<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3c.org/TR/1999/REC-html401-19991224/loose.dtd">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2722" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff">
<DIV><SPAN class=093302223-05012008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>I do
not know what the arguments for and against the work proposed at Cornhill are -
I know nothing about the background - but I am a little surprised that it is
assumed that the discussions about it should take place behind closed
doors.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=093302223-05012008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=093302223-05012008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>My job
involves dealing with applications for planning permission (and occasionally,
listed building consent). Any representations for and against a proposal
for a new building, or alterations to an existing one, are available for
inspection by the general public. I am expected to tell people what is
going on. Why should proposals for restoring or altering church bells
any different? </FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=093302223-05012008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=093302223-05012008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2>Peter
Rivet</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=093302223-05012008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=093302223-05012008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<DIV><SPAN class=093302223-05012008><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff
size=2></FONT></SPAN> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr align=left><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com [mailto:bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com]<B>On
Behalf Of </B>jimhedgcock<BR><B>Sent:</B> 05 January 2008 22:42<BR><B>To:</B>
bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com<BR><B>Subject:</B> [Bell Historians] Re:
Cornhill<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV id=ygrp-text>
<P>--- In <A
href="mailto:bellhistorians%40yahoogroups.com">bellhistorians@<WBR>yahoogroups.<WBR>com</A>,
"Richard Offen" <> As the matter <BR>is still before the Chancellor of
the Diocese, I would <BR>> imagine that information is confidential at
present. Whilst it <BR>would <BR>> probably be of some interest to know
what the objections are, who has <BR>> made them is really none of our
business!<BR>> <BR>> R<BR>><BR>In an ideal world I would agree with
Richard's comments about the <BR>identity of complainants not being any of our
business. Unfortunately <BR>we don't live in an ideal world. Some of us hold
different opinions <BR>from others and are perfectly entitled to do so. With
regard to this <BR>specific item, there are those in the ringing community who
are well <BR>balanced, thoughtful and responsible people. They are considered
in <BR>their views and responses and set out not to offend. We all know such
<BR>people. On the other hand there are those who command less respect, and
<BR>the identities of these people are known to us. I would rather know
<BR>that the views of the responsible and informed are being expressed to
<BR>the relevant authorities rather than the others making their
<BR>reprersentations and possibly claiming support that doesn't stand up to
<BR>scrutiny.<BR>David says that enquiries should be made via the tower
correspondent. <BR>This also is a very laudable position to adopt.
Unfortunately the 'cat <BR>is out of the bag'. The names of objectors and the
reasons for their <BR>objections are common topics of conversation in
locations where ringers <BR>meet for ringing and social discourse. In these
circumstances, fact, <BR>inuendo and speculation tend to blend and the result
is information <BR>that has no sure foundation. Given this situation, it is my
opinion, <BR>that may differ from that of others, that it is better to clear
the <BR>air. This site is frequented by many with much knowledge of this
<BR>situation and if they consider it appropriate will make a response. If
<BR>they don't then the matter will die a natural death. So be it. We also
<BR>have a very competent and experienced moderator who can similarly end
<BR>this correspondence should he so choose. I have no further comment to
<BR>make. I have heard the names of four objectors mentioned but these may
<BR>be unfounded.<BR>Finally David states that this site is not the place to
air such <BR>enquiries. Could I ask if this site is a suitable vehicle for
sending <BR>Christmas Greetings and the like? I find such actions bland and
almost <BR>meaningless, but then that is my opinion. I usually do mine using
<BR>e.cards, telephone or via snail mail. Personal messages in such
<BR>vehicles in my opinion, far outweigh any other means.<BR><BR></P></DIV><!--End group email --></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>