Dear Tory Councillors for Wandsworth

Isn't it time you started to be more honest in your arguments about the Battersea Zoo?

It is your lack of honesty to date that has flabbergasted so many of your constituents on this issue so far, not just frustration at your refusal to acknowledge the enormous value of your existing amenity that you have unilaterally, and against the wishes of your constituents, now voted to close:

1) The heading of the council's press release following your vote to close the zoo last Wednesday was headed "Zoo school funding must come first".

Is this not deliberately misleading? Is it not giving the impression that if you had voted to keep the zoo open this would have been at the expense of funding for schools?

All along those trying to save the zoo have been doing so on the grounds that there is evidence there are relatively simple means whereby it could pay for itself a possibility that the council has refused to look into in any detail not that the zoo is more important than other services. Your constituents would like to know why you are deciding to be misleading in this way?

2) The council still has not addressed why it has refused to keep the zoo open while it determines the future of the site.

Having a derelict wasteland there for a few years is no good for anyone. Otherwise it could have remained a much loved, much used, low cost and much needed amenity for the young and disabled in particular.

Waste

Rather than the council wasting large sums of money on the costs of closing it, which it seemingly can't wait to do, why couldn't the council have voted for Councillor King's (Labour) amendment to keep the zoo open while a private funding package was sought that then could have been weighed fairly against other possible developments.

Why the hurry? Isn't your rush going to be very wasteful of the money that otherwise could have been spent on schools?

3) It is felt that Councillor Senior's apparent suggestion at the closure meeting last Wednesday that the council would still welcome any ideas of financial support for the zoo (seemingly to keep it open) is not an honest suggestion, as at the same time the council voted to close it.

Surely the whole point of Coun King's proposed amendment (that not one Tory councillor had the courage to support) was to postpone closure while these options were looked into.

Once staff are laid off and animals are sent away (which will be very costly to the council money that otherwise could have been invested in schools), the cost to re-establish the zoo will be enormously higher and revenue from visitors would be lost in the meantime. Is this not another example of the council misleading its constituents?

4) Many of your constituents are now amazed at the extent to which all Tory Councillors for Wandsworth appear utterly uninterested at the groundswell of public opinion, from all walks of life, that are against the council's decision on this issue.

They are amazed how not even one of the Tory councillors so much as even abstained from the vote to close the zoo, given the strength of arguments against their supposed logic about why the zoo should be closed immediately.

These strong arguments had been put to all councillors in advance of the meeting by many concerned residents in emails, letters, telephone calls and conversations, and in the 10,500 signatures on the petition.

The ability of 42 Tory councillors to refuse to address these real issues has stunned many.

What is going on here? What type of democracy is this? Were councillors allowed a free vote, or were their hands tied, and if so, in what way and why?

It is time for greater honesty from our Tory councillors for Wandsworth. We your constituents deserve better from you. Honesty and openness, please.

A Concerned Resident

Name and Address supplied

May 30, 2003 16:00