Various recent letters have touched on the decline of Spalding.
It’s interesting to reflect on the possible causes.
One, of course, is the change in agricultural practice, which has more or less eliminated the former intimate relationship of Spalding with its surrounding district.
Many shops and businesses in town reflected that intimacy, and the thriving cattle market was a quite outstanding marker of it. The town is now almost an island unrelated to the agriculture that surrounds it.
Then there is Springfields, coupled with the growth in web shopping. I won’t enlarge on what others have said, but do express sadness, especially at the closure of Hills, whose local owners deserve thanks for what they created and ran for many years.
But what I think made a major difference to the spirit of the town, with negative consequences, was the change in the structure of local government in 1974. Before that, Spalding had its own Urban District Council (SUDC), with a focus of interest directly on the town. The SUDC was thrusting and caring.
The town just after WW2, had a population of about 17,000. Here are just some of the things the Urban Council used to do: lit owned and ran the Gas Works, the gas distribution system, and the service; lit owned and ran the electricity distribution and service;
lit owned the water extraction plant at Bourne, piped the water to Spalding and, just after the war, built the Chatterton water tower;
lalso just after the war, it planned and managed the building of the large St Paul’s housing estate, having built earlier estates before the war, when it had also built the new cattle market;
lit built the new Spalding swimming pool and recreational facilities;
lit provided live-in keepers for both Ayscoughee and the Cemetery, and both were always in beautiful condition;
lit built, and ran the care home in Grange Drive.
And the chief officer of the Council, was just known as the Clerk to the Council – no fancy title.
(Of course, the SUDC lost the utilities when they were nationalised, but they had run and developed them for many years.)
What made the council so lively? In my opinion, it was a result of not being run on political lines.
Candidates for the council did not carry any party label: the vote went to the person, who had to convince the electors of his or her own personal energy and competence. Councillors were well known about the town, and could not get by without performing.
I have not been to an SHDC meeting for some time, but when I did go I found it a most dispiriting experience listening to the flaccid level of debate.
I concluded that in the three-tier council organisation – council, cabinet, and cabal – it must just be the top level, if any, where effective debate took place.
Energy was not on display, and that – coupled with the principle of ‘don’t do it well, do it cheap’ – may have something to do with the decline many have noted.
John Tippler
Spalding
