Pavement extension
In a feature (June 3) about the pavement extension in Church Street, St Paul's Bay, the mayor said: "The problem is that people do not readily accept change and think that you are taking something away from them". In the issue of August 19, a statement...
In a feature (June 3) about the pavement extension in Church Street, St Paul's Bay, the mayor said: "The problem is that people do not readily accept change and think that you are taking something away from them".
In the issue of August 19, a statement by the mayor said, among other things that: "The council surely did not want to create an inconvenience to the public with decisions it took" and "not every zone would allow such widening".
These two points prove that the mayor on June 3 was speaking out of tune and that the people were right in protesting about the pavement extension in Church Street, St Paul's Bay.
According to the statement, the council would take steps against those who abuse.
On July 8, in a live programme on Super 1 TV, the mayor stated publicly that in Church Street there had been abuse. So far (until August 19) nothing has been done to rectify the abuse. Why?
In view of all this, I would like to thank the mayor for proving the people right and I would also like to ask him: What is the council going to do about the inconveniences being suffered by the people because of the pavement extension in Church Street?