WEEKEND WEB: Letters to the Spalding Guardian
We dip into this week’s Guardian postbag
STREET LIGHTING Contempt is shocking
I read with interest your headline story regarding the lady’s nasty fall in Spalding attributed to the county council’s enforced blackout of certain highways frequented by the general public.
The highway is the responsibility of the county council for both vehicular and pedestrian use, and the county council therefore has a duty of care to the general public who use the facility.
The county council’s duty of care is of 24-hour duration and the level of the duty of care is not affected by any budgetary constraints. The same duty of care operates in darkness as well as in daylight.
No doubt a risk assessment was conducted prior to the decision to turn off certain street lamps at midnight, but I can find no record of it on the council’s website. However, an official request for information application will no doubt bring it to light.
Common sense and logic tell us that street lighting is provided for the safety of the highway user during the hours of darkness, it’s not for decoration, and even the police must agree that the cloak of darkness reduces the level of safety on the streets and this reduction of street lighting reduces the level of safety and must therefore impact on the county council’s duty of care.
I would certainly recommend the injured lady contacts one of the many injury lawyers advertised and, if accepted, be prepared for an ‘out of court’ settlement because the county council cannot risk taking a case to court and losing, when a legal precedent would be set.
Finally, we come to the outrageous comments made by Coun Richard Davies, a public servant, a person elected by the people, a person who has the audacity to take payment for his services and then publicly states that this reduction in safety ‘might be inconvenient for some residents’, then figuratively speaking says ‘Up yours’ and ‘your safety after midnight is up to you’.
It beggars belief that such an elected individual can hold the people of Lincolnshire in such contempt.
Mr. J Carr
BREXIT No deal over a bad deal
As the EU continues to be intransigent over Brexit negotiations, the British government should be fully prepared to walk away with no deal rather than agree to a bad deal.
The government would certainly have the support of the British people.
According to a new Sky Data poll, a large majority of the public believes that ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’. A massive 74 per cent agreed the country should walk away rather than accept a bad, ‘punishment’ deal. Just 26 per cent think ‘any deal is better than no deal’.
There is nothing to fear from leaving with no deal. The US and China conduct hundreds of billions of EU trade annually with no free trade agreement – Britain can do the same.
If trading under World Trade Organisation rules is so bad, why are the majority of UK exports already sold beyond the EU – largely under WTO rules?
Jeremy Corbyn and his co-conspirators say they will not allow us to leave without a deal. Imagine him telling the EU this if he ever gets into power. Do you think he would get a good deal? No chance!
If, because of EU bullying, the UK and EU agree to a bad deal, then Britain will be saddled with the terms of the deal for decades.
It is time to prepare to quit the negotiations and spend the £20 billion offered by Teresa May to the EU on readying our country for a no deal scenario.
Please send your letters, max 350 words, to firstname.lastname@example.org