In the latest print edition of the South Essex Stirrer, the main theme was how dysfunctional and unfit for purpose the local authorities in our region who presume to govern us are – https://www.dropbox.com/s/x5ixljqiomcwkx5/STIRRER_No_2.pdf?dl=0 A recurring theme is their refusal to listen to well researched ideas and proposals from concerned groups of local residents who simply want to improve life in their communities. Saxon King In Priory Park are one such group who consistently come up with well researched ideas yet find themselves constantly rebuffed by Southend Borough Council who arrogantly think they know best. To help redress the balance, we’re more than happy to publish their latest press release:

SKIPP press release (03-11-17) answering our Echo critics

With regards to the comments and questions raised by Mr Downing and Mr Woods on the letters pages of the Echo over the last week:

Both gentlemen have asked us to prove SKIPP’s figures regarding our opinion that our proposal for an interactive Saxon King museum in Priory Park would be a greater attraction than an ugly carbuncle of an entertainment centre purporting to be a museum on the seafront cliffs.

The first thing to point out here is the obvious, any figures quoted by either the Council or SKIPP are merely a matter of guess work based on circumstantial assumptions. We don’t think even the Council would claim to have the clairvoyance to see into the future. The council bases their assumption on the results of a software programme designed to guess the expected visitor figures. It’s probably a programme written by the same programmer who wrote the software that said the removal of the roundabout at Victoria Circus would improve traffic flow and we all know how stupid the council were to believe those results.

SKIPP does not have the financial resources of the council so doesn’t have the expensive software to guess for us. No we have based our honest opinion on good old leg work. We have spoken with people who know about these things and have real experience in heritage attractions instead of relying on a computer programme. We have spoken at length with the management team at the nearest equivalent – Sutton Hoo – and were told by them that in their expert opinion separating the exhibition of the King’s treasures from the burial site was a fundamental mistake and would result in much reduced interest and consequently visitor numbers.

The second point to mention regards the type of exhibition being planned. The council plans a static old fashioned style exhibition based on glass cases, whereas SKIPP proposes a fully interactive Saxon experience to immerse the visitor in the feel and atmosphere of the dark ages. SKIPP again has done its leg work. We met with the experts at the Museum of London and were told that creating a museum of uninspiring glass cases that children simply run past was not only an out of date idea but would also result in reduced repeat visits.

It is interesting that our opinion regarding the popularity of SKIPP’s proposal for a Saxon experience on the brownfield site in Priory Park is also shared by the former leader of Southend Council Nigel Holdcroft who wrote to SKIPP in 2009 whilst leader of the Council expressing the opinion that our proposal would attract “tens of thousands”.

Another point of interest regarding both these letters, why do they demand that we prove our claims but they make no similar demand of the Council? Draw your own conclusions on that.

The SKIPP Committee

Patsy Link, Sheena Walker, Mark Sharp