One correction from me, I realise I have assumed OurSoul, Mrs C and Judith Chalmers is a female, I apologise, this person could quite easily be male.
@Woodstock, And that is because OurSoul, Judith Chalmers , Mrs C and any other incarnation she goes under, takes pleasure in trolling and generally passing derogatory comments about anyone who opposes her views. The most intelligent and informative discussions take place when she is in a period of being banned, but they are sadly all too short.
But if the building has been decommissioned and, quote, 'it would be too expensive to reinstate the services' what is the point of the tendering process?
OurSoul is the biggest troll on this site, it is well known and about time she and all her incarnations were banned for ever!
@Lynne , brill letter in the gazette today and i hope you get answers to your questions. In my view, the posts from current DTC councillors are correct in their recollection of the situation, so it really is down to TDC and WHO decided that the Dawlish Warren toilets should close entirely. This was never on the cards. To have three portaloos in such a prominent seaside resort is nothing short of ...
I didn't say they were not well used I simply asked the question, used by how many? But I suspect when the two are compared the numbers using Dawlish Warren car park toilets far outstrip those using Sandy Lane toilets. For me, both sets of toilets should have been retained but the fight was soundly focused on the Sandy Lane toilets and we are now seeing the consequence of that.
@Dorian , I was stating facts! The chair of F&GP did lead on this issue.
Ok I have kept quiet for a while, which I am sure Mrs C and Dorian (or Dorian's reincarnation) will be pleased about, but..........back to the toilets. The chair of F&GP in the last administration led on this topic and fought hard to keep the Sandy Lane toilets open, used by how many people? The agreement with TDC was to keep half the Warren car park toilets open and the other half of the building ...
The FOI application can request all letters, documents and emails linked to the discussions about the proposals and would be a legitimate request. The information in itself should reveal what has or, more importantly, has not been discussed. Often the omissions tell us more than the admissions.
So Netiquette, we can no longer hold Mrs C to account for her dubious comments about identifiable people? It will be a sad day if that ever happens!