Preston Village Debate page.

Preston Village Debate page.

I would normally prefer not to comment on another page but as administrators of the above page have commented on this page I feel it only polite to respond in kind but hopefully I, at least, will give some substance to my view.

I have recently read Preston Village Debate page and apart from being pointless because members are not allowed to say anything that is not politically correct, polite or nice about people, companies, organisations or local authorities so, unless you can balance on a fence and have no opinion there’s really no point in commenting but then, if your concentrating on a balancing act there’s probably no point in commenting anyway.....I know, it doesn't make any sense to me either!!

That may be the reason why so few of its members actually comment on any issues and under such restrictive conditions debate is somewhat difficult, that is bourn out by the lack of debate on the page. I agree you have to have rules and limits have to be set and members must abide by them but being so restrictive only serves to stifle debate not encourage or create it!

The current “debate” about travellers on Staithes Road isn’t actually a debate it’s just a collection of opinions and even that has been criticised by administrators.

I think the administrators should ask themselves if they are the right people for the role of administering such a page and if they conclude they are afraid that someone may be unkind, impolite or critical of someone else, company, organisation or local authority I would think it time for either new administrators to be appointed to liven the page up or set up a new page where opposing views can be voiced and challenged.

If you look at the definition of the word debate, you will come up with things like argue, dispute, contest or oppose, the very things that are not permitted on Preston Village Debate especially if you have strongly held views and voice them passionately against some one who disagrees with you with equal passion, that is all too often seen as an “attack” on someone and would therefore be deleted and the author possibly removed. Like me, I’m sure there are many who no longer know what is permissible and what is not, to date the rules have been made up as the administrators stumble along altering or adding to the rules when administrators disagree with a comment or view in order to justify its deletion or the authors removal from the page, sounds a little autocratic to me.

I have no wish to cast doubt on the sincerity of administrators of the page but if you look at the number of debates on the page you may well come to the conclusion that there are none and if there is anything that might resemble a debate contributors are constantly warned against failing to be kind or balanced and that usually kills the debate stone dead!! So we now return to “what is the point”.

To have a debate you need honesty, sincerity, passion and commitment, which as far as I’m concerned create conflicts of opinion and argument that leads to healthy debate and hopefully a mutually agreed resolution. Most good debates are centred on controversial subjects and opinions. If you are going to run a debate page then for heavens sake let people get on and debate issues, because we might disagree with someone else’s view doesn’t mean we’ll end up knocking 10 bells of hell out of each other.

As for a local authority not being able to defend itself that is not true, while I accept a local authority has no defence against libel in law, libel law does give a defence for a council as “utterances and council debate”. Therefore a council is able to list as an agenda item the issue in question and debate it in council in front of a public gallery and thereby refute any criticism, that would be the right approach for a council to adopt, open, transparent and honest, it is wholly wrong to suggest residents are not allowed to criticise a council because it cannot defend itself.

It’s far more appropriate to ask why a council doesn’t defend itself when it has every right to do so and the means to do it. The alternative is not to criticise a council on any subject or oppose their methods or actions, just let them get on with whatever it is their doing and hope you’re able to vote them out at the next common election if you happen to disagree with them. The problem with that view is that a council who is unchallenged will become bolder and bolder in their actions and the amount of damage they can inflict on a community during their 4-year term of office is enormous. Bearing that in mind we as residents have a duty to question and challenge a council when we feel they are failing, if we don’t we deserve everything we get!!

We must also remember that councillors are equally private residents and as such have a voice as residents, hopefully from a position of awareness and knowledge, that is a valuable addition to any debate that effects a local community, to cut off an enquiry to such a person is to deny valuable input to the debate and lessen it’s worth, another fault of administrators, in my view. A main duty of a Parish Councillor is to engage with residents, understand their views and needs so they are able to fully represent those residents in council. Failing to engage with residents is in my view a dereliction of their duty to the electorate.

Is Preston Village Debate there to protect the interests of the Parish Council or encourage open debate, it cannot do both.

I’ll probably get some flak for this post but at least I’m honest, I have an opinion and everyone knows were I stand and I’m willing to have a debate while respecting any opposing view.