9 April 2015
The main issue in our campaign is quite simple: why have the authorities chosen to defend Torcross and Beesands from the sea, but leave Hallsands to fend for itself? The response of our MP (who still remains invisible at Hallsands) was tweeted thus: @NorthHallsands the majority would not support diverting scarce resources for coastal erosion away from prioritising Slapton Line.
So, despite the proven low cost of so doing, defence of Hallsands is unaffordable. In fact the only source of money is to steal from the fund allocated to Slapton Line. I am not paraphrasing the good doctor unfairly, am I?
But on this morning’s Today programme (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p02nqxbs) we hear of the constituency of Great Yarmouth where UKIP and Labour are threatening to take the seat from under government minister Brandon Lewis.
They have coastal erosion problems there too, but more serious and therefore much more expensive to counter than at Hallsands. In their case unstable cliffs are collapsing into the sea. It takes more than a few boulders to sort that out. But, nevertheless a minister’s seat is threatened, so Mr Brandon has announced that he has secured funds to pay for the necessary works.
‘Scarce resources‘? Not in a marginal constituency at election time. Just reach into the money tree and pick off a few fivers. Magic. Or is that the right word? Isn’t there another word, Dr Wollaston, for saying one thing and doing another? Now lets see if I can bring it to mind …