HAVING lived and worked in Bournemouth or Christchurch for the best part of 60 years, I am at a loss to understand why anyone would want to save Druitt Hall.

It is not a listed building and is of no architectural merit, being little better than a run-down double garage with an asbestos roof and no kitchen facilities.

Why not use the Regent Centre, which has room for utilisation?

I suspect that current users of Druitt Hall are charged very little and if forced to move elsewhere would have to pay substantially more.

Originally there were grandiose plans costing £1.5m for a 200-seater conference centre and ancillary facilities which has now bitten the dust because less than £200,000 has been raised in four years.

What is now going to happen to this money as it clearly can’t be returned to the donors?

A dose of reality is needed. Clinging to a building just because it bears the name of one of the town’s Victorian grandees is not an option.

Just demolish it and leave a nice open space for extending the gardens. The name of Druitt will still be preserved.

There is a lot more behind the retention of Druitt Hall that we need to know. One thing you can be sure of. Quangos are expert at spending other peoples money! Perhaps Christchurch is trying to emulate the profligacy of its neighbour Bournemouth who thought nothing of spending vast sums of council taxpayers’ money on Boscombe Surf Reef, or does someone somewhere have a burning ambition to have their name on a brass plaque that we will all end up paying for?

WARWICK RUST, Bure Close, Christchurch