Crack down on bad drivers, not large-car owners

If bad drivers are to be punished, let the police position themselves in roads like Mont Arrive and the likes as they do to catch speedsters and then let the courts punish them accordingly.

If some clown is charging along on the footpath or driving while using their mobile phone, hit them hard.

It is not the innocent people that should foot the bill because they have been allowed to buy a large car.

After all, they are on offer – so why should they not have the right to have one and then have to pay for having it if they are sensible enough to obey the rules of the roads?

I mean, are lorries and buses going to be taxed? Are articulated lorries going to be stopped from driving through the middle of the island, having no chance of getting to their destination without (as it is now called) curb surfing?

If not, why not?

I can hear it now.

Like most businesses, as soon as the employer has to pay a bit more (like a higher minimum wage), the cry comes out – we will have to cut staff or we will fold and close down. Trying the old 'jobs will go' approach to get let off with any increase.

As some people may know, I was accepted onto the St Peter Port douzaine recently (unopposed) and I look forward to taking on the job and acting on behalf of the people of St Peter Port, but I must say that the meeting held at Les Cotils Christian Centre on Wednesday 12 April, where the people of St Peter Port could put forward any points and vote to accept or reject proposals on how the douzaine acts on their behalf, was very poorly attended by deputies and the voting public alike.

There were four deputies at the start of the meeting and one entered the room later, but there were only around 43 of the voting public in attendance.

When you think of how many people there are living and voting in St Peter Port, that was a poor show.

It is fine to shout about the people put in office not doing the job properly, but when the chance comes to have a direct say, not bothering to attend makes it somewhat unfair to criticise.

Just for an instance, a vote was taken on how much money should be paid out on a certain thing and was passed with a vote of 26 to 13 with about four abstentions.

So, by rights, only 26 have the right to say it is the right way to spend that money and only 13 have the right to say it is money wasted.

The people not in attendance will make a lot of noise about it, but really are out of order when condemning the way the money is spent.

Look, I am not supporting the douzaine or the people by pointing this out, but just making a point that we cannot shout if we do not attend these kinds of meetings to put our points forward.

Out of interest, I voted against spending the amount of money that was proposed for this individual item on the agenda as I thought, along with the other 12 who voted against it, we were spending more than necessary on it.

I am not going to say what it was as it will be interesting to hear the people not in attendance complaining in the future and I can point out that they were not willing to turn out and vote against it.

So in reality 26 people decided it for them.

I am one of the first to voice my opinion on matters, but I am also prepared to stand up and be counted if need be.

I think we should all be prepared to do this if we want to put our points across. I am a people person and I am for the underdog every time, but the underdog must stand up and be counted or the battle is lost before it begins.

ROD HAMON,

5, Rosemount,

Mont Arrive,

St Peter Port,

GY1 2AF.