6/3/2008

Woking

Letters from February 28 2008

Beautiful cemetery is available to all

EDITOR — I read with interest the item on Muslim burial sites (News and Mail, February 21).

I was concerned to learn that the Woking Borough Council discussion on the subject was held in secret without the representation of Brookwood Cemetery or Horsell Common Preservation Society. Death and taxes are always with us — what need for secrecy?

Cllr Khan is quoted as saying it is a case of recreating something that already exists, rather than finding a new site for Muslim burials. He is referring to what was known as The Indian Burial Ground on Horsell Common.

As one who remembers the site when it was beautiful, serene, and well cared for, and who saw it become vandalised, I wonder what would be done to prevent the same happening if the ground was once more used for burials — especially as, unfortunately, it is even more likely to be vandalised these days.

And, of course, it is not a large area.

The bodies of the brave soldiers were removed from the common site to Brookwood Cemetery. If this cemetery was good enough for the soldiers, why not for the civilian Muslims?

On a recent visit to Brookwood Cemetery with a group of young people it was interesting to hear them observe that, even in death, people are separated by religion and, indeed, also by nationality in many places.

On that walk we also met, serendipitously, representatives of Brookwood Cemetery Society and of the cemetery itself. We were told of previous cases of vandalism — the cemetery covers some 450 acres — and how the grounds are patrolled and how some of the gates are now locked in an effort to protect the graves and monuments, to the chagrin of some locals who used the peaceful tracks as short cuts.

The cemetery is a beautiful and peaceful place. The Brookwood Cemetery Society (www.tbcs.org.uk) conducts regular walks, which are to be recommended, as is the  exhibition at The Lightbox ‘Pavilions Recaptured’ that highlights the national significance of the Indian Burial Ground.

Even Dodi Fayed was buried, albeit briefly, at Brookwood Cemetery.

There is still a great deal of space there. What, therefore, is the need for another burial site?
Ann Harington
Wheatsheaf Close
Horsell

EDITOR — I am responding to Cllr Riasat Khan and his comments about the possible opening of the former Muslim military cemetery being considered by the council.

Cllr Khan is well aware that the burial ground for all denominations and nationalities of Muslims and every other culture is available in Brookwood Cemetery.

To my knowledge quite a few Muslims from our own mosque are buried there. My late husband Dr Rasul Bux Baluch is also buried there in a three-plot grave, at his personal wish to be buried where there are trees, flowers and grass.

The area is beautifully looked after by the owners, the Guney family.

On top of this facility a lot of our Muslim community also contribute to a burial fund yearly or monthly to help those of the community who wish to be buried in the place of their birth of their family home area. I know my husband contributed to this and I continued long after his death in 1984.

Cllr Khan comments that the community wants this land again in Horsell as the cost of buying a plot at Brookwood is very high. Nothing is free, not even death. Is the assumption that, should the plot be opened for burial again, it would be free? Mrs Guney has said that an all-inclusive rate is available for those within a 17 mile radius of Woking.

I would suggest a visit to the Lightbox, our museum and galleries in Woking, which shows the consideration and care with which the Muslim soldiers were reburied in Brookwood Military Cemetery. There is a large hall in the museum devoted to this subject by Said Adrus. Entry is free, but it finishes on Sunday.

I know Riasat Khan is conscientious about his role as a councillor, but I suggest he concentrates more on education, housing, health and social issues in the community, which need his help.
Perveen Baluch-Jenkins,
former councillor for Central and Maybury ward

A duty  to tell it as it is

EDITOR — I’m beginning to wonder whether I can pick up a copy of the News and Mail without feeling exasperated enough to write to you. Again.

It is a journalist’s job to report fairly, accurately and, most of all, impartially. This can, on occasion, mean putting people’s noses out of joint, usually unintentionally.

It seems Cllr Melanie Whitehand thinks she has a broken nose, all at the fault of the  News and Mail (Letters, February 21).

She asks: “Why was it felt appropriate to quote from someone who no longer sits as a councillor?”. The answer is simple.

Just as David Atkinson of Horsell Rise wrote (News and Mail, February 7,) Woking is lucky enough to have a newspaper which investigates local matters, stimulates people’s thought, and covers controversial stories.

And, for the benefit of Cllr Whitehand, the editor can speak to whom they feel fit in the context of the story. The editor of any media outlet doesn’t have to bow down to the corporate dung being piled out of any organisation, company or institution.

As far as I’m concerned, Woking residents already have what they deserve — a local newspaper which reports fairly and without sensation. At times, this means upsetting people like Cllr Whitehand because the editor chose not to publish something from a press release shouting about how wonderful Woking Borough Council is.

But the truth is, the council isn’t that wonderful at all. Overspending of £1.7m in one financial year, lack of communication between chief executive and the councillors so the overspending is permitted to happen, closing of Sheerwater Neighbourhood Office, the town’s visitor’s centre, and an obsession with officers and councillors to pile as much into Part 2 to keep it out of the Woking residents’ knowledge.

So thank you to the News and Mail for continually telling the truth about our council, its executives and its councillors.

To quote the aforementioned Mr Atkinson: “Keep up the good work.”
Rob Burberry
Goldsworth East
UK Independence Party

EDITOR — Your caption below Cllr Melanie Whitehand’s picture (News and Mail, February 21) stated: ‘Cllr Whitehand who says the News and Mail should only report what councillors think is appropriate’. 

After carefully reading the letter, I think this in no way represented the point she was making.
In fact it provided excellent proof that you ignore the facts in favour of sensational statements.
Valerie Smallman 
Woodham Park Road, Addlestone

Flooding madness

EDITOR — I would like to give the planners in Woking a short lesson in flood management.

To set the scene: some weeks ago, most of us in the Old Woking area received a missive from Woking Borough Council, advising us an application had been received for the proposed redevelopment of land at present occupied by Martins Press, High Street, Old Woking, with 88 units and 88 parking spaces and having landscaping and flood protection measures.

Now, anyone who knows this particular area (and those who don’t only have to look) will be aware that the land in question is covered in marsh grass, which therefore presupposes that it is already well covered with water, so where on earth do you propose to out the water under ‘flood protection measures’?

Anyone with half a grain of common sense knows that water cannot be controlled simply by introducing ‘measures’.

Old Woking is already highly vulnerable as, even in the recent heavy rains, the gardens along the Wey fronting on to the Old Woking Road were once again flooded.

Add to this scenario 88 washing machines, baths, cars being washed, sewage and no doubt a lot more I haven’t even thought of, and where does the flood protection for those units go? Probably into my back garden.
Olive Dean
Loop Road
Woking

Fighting hard for reforms

EDITOR — On February 7 the News and Mail published the article Petition To PM Calls For Council Boss To Go about the petition highlighting the £1.2 million unauthorised spend on the Albion Square Canopy.

The article highlighted that the usual process is for the disgruntled to contact the local government ombudsman once they have given the council an opportunity to address concerns.

We have already expressed our deep concerns to the government and Minister of Justice in respect of the administration by the complaint bodies and the investigating authorities, of which the ombudsman is one.  There is no mechanism in place to discover the truth in order to address  impropriety, failure or abuse in local authorities.

In the News and Mail article we were described as an obscure political party. We would like to clarify that the UK Community Issues Party was founded by ordinary people who suffered medical mistakes/negligence under the NHS, together with their families and those that have lost loved ones.  We were registered with the Electoral Commission in October 2004 and have fielded candidates in the local elections and in our first general election in 2005. 

We are campaigning for reform in all public services and the justice system and aim to stand in local and general elections to promote openness, honesty and accountability.  We believe in increased democratic control of public services.

Everyone accepts mistakes can be made but they are becoming more frequent while the costs are passed to the long-suffering taxpayers. Why are our elected representatives allowing this to happen?

Further details regarding the petition can be found on our website. Log on to www.ukcommunityissues.org. 
Michael Osman,  Woking
UK Community Issues Party

First printed in: Woking News and Mail

Related Articles More questions over burial plans Letters from February 21 2008