Sir – Recently a group of Wallingford residents was invited to a meeting of a town council sub-committee.

The invitation said: “We would really appreciate you coming up and putting your point of view. I am not in a position to promise anything at this stage but if we can find a way to sort this to everyone’s satisfaction let’s give it a try.”

A friendly invitation. But how disappointing in its execution. We felt we were merely tolerated rather than welcomed. Furthermore we felt intimidated, disadvantaged and, more importantly that the committee had already made its mind up and was not prepared to look at possible solutions.

It was a waste of our time.

It is too easy to fall back on traditional procedures rather than engage fully with the public.

Sitting in a circle with backs to the public; giving no pre-information on procedures to be used; refusal to discuss issues; sitting down to speak while making the public stand up; all of these create a barrier between residents and the councillors who purport to represent and serve their interests.

We weren’t even given the correct time and venue for the meeting, and no apology – ‘It was in the minutes!’ (which are not on display).

We would so like our town council to make efforts to be more inclusive (as some other councils are). How can it hope to gain public support when needed, if its members are patronising and disrespectful?

By the way, the issue that concerned us was the town council’s decision permanently to close the pathway and steps over the town fortifications, from the Bullcroft to footpath 17 (which lies behind the Bullcroft). There are solutions other than closure, which may or may not be feasible, but which aren’t being examined.

Julia West, Jane Randle, Paula Woodward, Neil Kelly, Chris Tyndall, Brenda Calcutt
Priory Mews
Wallingford