Six things you're saying about...Peterborough's Covid marshals


Some readers thought that the marshal scheme should just be dropped altogether (Photo: Terry Harris)

Most Peterborough Matters readers who made their feelings known were against the idea of extending the contract for Covid marshals in the city.

The suggestion that the money could be better spent elsewhere was common and some questioned the effectiveness of the job based on how they had seen current marshals perform their duties.

James Morgan said he was angered by the decision to fund the marshals "from the start". He said: "It makes me angry when there are so many more important things on which the money could be spent."

The sentiment was echoed by Stephen Wayne Pollard, who wrote: "Might as well have walking chocolate teapots."

But David Hucks, who claimed to be a Covid officer, said any marshal who did not enforce the rules as part of their job description "let down the team".

Some commenters provided ideas for what could be done with the funding to improve the scheme.

Fiaz Rasool suggested that the job titles be changed to 'marshal of Peterborough' and that they could monitor "flytipping, litter patrols and maybe parking at certain times and events".

Kera Chaney also thought marshals could be useful, but not in a Covid-related capacity. She said: "Can't money be spent on different kinds of marshals? Like ones trained in mental health, or spotting signs of trafficking."

But some thought that the marshal scheme should just be dropped altogether. Bik Sohal wrote: "Completely pointless. Instead the money should have been spent as small grants for businesses that fell through the cracks or somewhere else needed within the council such as social care."

Peterborough City Council confirmed last week that a review into whether the contract would need to be extended beyond August was underway.