THE claim made by Ilfracombe Town Councillor Frank Pearson ('Power to the people, but how? Journal, January 26) "The cost to the town so far has been £58,000 and loss of community support" is completely untrue in relation to the Ilfracombe Town Council's bid to become a pioneering community taking charge of its own affairs.

The council so far has spent approximately £1,000 on this initiative and whilst this is not an insubstantial sum, the majority of the council felt it justified when measured against the potential gains for the town.

These expenses are made up of professional officer time in helping to put the bid together and travelling expenses to London to present the bid to Government.

The council paid my train fare to London, but given that this was the first time in nearly nine years on the council that I have claimed any expenses and the fact I took a whole day out of work at my own expense hopefully explains how important I believe this opportunity to be for our town.

I am of the view that Councillor Pearson owes Ilfracombe Town Council and our community an apology for his false allegations and attempt at discrediting this fantastic chance.

For whatever reason, he appears not to share the vision of the majority of our council in its ambition to improve our town and whilst I have no problem in him opposing, I ask in future that he bases his arguments on fact.

One reason why I stood for our Town Council in 2003 was because of the horrendous mischief making that had gone on previously.

Arguments, misinformation and disrespectful behaviour were a regular feature of council meetings as reported in the Press, resulting in nothing being done.

The council had a notoriety that reached a national stage during the period 1999-2003. I was embarrassed for our town. Councillor Pearson was a member of the council during that time, so should be aware of the damage that untruths can cause.

Councillor Pearson may not like the Secretary of State Eric Pickles who is responsible for delivering localism, but that is no reason to jeopardise the opportunity that our Town Council has secured for the town.

I have no doubt that Councillor Pearson will further argue that he helped prevent next year's local Council Tax rise believing that the council would have increased it to help cover the cost of this initiative.

Well I can tell Councillor Pearson that such a view would be wrong also, because if he had taken the trouble to attend important meetings when the Council Tax budget was first discussed, he would have realised the error in such thinking, as our council was always keen to avoid unnecessary expense to the community and this project was never intended to result in increased Council Tax.

My advice is when 'looking' it is important to 'see', and when 'hearing' it is important to 'listen', otherwise the truth becomes fantasy and regarding this topic my esteemed colleague would make a good fairytale author.

Finally, Councillor Pearson argued that the town is moving too fast. I find that statement difficult to understand because we have been waiting nearly 40 years to regain some control of our town, so how slow does he want us to move, because it is very difficult to go slower than snail pace?

I believe we are all tired of same old same old, so let's try and make a real difference together.

COUNCILLOR RON LEY,

Ilfracombe Town Councillor.

I WAS always led to believe that the Press upheld democracy, the right to free speech and the right for the truth to be printed.

After last week's Ilfracombe Town Council meeting, where the council voted to increase the Council Tax Town precept and refused to let any member of the public to speak or to challenge the budget figures or to speak for or against, I have had my faith in democracy and the right to free speech shattered.

The newspaper reporter present did not ask any questions or report in the Journal that the public was muzzled.

I have a copy of a letter dated February 23, 2011, from Bob Neill the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State addressed to councillors on the subject of access to meetings.

In his letter he states "As part of the Government's transparency drive I want to highlight the importance of your council giving citizens the opportunity to access and experience local democracy, that to me is freedom of speech and comment."

At other times citizens have been able to speak at town council meetings, so what was so secret or important that the public had to be muzzled at this meeting on January 23, 2012?

I suspect that the reason the public were denied questions was that the budget was only presented by Councillor Ley at the start of the meeting, giving councillors no time to study it, check figures or make suggestions for savings that would have meant a zero increase in council tax.

There was no transparency and it was a meeting that Stalin would have been proud of, his little band of Sovietstyle councillors dispensing local democracy.

The Journal should be speaking up for the silent majority, the ordinary people of Ilfracombe, encouraging their reporters to ask challenging questions, support the right of free speech and a free Press.

Where are the campaigning reporters of old? We need you to speak out to protect the right of free speech, a free Press and freedom of thought.

G.R. PARKHOUSE,

Ilfracombe.

Editor's note: Legally, the Journal is not entitled to ask questions at council meetings, but merely to report on proceedings, a distinction it is important to make in relation to Mr Parkhouse's criticisms.