Costly gardens

Published: 10:16 AM July 16, 2009 Updated: 2:40 PM November 1, 2020

SIR - I found your report last week on the spectacular new Future Gardens (pictured left) very interesting even though I was puzzled by the title. Maybe someone can explain how it was so designated. Having seen a wonderfully colourful photograph in the

SIR - I found your report last week on the spectacular new Future Gardens (pictured left) very interesting even though I was puzzled by the title. Maybe someone can explain how it was so designated.

Having seen a wonderfully colourful photograph in the Daily Telegraph last week I was very proud to live in the community that was boasting so delightful an exhibition and felt "this I must see", although I would hope to avoid David Bellamy.

However I do have to admit I suffered a sense of shock when I discovered the admission prices - adults �12.50, concessions �9.50 and children �5 tempered by the price of a family ticket (two adults and two children for �32).

There must be many families who would like their children to see so splendid a display but to have to fork out �32 for the privilege is surely a bit over the top?

You may also want to watch:

Some years ago I accompanied a group of American tourists to Stonehenge but, having made several previous visits, stayed in the visitor centre to await their return from the phenomenon. Within minutes the first vistor was back. "That didn't take you long," I suggested. "No", he said "stones is stones is stones."

It strikes me that it would be a great pity if potential visitors to Future World were to be deterred by the fact that "flowers is flowers is flowers" and to think that �32 for a family ticket is somewhat on the high side.