He should have attended meetings

Have your say

How could the disqualified ex- (Sutton Bridge parish) councillor Tom Rowe claim to be outnumbered, in his Lincolnshire Free Press letter of September 18, when he only came to the first council meeting (May 2011) to become a councillor?

If he really wanted to protect the interests of villagers, he should have attended every meeting.

He was “working quietly within the parish for worthwhile projects”? Is this the marina project, of which he, his wife and other ex-councillors are directors?

He states that I “... only served you for a few months ...”. Wrong! I was a parish councillor for three years, and chairman for the last one.

During that time, I was unpaid acting clerk for nearly six months, I served on six groups and committees and attended 85 per cent of full council meetings

If he was worried about the precept, why didn’t he attend the meetings to put the opposite view?

The “incinerator” referred to in the article in the Spalding Guardian on September 20 is a power generator, using a “gasification” method.

Councillor Mrs Rowe is concerned about increased traffic. Is it because of increased traffic passing her house next to the A17. Is she a NIMBY?

If she really had parishioners’ interests at heart, she would welcome the potential for employment and funds towards projects in the community.

Chris Brandon-King

Nightingale Way

Sutton Bridge