For centuries, the small village of Walsingham in north Norfolk has been a beacon for Christian pilgrims. Its Shrine of Our Lady draws 320,000 visitors annually from across the globe, including a significant Tamil community. Yet, this cherished experience is under threat due to plans to close the village’s only public toilet.
Locals, led by councillor Tom FitzPatrick, have voiced “palpable anger” at North Norfolk District Council’s (NNDC) proposal, fearing it will harm tourism and alienate elderly and disabled visitors. Mary Jones, a local shopkeeper, remarked, “Our village thrives on visitors, many of whom are older or have disabilities. Closing the toilets sends a message that they’re not welcome here.” Another resident added, “Tourists already ask us where to find facilities—if the toilets close, they may stop coming altogether.”
One person from nearby Fakenham commented on a Facebook group: “We visit Walsingham on Wells and Walsingham railway, walk into Walsingham and have dinner before catching the train back. With two young children, no toilets is a nightmare!”
The council, grappling with a £1.8m deficit, defends the decision as a financial necessity. According to council leader Tim Adams, the high costs of temporary accommodation for homeless families have forced difficult choices. The hope, he says, is that local groups will step in to manage the facility. However, this approach has left residents and businesses questioning why such a vital service is treated as a dispensable luxury.
Toilet closures: a pattern across the region
Walsingham is far from alone. Across East Anglia, public toilet closures have become an alarming trend, with closures reported in numerous counties across the East of England. A recent survey quoted by The Guardian found that the number of public facilities in the UK has dropped by a fifth over the last decade, highlighting the wider context of this regional issue. NNDC plans to shut or partially close 40% of its facilities, affecting key tourist hubs like Cromer, Wells and Sheringham, as well as Potter Heigham, West Runton, Hickling and even Weybourne’s eco toilet, built only 3 years ago at a cost of £12k. The closures aim to save £122,000, a fraction of the council’s deficit. Seasonal shutdowns during winter months are also proposed, leaving walkers on the Norfolk Coastal Path facing 15km stretches without access to a toilet.
Conservative councillors, including Christopher Cushing, argue the closures jeopardise the region’s tourism economy. “It may not be a statutory requirement to run those facilities, but it should be a high priority,” he said. Residents and businesses have petitioned NNDC to reconsider, with petitions like Stalham’s 1,500-strong appeal demonstrating widespread frustration.
Desperation in Jaywick Sands
In Jaywick Sands, the situation has reached crisis levels. Without public facilities near the beach, residents have reported holidaymakers using their gardens as a toilet. A petition from the Jaywick Sands Happy Club highlighted the growing problem, yet Tendring District Council declined to fund new facilities, citing financial constraints and past issues with vandalism and maintenance. Councillor Peter Kotz pointed to a need for a broader review of public toilet provision but admitted that immediate solutions are unlikely.
Southend’s struggle for accessibility
In Southend, the lack of adequate facilities has led to similar issues. Green Party member Simon Gittus has called for more toilets, arguing that the shortage isolates elderly and disabled residents. Independent councillor Ron Woodley echoed these concerns, stating that the lack of toilets deters people from walking and enjoying the area’s natural beauty. While Southend Council provides 200 toilets in 15 locations across the city, it acknowledges that maintaining 24-hour accessibility poses financial and safety challenges.
A public good under threat
The closure of public toilets disproportionately impacts the elderly, disabled individuals and families with young children – groups who rely heavily on these facilities. East Anglia’s demographics underscore the urgency: the region has a higher-than-average elderly population and is a popular holiday destination for families. For these communities, the availability of public toilets is not merely a convenience but a necessity.
Yet, councils insist that public toilets are a discretionary service, not a statutory obligation. This rationale fails to address the broader implications of closures, from reduced tourism revenues to diminished quality of life for residents. Critics argue that public toilets should be viewed as essential infrastructure, akin to roads or public parks.
Finding a better way
While financial pressures on local councils are undeniable, the solutions proposed – such as transferring management to local groups or seasonal closures – are insufficient to meet the needs of communities and visitors. Innovative funding models, grants from higher levels of government and partnerships with businesses could provide alternatives to outright closures. One success story is Hertsmere Borough Council’s Community Toilet Scheme where local businesses are paid a small annual fee to allow people to use their toilets during their normal opening hours. Participating premises display a sticker in their window. The scheme is currently operating in Borehamwood, Bushey, Bushey Heath, Potters Bar and Radlett.
The issue extends beyond budgets to priorities. As Dr Victoria Holliday, a Conservative councillor, pointed out, the absence of facilities on the Norfolk Coastal Path could “flush away” the area’s appeal to hikers. Likewise, Stalham’s lone toilet closure threatens the vitality of its high street. These are not isolated inconveniences but cumulative blows to East Anglia’s identity as a welcoming region for residents and visitors alike.
Final thoughts
The debate over public toilet closures, as seen in Walsingham, underscores a broader issue of neglecting essential services. In this village, where public toilets serve not only as a convenience but as a lifeline for the elderly, disabled and families, their potential closure could harm both local life and tourism. Walsingham’s plight is emblematic of a wider trend in East Anglia, where public toilet shortages threaten both community wellbeing and economic stability, particularly in areas with aging populations and thriving tourist industries.
“Cllr Adams claims homelessness is a greater priority than public toilets. I beg to differ,” said Kate Moore a North Norfolk resident. “As a woman you can’t just whip out your todger and pee in some street corner. If you are pregnant, feeling unwell, starting a period or elderly, the sudden need for a toilet can be alarming. Then there are the mobile workers and delivery drivers who need public toilet access.”
Moore points out that some residents will not leave their homes for fear of being caught short and this can be isolating. “Even transferring the toilets into private hands will no doubt result in shorter opening hours and in time their closure,” she adds. “It’s an appalling, thoughtless decision by NNDC to close any council public convenience.”
As councils struggle with financial pressures, maintaining public toilets should be seen not just as a cost but as an investment in the region’s identity and inclusivity. In places like Walsingham, the absence of such services could alienate vulnerable groups and diminish the appeal to visitors. Ensuring these facilities remain open is essential for preserving East Anglia as a welcoming destination for all.
The question now is whether local authorities will prioritise the needs of their communities over short-term budget cuts. Can we afford to lose a service that is integral to accessibility, hospitality and the region’s long-term sustainability, or will they rise to the challenge, ensuring that places like Walsingham remain accessible to everyone?
This article is based on several accounts from Local Democracy Reporting.
Share this article on Bluesky:
