Branston Ltd are a sponsor of the Seavington Web Museum

The Seavingtons News - September, 95
SEAVINGTON NEW VILLAGE HALL
‘On and on and on and on and on’ like the washing machine television advert, the meetings called by the new Village Hall committee tend to drone on with virtually the same people raising the same points year after year. The 17th of August meeting was, however, different.

In opening proceedings, the Chairman, Bob Ash, one of the most respected and popular members of our community, gave a very brief outline of the present position regarding the plans, finance, grant aid, etc. He then announced that he would not chair this meeting as following his recent heart attack he had been medically advised to avoid stress and would therefore ask Peter Ashley to act in his place. The threat of losing Bob was far more serious than the thought of losing the new hall so Peter took the chair, a welcomed and knowledgeable substitute.

Peter welcomed everyone present including the surveyor from the partnership who had drawn up the plans and the Local Government Advisor on village halls. The plans had been available for inspection throughout the day for all to view. The Chairman gave details of the current cash position, possible grants from such bodies as the National Lottery, the Sports Council, etc. and the Committee’s proposal to request the Parish Council for an increase, albeit temporary, in the Parish Precept to assist both financially and as a policy matter when grants were applied for. A form of referendum which it was proposed to circulate to all householders was tabled. Bravely, he then threw the meeting open for discussion. This was a ready invitation for those so minded to air their views on such matters as a bar licence, their personal drink preferences, door positions, and what various people as individuals did or did not support. All very interesting but much of it hardly relevant to the basic matter of finance. However, the Chairman dealt with these patiently and politely despite not infrequent remarks interjected at random.

Some years ago, at the first meeting, Donald Paton, the late France Jack’s step­father and a man of considerable business experience, had stressed the importance of preparing a financial plan, often called a business plan. The Committee should have noted this as a priority or the Advisor should have drawn it to their attention.

When it was learned that no such plan had been prepared, surprise was expressed by several people, particularly in the light of proposed grant applications and it was felt that no application would be considered without one. one or two members of the Committee, who appeared not to grasp the meaning of such a plan queried the possibility without precise details of the total cash that would be available, total membership numbers and detailed costings. The Chairman gave such arguments very short thrift and promised that it would be produced in very quick time.

As the idea of an increase in the Parish Precept and the proposed draft form for a referendum did not appear to be favourably received the Chairman asked Laurie Uncles, Parish Council Chairman, for his views. he replied that the PC could neither give an opinion or an undertaking of any sort until the precise views of each household were known. Following the rapid withdrawal of an offer of an interest free loan of £15,000.00, it was obvious that the idea of a loan or loans was not popular, as these would have to be repaid anyway.

As there always appeared to be some differences of opinion between the Parish Council, elected to represent the community as a whole, and the Committee, which had, like Topsy, grown out of the generous and public spiritedness of its members but was not a generally elected body, David Ades, again with much business and commercial experience, made the most sensible and helpful of any of the various proposals - that the Parish Council and the Committee work together - particularly on the matter concerning the Precept but also as regards the general feeling as to the desire of the community for a new Village Hall, or not, a referendum and any other important matters that would affect the business plan. He was more than willing to assist. His excellent suggestion was warmly welcomed.

General observations, criticisms and suggestions on the meeting would first have to stress the bnnecessary number of Committee members. The vast phalanx facing the rest of those present is unwieldy and intimidating and the fact that more than one member of more than one family is on this Committee seems unnecessary and unwise. The argument that a representative from each of the many Village organisations - the Ladies, Gardeners, Stitchers, Footballers, Cricketers, Uncle Tom Cobley and all must be members is unacceptable in the initial stages. They can always be consulted or co-opted as required. Furthermore, the Committee must not seek to abrogate the duties and responsibilities of the Parish Council or take umbrage, as some appear to do, if their views are not accepted. Perhaps the Chairman could consider these points and, in conjunction with the Chairman of the PC, ponder the thought of producing one small, cohesive committee, as few members as possible, with equal representation from the new Village Hall Committee and the PC. No doubt, some members of the present Committee would be only too pleased to be relieved of the onerous duties and prefer to be called on as necessary.
The meeting finished in good time and spirits with sincere thanks being expressed to the Chairman, the Acting Chairman and the committee for their considerable efforts and devotion.
The Acting Chairman brought matters to a close by thinking all those present and particularly the Surveyor and the Local Government Advisor.
David J Pye