I feel very saddened at the attitude of the council at Tuesdays meeting and it was abundantly clear many had not even bothered to read the report, having already dismissed it out of hand with their pre-set nay vote. Quite rightly, everyone has differing views but as a matter of respect to our time and effort, it was simple courtesy to read our recommendations. It was an honour to have been part of the process and to see Glastonbury at its best rather than just being yet another group that sits round a table and talks . . . and talks … and talks. A successful process is one that allows for all to discuss, put forward own perspectives, explore, consider and work out routes that will allow things to be taken forward - without tantrums and closed minds. A process such as that is a peace process and I am sure everyone who was around that table and in the room would agree that the world needs a lot of that these days. Such a process, as the Heraldry Working Group so ably demonstrated, can allow avenues to be found that leaves room to see and consider a bigger picture - akin to standing back from a work of art in order to see the whole canvass- and bybasses ego and personality, allowing an evolutionary course of action to take place. Stop, look, listen is not just great advice to refrain from getting hit by passing cars; it is also very useful when on a journey, a process, in any meeting of differing attitudes and ideas. Change IS uncomfortable and challenging, but, like it or not, it is a human process. I am a traditionalist that likes to honour all that has been, holding it in the present so that our ‘ancestry’ - our ‘story’ - is not lost and can be respectfully taken into the future. Even the ‘bad’ stuff holds valuable lessons and can be utilised as a map; reminding us of where ‘treacherous waters’ can be. Perhaps I am being naïve, but I really am struggling to grasp how, knowing something is now unlawful, how it can possibly remain the same? Or, how the efforts of a Heraldry Working Group, set up and approved by the Town Council can be so dismissed out-of-hand without any show of gratitude or respect of people’s time, commitment and efforts. The Findings and Recommendations of the Working Group The Heraldry Working Group included eight Town Councillors and 15 representatives from different sections of the community, attempting to reflect a wide diversity of opinion and belief, including Anglican, Catholic, Hindu, Buddhist, Druid, Goddess Temple, and Shamanic paths, as well as local historians and people with relevant knowledge and expertise related to heraldry and symbolism. The group met on four occasions, between October 2013 and March 2014, to discuss the motion. The debate was open and frank; at times heartfelt, passionate, and lively – whilst moving forward and maintaining a positive and productive spirit. It was agreed that: • The creation of a legal, viable, and marketable asset for the Town was a wonderful opportunity for Glastonbury, which could be embraced in a positive manner. • Whatever the outcome of the process – the current heraldry and motto has an honourable place in the town’s history; it is important to acknowledge this fully; having it on displayed in the Town Hall, etc., to pay respect to everyone who served under it: “taking history with us – the pride we should have in the existing Coat-of-Arms – to honour the past; not eclipse it”. • The whole community should be involved in the process, having the opportunity to contribute ideas and suggestions through active consultation. • The process should not be rushed, “it will take time”. • The final decision would remain with the Town Council. Recommendations: 1) Recommendation to obtain Arms: Underpinned by concern about the legalities, the Working Group recommends that Glastonbury Town Council formally ‘obtain arms’ – to be lawful; representative of the whole community; something that “everyone would know”. The significant factors for this recommendation being the Town Council’s statutory Equality Duty, and the responsibility of Councillors to uphold the law [see page 12]. The Working Group suggests that the Town Council consider that a legal emblem; a legitimately obtained Coat-of-Arms is property. It has value. Therefore, its use could be permitted to businesses and organisations in the town who might wish to financially support the creation and design of a civic emblem or petition to the College of Arms. Any businesses contributing could receive authorization to use Glastonbury’s ‘official’ Coat-of-Arms as a badge of honour [see page 16 ‘Raising the funds’]. 2) Recommendation for community consultation: The Working Group recommends that Glastonbury Town Council enter into a process of consultation, involving the churches, the schools, local businesses, artists, etc., with rolling exhibitions in the High Street, public meetings, and displays to enable the whole community the opportunity to contribute their ideas and suggestions on what they would like to see on the Coat-of-Arms or civic emblem; and to voice their ideas for a motto for Glastonbury. 3) Recommendation to form a Committee, to take the process forward: The Working Group recommends the formation of a Town Council committee to implement and manage the process, as outlined in the ‘Milestones’ section [below]. Overseeing the three aspects of the process: a) The ‘popular’ thread, which would include consultation, promotion, and publicity. b) The ‘formal’ structural aspect – term of reference, the College of Arms, the legalities, statutory requirements, etc. c) The ‘financial’ aspect of the project – budgeting and fundraising.
Posted on: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 09:40:19 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015