I READ councillor Martin Hunt’s view that Colchester Council does support small businesses in the town (Gazette, August 5).

However, the councillor for street and waste services seems to have made comments that, as a resident, a pensioner, an income tax and council taxpayer, I find questionable.

He claims: “This administration has a record second- to-none on meaningful consultation, and it will sit down and talk to anyone at any time and try to help in any way.”

Well, it seems Mr Hunt has already forgotten a public- spirited gentleman, named Andy Hamilton, tried to make his views, and those of many Colcestrians, to the council about a very costly and troubled project Colchester Council has been involved in called the Vaf.

There was no public consultation about the Vaf, was there? It was reported that Andy Hamilton was shouted at and jeered at by councillors in the council chamber.

Second, the council had to be warned by the Information Commissioner that unless it released details under the Freedom of Information Act, it would be prosecuted.

So, clearly in the matter of releasing information about the Vaf, the council was prepared to go to the wire.

Then, Mr Hunt claims it costs Colchester Council £3,500 per day to pick up litter.

In respect of street services, as a walker into Colchester town, I can comment from personal observation that Colchester’s pavements are fouled with vomit, dog dirt, human faeces, broken bottles and smashed glass signs.

Can Mr Hunt tell the public when the last time the footpath on the west side under North Station bridge pavement was swept?

If the council is really concerned about litter, get a grip of the people who drop it.

Go to bus stops and see the litter dropped there.

Issue a few fines for dog fouling, bottle breaking, sign smashing.

The truth is, the £3,500 per day is costing councillors nothing. But it is costing council taxpayers, and Colchester Council isn’t focused on providing a public service by trying to reuduce that cost at source.

Instead, its enforcement officers are giving traders hassle for putting up signs directing the public.

Just how many members of the public complained about those signs? But plenty of people have written to the Gazette about the dirty state of the town’s footpaths.

The public will sort out which traders they want to patronise, not the council.

A direction sign or two is helpful so we know where they are located. It does not warrant a £1,000 fine.

The problem is the council and councillors, once elected, seem to forget they were elected to represent the best interests of the public.

They become distant from the public and that came out in Mr Hunt’s article.

Councillors seem to have developed an “us and them” attitude towards traders and the public and the council really needs to address this attitude.

Allen Hewitt
Bluebell Way
Colchester