misguided or plain stupid. So be it.

My starting point is the two Great Commandments expressed by Jesus and set out in all the synoptic gospels.  He states two principles which are the basis of the Christian faith. Christians are to love God and love others.  Two principles with profound meaning stated with clarity and simplicity.

The two Great Commandments are to be found in Matthew 22:37-40

Love the Lord with all your heart and with all your soul and all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbour as yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.

See also: Mark 12:30-31 and Luke 10:27.

At this juncture I invite you to consider two passages.

In Luke 4 we read of Jesus in the synagogue  reading from Isaiah 61.

The  Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord's favour.

Luke tells us that Jesus then said:

Today, this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.

The second passage is Matthew 5:17

Do not think I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfil them.

I  conclude from these passages that Jesus, in setting out the two Great Commandments, has incorporated within them all of the Old Testament. We should be guided first and foremost by the two principles based on love rather than specific rules. Rules are limiting, principles are broad. Living by the principles Jesus commands us to follow challenges us in all areas of life, rather than regulating some of our life to follow specific rules. In other words the Great Commandments are all-embracing and not a set of rules applicable only part of our lives.

Should you agree with my interpretation it will be clear that love extends to all people. All-embracing love does not exclude. The Law did exclude and this is brought out in Luke where we read the Parable of the Good Samaritan. Jesus frees us to love all equally: rich  poor, male, female, straight, gay, old, young.  You get the picture. We need to be inclusive and positive in loving our neighbour, not exclusive and negative.

I know only too well that this approach does not meet with universal acclaim. Indeed there is virulent opposition mostly from bible literalists who cannot or will not see beyond words to the ideas or concepts they convey.  

There is of course a lot more to be said on this and the above is just a brief outline and stated simply but not I hope simplistically. 

I plan to write on this topic in greater detail and also on the way Christians regard the Old Testament. A minefield. 

Wilmot's Alley

Many years ago I played crown green bowls on a green behind the Highfield Hotel. I was not a member of the club but occasional players were welcome in the afternoon for a small charge usually of a liquid nature.

We played always in pairs. A roving biased jack meant that green knowledge was paramount. Some players sought to mitigate the effect of the crown by playing down the sides . One such player was Wilmot who favoured one side in particular. He was comfortable going either straight or round-pegging.  He was deadly and even if his partner was useless could be relied on to win an end.

Unfortunately for Wilmot he was unable to send a bowl across the green. Should his opponents be lucky and win an end the next jack would be sent as far away from the mat as possible. Wilmcote would then immediately pick up his woods and walk off!'

Twerps at Large

The new administration at Tunbridge Wells Borough Council has rather pomously named itself "The Borough Partnership ". It consists of Liberal Democrat, Tunbridge Wells Alliance and Labour councillors and an Independent from Paddock Wood. In order to accommodate this motley crew the Cabinet has increased in size. More pigs at the trough.

So far we have been regaled with dubious claims concerning the council's finances and now we have the farce of plans to introduce or raise car parking fees without any consultation.  The resulting public storm of protest has ensured the proposals will be put out to public consultation - a classic case of closing the stable door after the horse  has bolted.

What a shambles.  The Borough Partnership started with much public goodwill after years of Tory drift but even the Tories could not have anticipated the speed with which the Partnership has dissipated its support.

Not a good start

The Liberal Democrats is the party with the largest number of councillors on Tunbridge Wells Borough Council but is well short of a majority.

The Lib Dems need the support of the Alliance if it wishes to form a stable administration.  A deal with Labour and the three independents is another option.  

The Lib Dem leader states negotiations are being held with other parties.  The leader of the Alliance states there has been no approach from the Lib Dems.  Not a good start.  Hardly inspires confidence 

Local Elections Tunbridge Wells

The anticipated results came to pass although there were one or two surprises. In Paddock Wood Ray Moon won a seat for Labour.  He has been contesting seats for many years and no-one should begrudge him his victory.

Elsewhere the results were much as expected. The Green Party did well in Broadwater. The seat was won by the Liberal Democrats, the retiring mayor coming a poor third for the Conservatives.

We have a hung council (I prefer this to the stupid Lib Dem balanced council). The Liberal Democrats have 16 out of the 48 seats. Although Labour will make a lot of noise the significant issue is how the Liberal Democrats and the Alliance relate.

The Death of Local Government

Groucho Marx said:

 Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

He was right and his sage words apply to both local and national politicians and the plethora of civil servants and other public service managers advising them.

Over the years central government has re-organised many times the health service, education and local government and to what good or benefit?  Precious little, if any. Indeed they exemplify Hutber's Law: Improvement means deterioration.  

Look at local government as an example of Hutber's Law.  The current organisation is a mess and has led to such nonsense as Liverpool having three mayors: Lord Mayor, Mayor and Metro Mayor.

Rumour in Whitehall is that arch-meddler Michael Gove is about to embark on a further round of local government 'reform' as part of the 'levelling-up' agenda. Local authorities at district level will be merged, county councils abolished, the number of councillors halved and all authorities run on the mayor and cabinet model.

The consequences will be that fewer people will make decisions locally, central government will tighten its grip on local authorities even further and local democracy will wither.

 

 

Tunbridge Wells Borough Council: 2022 will be interesting!

 In 2021 the Conservatives lost control of the council, a control only possible with the deciding vote of the Conservative mayor.  The Conservative Leader of the Council retained his position as did his Cabinet.  It is anticipated the Tories will lose seats at the May 2022 elections and power will transfer to the opposition councillors - Liberal Democrat, Alliance, Labour and one Independent. The Conservatives have only themselves to blame having ousted Roy Bullock and replaced him with a dithering nonentity who promptly lost his seat to UKIP.  On his departure he was replaced by a councillor who lived in East Sussex (although qualified to be a councillor),  was certainly more dynamic, and managed to split his party before losing his seat. Since then there have been Leaders who to put it mildly have overseen drift and decline.

It remains to be determined if the current three opposition parties will be able to form a coherent controlling group.  Prior to the May elections what are these parties going to do?  Will they agree on electoral pacts as after all they will have to unite behind one set of policies post the elections?  Will the parties stand on a policy platform agreed before the elections and placed in the public domain?  Or will we see squalid secretive deals done after the elections thus making the electorates' choices irrelevant?

Opposition is easy, promises can be made, negative criticism aired, outlandish assertions made all of which will come back and bite.  Will the new 'management' be up for the fight or will it succumb to in-fighting and thereby lose the trust of voters?

We may be amazed of course by the Tories pulling off electoral victory!

Twerp of the Year Award

 This year I shall break with tradition and name a group as my Twerp of the Year.  A drum-roll for the Conservative Group on Tunbridge Wells Borough Council.  The Group 'succeeded' in losing control of the council to a motley bunch of Labour, Liberal  Democrat and Alliance councillors with an Independent thrown in for good measure.  I expect the Tories to lose more seats in May 2022.

What happens then will be interesting.  Doubtless squalid secretive negotiations will take place to decide who gets the plum jobs and the policies to be followed.  The effect will be that the negotiations will render irrelevant whom an elector votes for should that vote be cast for a non-Tory candidate.

So how is it that the Tories have lost control to this group?  Perhaps it was a loss of nerve when a group of local foghorns, social media users amd political chancers united to oppose the theatre proposals.  Instead of taking them head-on the Tory Group took the road of appeasement in the hope of saving themselves from losing seats.  It hasn't worked.  It has been a shambles.

Royal Victoria Place

 Today I visited the Royal Victoria Place shopping centre in Royal Tunbridge Wells for the first time since March 2020.  The new flooring is impressive as is the spaciousness now most of the stalls cluttering the walking areas have been removed.  Reminded me very much of the look of the centre when it first opened.  I suspect the stalls will return and that will be a sad event as they diminish the character of the centre.

The number of empty shop units was not a surprise and I fear for the long-term future of RVP as shopping habits are changing with more people using on-line shopping and out-of-town retail parks.  Should it close you could build a lot of domestic properties on what would be a brownfield site.

HS2 Eastern Arm

Rumours are circulating in the press that the government is about to announce that the eastern arm of HS2 is to be deferred indefinitely.  There has been months of speculation that this will happen.  The eastern arm is (was) planned to run from Birmingham to Leeds with a station at Toton to serve Derby and Nottingham and then on to Leeds together with a loop line to Sheffield utilising existing track.

The proposed line did not serve Leicester and was miles from Nottingham and Derby.  So, what should happen now?

 

A few suggestions: 

*  The Midland Main line electrification should be extended to Leeds via Nottingham, Derby and the Erewash Valley.  The line between Leeds and York is planned to be electrified as part of the  Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds-Newcastle improvement scheme.

* A fast London - Leicester-Sheffield- Leeds -York service.

 * Electrify the Bristol - Birmingham - Derby line.

Refuse collection

 Some years ago I was a governor at a local school.  Meetings of the governors held to one guiding principle namely: the less important an issue was the more time would be spent discussing it. And so it is in respect of local politics.  The electorate will be tempted to vote for parties on the issue of refuse collection (or lack of it) rather than the major issues.

However one can understand the frustration of being subjected to an abject refuse collection contractor. The men who collect the rubbish are not to blame, indeed I find them very helpful.  No, the problem is with the management of the company they work for and the supine councillors and officers of the council who have failed to deal with the matter.

Asylum Seekers/Illegal Economic Immigrants

 Perhaps those EU loving Liberal Democrats can tell me why, if the EU is so wonderful, so many people are desperate to risk crossing the English Channel in small boats and dinghies to reach our shores?  Surely our EU loving sycophants should be clamouring to cross in the opposite direction quite apart from seeking to make it easier to return those who are not genuine asylum seekers back to EU land.

No change at the Town Hall

The Tories lost seats in Tunbridge Wells at the local elections and now hold half the seats (24).  The Lib Dems have 13, Labour 5, the Alliance 5 and there is one Independent.  Prior to the annual meeting of the council members of the opposition parties and the Independent met.  What happened at that meeting behind closed doors is not in the public domain but doubtless they were intent on sharing the spoils of mayoral, leadership and cabinet posts.  Naturally manifesto policies are compromised and deals done of which the electorate has no prior knowledge or say in the matter.  It smacks of squalid politicking.

In the event the retiring Conservative mayor (who had not stood for re-election as a councillor) used her casting vote for mayor in favour of the Conservative deputy mayor.  Thus the Tories retain control of the council.

 

Chapelard is the Lib Dem leader.

 

Rusthall's electorate: a sophisticated people.

It may be said of the Rusthall electorate that they know a dud when they see one.  In recent years the good people of Rusthall have elected to serve on Tunbridge Wells Borough Council Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat and UKIP candidates.  In the process they have voted out a Leader of the Council and have not been hoodwinked by spurious claims by candidates as to the likelihood of their being well placed to win. In 2021 the Liberal Democrat candidate claimed that the electorate knew Labour could not win, but as we know she did.

The electorate has taken a dim view of the parish council.  Since its formation and the first election in 2011 not a single vote has been cast for a parish councillor.  All elections have been unopposed and vacancies filled by co-option.  At the last election there were six candidates for nine seats.  The parish council has spawned four committees has a clerk and a deputy clerk, an office and a community centre, the latter for which there was and is no real need. The pity is that it is almost impossible to disband a parish council.

More on the dubious Liberal Democrat electoral claims

 In my previous blog I commented on the disgraceful tactics of the Liberal Democrat candidate for Rusthall.  She claimed it was a two-horse race between the Lib Dems and the Conservatives and that Labour could not win.  Labour won.

She should have known better, after all her husband won the seat in 2019 and Labour was second.

2019

Lib Dem:  547

Labour:    346

Con:         283

 UKIP:      144      

 

2021

Labour:     572

Con:         455

Lib Dem:  436 

Green:      141

Never trust Liberal Democrat electoral claims.

Lib Dem candidate stuffed by Labour in Rusthall

The Liberal Democrat candidate in Rusthall, one Angela Funnell, claimed in her election address that it was a "two horse race" in Rusthall between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats.  The Liberal Democrats were "the only chance to stop the Conservatves in Rusthall" and furthermore "everyone knows Labour can't win here".

Sadly for Angela the electorate disagreed.  Labour won deservedly and Angela trailed in behind the second placed Conservative.  Did she believe the rubbish she had published in her name?

Election Time

Tomorrow we may vote for candidates for borough and county council elections and for the Kent police commissioner post.

 The current holder of the latter post has done a sound job and I shall be voting for him.  I shall be voting for our current county councillor as he responded well to an issue I raised.

 The problem for me is whom to vote for at the borough council election.  The Green Party has not delivered a leaflet.  

 The Tory candidate tells us nothing about himself, not even where he lives. The election address is a mess

 The Liberal Democrat candidate lives up (or down) to the Groucho Marx comment.

 

 The Lib Dem leaflet has the usual dodgy diagram and claims of support which on its own is a sound ground for rejecting the candidate.

 The Labour Party has produced the best leaflet and has the best candidate by a country mile. Probably will get my vote.

A better bus service.

 
Central government has pledged to improve bus services in the interests of better connectivity.   About time.  The idea is to work with local councils and bus operators to achieve this using funds from central government.   Locally two proposals stand out.

The first proposal is for a dedicated bus service between Lewes and Uckfield railway stations to connect with Uckfield rail services.  This is far cheaper then re-opening the railway line between these two places.

The other proposal is for an hourly express bus service between Tunbridge Wells and Brighton stopping only at Crowborough, Uckfield bus station, Lewes, Falmer and Brighton.

RIP

 In the last year three former colleagues and friends have died.  First was Len Horwood the chairman of Tunbridge Wells Mental Health Resource Limited.  Second was Bob Wykes a former chairman of the Bridge Trust.  This year witnessed the death of the Revd. Michael Dent a breakfast and drinking companion over many years with whom I worked at Kent Industrial Mission.  Three quite different characters with one thing in common, a passion for helping the less fortunate in our society.

Daft Ideas

In Tunbridge Wells the local press and social media is not short of material publicising daft ideas for infrastructure developments. Often there is a short period of frenetic support for an idea, usually by the groupies for whom the originator of an idea can do no wrong.  After this burst of activity, nothing.  The recent nonsense regarding the development of the Odeon site is a classic.

 

The daftest idea I read was the proposal that a shaft be sunk at  Fiveways and a passenger station built in the railway tunnel.  Sadly the name of the originator of this proposal escapes me but he/she is my choice for the Twerp of the Year Award.

 

 

The new block

The block of terraced houses being built on the former garden of the Red Lion in Rusthall proceeds apace.  Price of a house over £500,000.  We have an artist's impression adorning the side of the office on the site.  The houses have no architectural merit, very little garden and a route march to the waste bins.

 

 

 

 

 

Storm in a Thai cup Rusthall

Before lockdown the Red Lion in Rusthall served Thai food which received rave reviews and had a live jazz night on Saturdays.  Since the partial lifting of the lockdown the Thai food service has resumed but the jazz nights are off limits.

Sadly all has not gone well since re-opening.  The popular Manager left before the re-opening but why has not been made public.  This week all Thai kitchen staff have been given notice.  Before lockdown the pub was closed on Mondays but is open now for what may be described as pub grub.  

The surmise locally is that Thai is out and pub grub in every day.

The locals, well some of them, are up in arms and have taken to social media to vent their fury.  Fingers are being pointed, accusations made and conclusions reached based on no hard evidence or  any unbiased  objective analysis.

New Blogger

Had to move from Chrome to Mozilla Firefox to access the 'new' Blogger format. Not keen on the new arrangement and not an improvement.

Planning Shambles (6)

Most of the new wall has been demolished and re-building on a new line is in progress.  A change demanded by Kent County Council has resulted in an improved sight line.  You will recall from an earlier post that Tunbridge Wells Borough Council was mindful to do nothing. This will form the basis of a formal complaint.

The re-built wall does not accord with the approved plans.  The difference is not major and although the outcome is not ideal I suspect KCC will apply the de minimis rule.

Opposition parties in Tunbridge Wells

The disaster that is overwhelming the retail sector in town and city centres has been accentuated by the COVID crisis.  However the problems existed well before the virus struck.  There is a desperate need for something to attract people into Tunbridge Wells, apart from the mayhem of boozers.  One idea was to develop the town as a cultural centre and a major proposal was for a new theatre to replace and improve on the Assembly Hall which is slowly falling apart.

An unholy alliance of opposition parties,  some members of the controlling party and a rat-bag of assorted local loud-mouths and foghorns killed the theatre scheme and with  it any future the town may have had.

Now these self-same councillors are seeking to replace the leader of the council for failing to be dynamic in dealing with the consequences of the virus.

Planning Shambles (5)

At last!  The offending wall is being demolished.  Tunbridge Wells Borough Council stated the wall was 'broadly' in accordance with the plans and decided to do nothing.  Fortunately Kent County Council  was not of the same opinion.

Planning Shambles (4) An end in sight?

Today there was a site meeting between the developer. Kent County Council Highways and Tunbridge Wells Borough Council  planners to consider the issue of 'the wall' (See earlier posts)

The outcome. conveyed to me by TWBC

Part of the wall is to be rebuilt where that part obscures the vision splays agreed in the planning permission.

Not before time!

Letter in today's Daily Telegraph:

SIR – Lists of user-friendly bars (Letters, July 1) will always lead with Maurice’s Peacock Inn in Nottingham, during the swinging Seventies.

Bells on the wall would bring pints of Shipstone’s in a jiffy, delivered with banter from another era.

I knew the pub well.  It was located on Mansfield Road, just up from the site of Nottingham Victoria station and opposite York House where I worked.  Many a happy lunchtime and after work sessions.  The lounge bar had a bell system.  Activate the bell push and Maurice would appear, tea-towel over his shoulder, take your order and reappear with tray and drinks and non PC banter.  Happy days.

Planning: Shambles ((3) Red :Lion Wall

The saga continues.  Recently I published the e-mails I sent and received on this matter.

https://kentcommunityactivist.blogspot.com/2020/06/planning-application-2-shambles.html

On 08 June Tunbridge Wells Borough Council (TWBC)  e-mailed me:

I have visited the site, and spoken to the developer. The wall being rebuilt broadly fits the detail of the plan 05D on 19/03589/LBC. As the development has always been controversial in terms of the visibility splays of access to the site, I believe they have adjusted it slightly for better visibility. As such I do not see this as a substantial breach of the plans.

In other words TWBC is happy to do nothing.

A few days later Kent County Council Highways (KCC) visited the site and contacted TWBC.  the upshot was this e-mail from TWBC dated 19 June.

I have since had a chance to hear from KCC Highways and they agree the wall, as built, is built on the wrong line in part.

The developer accepts this is an error of their making, and will be realigning it to comply with the visibility splays.

Rather a change!

However the developer has not realigned the wall. Instead he has continued building it. Time for me to complain again:

I e-mailed KCC on 01 July and received this response on 02 July.

At this stage I can advise you that  the developer is aware of this matter and  that the wall is under further consideration by both the highway and planning authorities.

Another change of stance.  What a shambles.  I fired off this response to KCC.

Thus 'further consideration' means let the developer continue to built and then?  Oh dear the work is so far advanced we should not stop it.  The developer should have been stopped.

I'll keep you posted.  My opinion is that the developer will get away with it. I shall be making a complaint to TWBC and KCC  in any event about how this matter has been handled.

Hacked, or what?

In the past three months I have come under attack from what I assume to be a hacker.  My name and address was used to complain to the local council about a garden fire.  The e-mail address used was not mine.

More recently I  have supposedly joined a dating site.

Today it is claimed I made a complaint on another matter.

Someone out there does not like me.  I couldn't care less and await further activity with interest.

Dame Vera Lynn Statue.

How insensitive can you be? Is it April Fools Day?  At a time when an idiot of a chief constable bends his knee before the Black Lives Matter vandals (criminal damage no less) it is suggested that a statue be raised for a white woman who sang about white cliffs and is a symbol of our oppressive colonial slave-trading past. Come on get a grip.  

No.  What we need is not a statue of Dame Vera but one of the Labour MPs: Dawn Butler, David Lammy and Diane Abbot all looking longingly into the eyes of Saint Jeremy surrounded by a throng of snowflakes and Liberal Democrats.

Planning Application (2) A shambles

In May I published a post on the development of the Red Lion Garden to build a terrace of 3 x 3 bedroom houses.  Planning permission has been granted for this to be a 3 x 4 bedroom development.

The developer has been busy.

A major concern of mine has been the line of the wall in the bottom two photographs which does not follow the line on the planning application.  Remember sight lines is a key factor in the decision to permit the development.

Correspondence flowed between me and the Planning Department:


From me 2 June:

Dear Sirs

I note that the boundary wall is being rebuilt in accordance with the plans currently before the planning authority for decision and not in accordance with the plans approved on appeal and also the decision of 8 April 2020 in respect of wall details.  The wall being built allows for two entrances whereas the approved plans are for one.

As work on the wall started on 1st June there is time for the wall to be built as approved.  I await your response.

From the Planning Department 3 June

Dear Mr Hopkinson,

The bricks were removed by a machine in blocks as there was no way they could remove them individually by hand, due to the shattering. I was on site to witness this.

As for any change in the line of the wall, I will visit the site to see what it is they are doing.

Yours sincerely

From me  5 June:

Further to your e-mail of 03 June I trust you have visited the site or plan to do so in the near future.  You will note that the wall changes direction opposite the gate to 57/55 Lower Green Road.  Initially the bricklayers laid a few bricks in the correct direction but were told to remove them to permit  the wall to be set off in the new direction.  Where the wall should have changed direction there is now a 90 degree curve which does not appear on any plans,  

From the Planning Department   8 June

Dear Mr Hopkinson,

I have visited the site, and spoken to the developer. The wall being rebuilt broadly fits the detail of the plan 05D on 19/03589/LBC. As the development has always been controversial in terms of the visibility splays of access to the site, I believe they have adjusted it slightly for better visibility. As such I do not see this as a substantial breach of the plans.

Yours sincerely

From me to Planning Department  8 June:

I am not surprised by your response: indeed it was in accord with my expectation given the current thinking within the Town Hall.   Words such as 'broadly' ring alarm bells.

The demolished wall was listed and was to be replaced by a new wall utilising the bricks in the demolished wall on a slightly different alignment: an alignment which appears in the original drawings, the appeal documents and the revised application.   The Planning Inspector approved the alignment in the plans and did not require any 'improvement' as a condition of approval.

The carefully drawn up plans for the wall had two purposes:

1.  To have visibility splays which would be approved

2.  To satisfy the listed building requirement.  

Having achieved this the developer, retrospectively aided and abetted by the planning authority, has chosen to ignore the plans.  The new wall bears little resemblance to the demolished wall.

I agree with the objective of improving the sight lines but the changes made will have no significant effect.  Why were the changes not included in the most recent planning application?  It looks like changes being made 'on the hoof'' and hope no-one notices.

A second e-mail from me dated 8 June:

I have read the most recent comments of the Council's Conservation Officer and KCC Highways.  Were these comments made before your decision to agree to the changes to the wall as they are broadly in accordance with the plans?  Indeed has either been consulted regarding the changes?

Looking at the curved part of the wall this appears to restrict vision of the road to the north from that which would obtain from a straight wall.   Quite important from a road safety aspect but hey ho it is broadly in accord with the plans.

From the Planning Department 19 June:

Dear Mr Hopkinson

I have since had a chance to hear from KCC Highways and they agree the wall, as built, is built on the wrong line in part.

The developer accepts this is an error of their making, and will be realigning it to comply with the visibility splays.

Yours sincerely

Bob Wykes RIP

I was saddened to read of the death of Bob Wykes a former chairman of the Bridge Trust;  Bob was involved in setting up  the trust in 1995 and was one of the original directors.  He was a 'mover and shaker' who had a strong presence at board meetings. In 2004 he became chairman   and I was fortunate to be his vice-chairman for a number of years. He retired from the board a couple of years after I left.  He was an unassuming person, without side, who confronted problems head on. The trust and those the organisation assisted out of homelessness owe Bob a huge debt of gratitude.

News of his death has come as a shock, so soon after the death of Len Horwood.

Planning Application: Rusthall

In 2019  Inspector C Osgathorp on behalf of The Planning Inspectorate allowed an appeal against the decision of Tunbridge Wells Borough Council (TWBC) to refuse planning permission for a three-bedroom, three homes terrace on land adjoining the Red Lion Pub. 

The decision of C Osgathorp in full is on TWBC's website.


The original application had been opposed by local residents, Rusthall Parish Council, Kent County Council and TWBC on road safety grounds.

TWBC has received a planning application to change the proposed developed into a terrace of three four-bedroom houses.  Local residents have opposed the application on road safety grounds.

In the meantime the developer has started ground levelling and utilities work.  An access road has been driven into the site and the sight lines for traffic coming upon the junction are clear to see.  The worst fears of the protesters look like being realised.  Remember the name: C. Osgathorp.

What's in a name, or myths about charities (Part 1)

Sadly some people lose all sense of reason when it comes to charities.  After all, isn't charity all about volunteering to do good works for the benefit of the poorer sections of our society?  No!! is the short answer.

A dose of reality:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/charity-inquiry-the-public-safety-charitable-trust-limited/charity-inquiry-the-public-safety-charitable-trust-limited

The Charity Commission doing its job.  Health warning: don't be fooled by the word 'charity'.  Quite apart from examples of .charities not being charities in law  there is a list of the types of activity deemed to be charitable. including the advancement of education which covers private schools:-as we know, well-trodden haunts of the poor.  The legal framework needs wholesale change.

The Centre of Industrial England

You would be forgiven should you think the answer is Birmingham or Sheffield. The centre, according to Chesterfield  Borough Council, was Chesterfield and in recognition of this the boundary signs on the main roads leading into the town had the strap-line 'The Centre of Industrial England'.   The validity of the claim depends on definition.  Is the 'centre' geographical, based on numbers of people engaged in industry, or some other measure.  Ambiguity and/or vagueness may be an attribute!

Chesterfield has a rich industrial heritage. Coal mining, ironworks, heavy engineering all gone along with their supply chains.

All aboard

Television news has shown images of near-empty trains during the rush hour (Underground apart).  Given the cost of commuter travel and the time involved how likely is it that many people will seek to work at least part if not all of the working week from home or local offices?  The savings in cash and time would be considerable for people in commuter belts.  Would reductions in long distance business travel make the case for HS2 even more shaky?

Smoke gets in your eyes.

A few days ago a near neighbour lit a bonfire made of garden waste. A lot of smoke drifted on the breeze. Someone complained to Tunbridge Wells Borough Council using an on-line form. Today I received a letter from the Council thanking me for my 'recent call'. However I made no such call. Whoever did used my name and address .but the e-mail address was not mine!

Free Bus to Sheffield

I was born in Sheffield and lived my early years in the city.  A long-time supporter of the Blades and Yorkshire cricket I visited the city many times.  I live now  in Kent and I have not been to Sheffield for over 30 years.  The nearest I came was travelling on the M1 over Tinsley viaduct.

Now is the time to rectify this sad state of affairs. I plan to travel to Sheffield for free, using my 'pensioners' bus pass.  Working out the route has not been easy, but it can be done.  I look on it as an adventure.

My destination is Pond Street Bus Station, now rather grandly known as Sheffield Interchange.

The Virus

We are self-isolating.  At our age and given our health issues it is the only sensible thing to do.  Neighbours, family, Sally Army and friends have rallied round and this, together with supermarket deliveries, means that we do not need to go out.  A special mention for Rachel who has called on us (and spoken with us from a good distance!).

Len Horwood RIP

The death of Len Horwood is reported on the Tunbridge Wells Borough Council's Facebook page. He served as a councillor for many years.  I met him for the first time in 1996 and saw him 'in action' as a councillor for four years.  I retired in 2000 and next met Len in a barber's shop in Camden Road.  He opined that I would be missed on the council. I suggested my absence would not be missed after a week to which his response was that it would be shorter than that, say a couple of days.

We met up again when I became a director of Tunbridge Wells Mental Health Resource.   He was the director responsible for overseeing the finances of the charity to which was added the position of chairman.   He ran a tight ship and the charity owes him a huge debt of gratitude for the time he devoted to its work.   Only one thing got in the way of his commitment to the charity,   the annual pilgrimage to the Cheltenham Festival.

Concerning this virus

We are informed that the vast majority of people will suffer only mild symptoms and for them it is not life-threatening.  From the way people are panic buying you might be forgiven for thinking the effect on the general population was akin to the Plague.

There are 'at risk' groups. I happen to fall within two categories - my age and my underlying health issues.  I am not unduly concerned and I am taking the recommended precautions.

Brexit Day

YIPPEE!!