A proposed switch to a ‘safer alternative’ than a chemical weedkiller in Ventnor will cost its town council 10 times more a year.
In April, Ventnor Town Council (VTC) banned the use of glyphosates in all non-ornamental areas of the town under its control, after the weedkiller was reintroduced by Island Roads.
While the makers of glyphosates say it is safe to use there have been concerns and bans on the product in various parts of the world, with its reintroduction causing issues within the town, including the potential effect it may have on wall lizards, and led to VTC looking at alternatives.
At its meeting last week, VTC agreed to go ahead with the introduction of a ‘safe alternative’ to glyphosate but at a £1,171 price tag.
Glyphosates had previously been used in 9 areas of the town at a fee of £129, with its use only once a year.
Now, the ‘safe alternative’ would cost the council £260 for one application but have to be applied up to 5 times a year to have the same effect as the chemical weed killer and it would see the cost increase from £129 to a potential £1,300 a year.
The increase has been approved by VTC but councillors raised question marks around the ‘safe alternative’ use at Ventnor Park.
To switch to the alternative at the park, costs would rise from £356 a year for the glyphosate use to £1,068 for one application or, under the same logic it would need to be treated five times, £5,340 – meaning an increase in fees to the council, and residents, of £4,984.
Councillor Steve Cockett, said the increase was an unacceptable use of public money and while he would like to see the use of glyphosates finished completely, that potential increase at this current time, does not work.
Whilst Councillor Brian Lucas said it was a moral dilemma about how much money you put against a principle, saying the money has to sit comfortably within the council’s affordability and he did not see that was the case.
The council agreed to speak to its grounds maintenance contractor to find out more and if the figure could be negotiated.
Peoples health does not count. Only £££s matter.
What rot you speak.
No one has been affected by such and many people in Ventnor are quite happy to consume alcohol and all types of drugs both prescribed and illegal.
I care for the lizards but why can’t the most sensitive areas have green groups or men in shed type hand weed and use strong effective killers elsewhere.
People eat junk food smoke and many live unhealthy lifestyle but love to find fault at anything others do and often are the ones not paying council tax hence not caring if expensive
“No one has been affected by such and many people in Ventnor are quite happy to consume alcohol and all types of drugs both prescribed and illegal.”
How do you know that no one has been affected?
And as for Alcohol and drug consumption – it’s called “Choice”.
We can’t choose the air we breathe….
Il guess calling yourself Mrs T is a reference to a certain P.M
Hope you saw what the pigeons did to that statue.
Word has it, a squadron of highly trained seagulls are on the look out for you;)
This is a CLASSIC example of spending other peoples money!
If the difference was ‘minimal’ it would be totally different, however, if they take this option you can bet your last penny that there will be a HUGE increase in the Town Council Precept next time around!
Cockett says “unacceptable use of public money” is it really. I don’t think so, this will just make things worse for the whole island. Just go ahead and poison the local wildlife then as well. Typical local councillors, going against what the locals want or say.
What happens to people when they become councillors?
They seem to become obsessive anal budget controllers and nothing else. You are there to REPRESENT THE VIEWS AND WISHES OF THE PUBLIC. Shut up and listen.
I suggest those green people fund the difference.
Yet reality is they are the most likely people to pay nothing in council tax, claim the most by living a hippie style life with many scattered children
Easy to be moralistic if others fund your desires