Keith Skipper says Norfolk's newcomers and old guard must unite

That thought sauntered across my mind on a recent Sunday afternoon as rain smacked against my study window and bushes and trees staged an impromptu Strictly Come Cavorting session outside.

Yet another spot of rummaging through old magazines, pamphlets and cuttings unwrapped a surprising reminder that one of the harshest indictments of newcomers’ behaviour on reaching The Promised Land was delivered shortly after the Second World War.

There it was in black and white on yellowed paper: HJ Harcourt, writing in the fledgeling Norfolk Magazine in 1948 - it started life as The Norfolker, but readers voted that a clumsy title – summed it up thus: “Strangers who come into our midst are inclined to treat us with benevolent condescension or with undisguised superciliousness – and then expect us to acclaim them as saviours and harbingers of civilisation”.

Some will affirm useful lessons have been learnt since, although Norfolk still has to put up with plenty of ribbing about being on the road to nowhere and working overtime to keep that old drawbridge intact. I suspect some of these “backwater” comments are born out of envy.

Even those in the vanguard of the Development Express charging through so many precious parts of our county in recent decades must have caught a fleeting glimpse of what is being replaced. There’s also now an element of admiration in backhanders like “The only way to lead Norfolk people is first to find out which way they are going and then march in front of them.”

It's one thing to be noticed for being different and then amusingly chastised for it. However, Norfolk stalwarts draw the line on being urged to apologise for simply following natural instincts.

I recall a frustrated incomer soaked in missionary zeal announcing at a parish meeting packed with immovable natives : “You have a real problem – no talent for surrender” At once, a pat on the back and a kick in the teeth!

A double-edged remark that might have been specially minted with Norfolk’s cussed corps in mind, admired in one breath and attacked in the next, they continue to square up to tactics which might weaken or even break lesser mortals

There used to be two opening gambits in dealing with the Norfolk agitator always moaning about rape and pillage of his domain by property barons, pushy incomers and various other insensitive creatures.

A contemptuous sniff or patronising tap on the head was normally enough to send him shuffling towards some dark corner to mouth ancient oaths and contemplate the diminishing role of a rural sage.

Buy him a half, put it down to “planning gain” on the progress ledger and agree it is a hard old world out there nowadays. Buy him a packet of coypu-flavoured crisps and tell him to get his name down for the proposed Hemlock Pastures sheltered housing and suggest it hurts you far more than it hurts him.

These days it takes sharper ploys to put down a potential uprising. Traditional protesting methods are being coated in subtlety. Many who used to think you had to get hoarse and turn six shades of purple to make a point now know the value of a nudge, a wink, a smile or a well-directed whisper.

That should not be construed as a form of capitulation. On the contrary, this marked switch in approach can confuse the opposition to such a degree it leads to strange little spells of relatively peaceful co-existence.

The indigenous old guard are being joined in some beleaguered areas by battalions of newcomers ready to help preserve what they moved for in the first place. Indeed, a clutch of local watchdog groups have blossomed as a result of this fresh alliance.

A strong theory goes that people are bound to be drawn to pleasant parts to live, to work, to retire, to visit, and these freedoms should be positively encouraged at a time of considerable population movement. But what of the freedom of those descended upon from a great height to demand enough leeway to preserve some degree of local pride and identity?

Why should they be dismissed as eccentric leftovers, tired old grumblers, when so much obvious damage can still be caused? They care passionately about where Norfolk is going as well as where it has been. They must be entitled to draw attention to some of the follies of the past in a reasonable hope of avoiding too many additions or repetitions.

Room for compromise and co-operation, yes, but there can be no connivance, no coercion as far as Norfolk’s cussed corps are concerned. They are the ones able to make honest comparisons, even cruel ones, between then and now.

They have no talent (or clearcut reason) for surrender, a glorious fault worth preserving and a problem worth advertising while the forces of change continue to hurt much more than they enhance.