SET STONEHENGE FREE!
Sm,—Is it not a scandal that the Tories (or Aims of Industry) have not raised the issue of Stonehenge in their election campaign? Here is an example of public ownership at its worst. After years of control from Whitehall, Stonehenge presents all the symp- toms of inefficiency and decay that we have come to expect from the nationalised industries. As a result, no doubt, of bureaucratic incompetence, half the stones have fallen down. If one complains to the custodians about this disgusting state of affairs, one is met with an uncomprehending stare traceable, no doubt, to Communist infiltration into the union concerned. Yet the service to the public is a disgrace. The native can't even buy a bag of fish and chips at Stonehenge. Typical of our insular attitude is the absence of Coca-Cola.
Further, the prices charged for admission have increased continuously. On my last visit I had to pay sixpence. No wonder we are rotting with inflation. Nevertheless, the industry probably makes a loss which must be made up by the long-suffering tax- payer. But in a government monopoly there can oe no incentive to improve. The customer has absolutely no choice. If one doesn't like Stonehenge, where else can one go?
Sir, what a wonderful tonic it would be for the Tories if Stonehenge was returned to private enter- prise. But when one asks Sir Alec to be specific, what is the answer? He shirks the issue. Never once in any of his speeches has he mentioned the subject (so far as I know).
Rubens,' Flax Bourton, nr. Bristol J. L. SHUTTER
Previous page
