Check out today’s YEP letters
Stop putting the clocks forward
Michael Brook, Wakefield
In the name of all that’s sensible, is it not time that we stopped this ridiculous farce of putting the clocks forward and back every year?
The sun has been rising and setting at the same pace for millennia and nothing we do will change that.
There may have been an argument for it when Britain was a mainly agricultural country, but to continue with it now is a joke.
People will still get up and go to work, children will still wend their weary way to school.
Accidents may happen whether it’s dark or light. Come what may, life will go on as it always has. For heaven’s sake someone needs to get a grip.
‘Destruction and vandalism of our city’
Martin Edgerton, Tingley
Even as a long standing member of the Labour Party I gasped in abject horror of the Site Allocation Plan (SAP) proposal submitted by the ruling Labour council.
If ever there was a definitive example of the wanton destruction and vandalism of our city, where the wishes and thoughts of Leeds council tax payers have yet again been ignored, it is, for all to see in these plans.
In its attempt to grow the population of Leeds by one third, the council have seemingly ignored issues relating to, transport, congestion, healthcare facilities, schools, council services and more importantly, the needs of its own voters and residents.
There are approximately 26,000-plus individuals on the council’s own social housing waiting lists, plus thousands of others who cannot afford the deposits to even take their first steps on the housing ladder. The Leeds SAP does nothing to help these citizens.
The proposed SAP does not even come close to satisfying these basic needs, as the social housing allocation of the proposal is miniscule and somewhat meaningless, though I suppose if you are in full time employment and earn £40k a year your choices become more numerous.
Any councillor who supported this outrageous decision should be ashamed of themselves and during the next year or so be made to “look over their shoulder” as elections loom in just over 12 months time.
Forty five thousand objectors submitted letters against the scheme, yet the council signed off the plan within two days of the consultation period. How is that possible?
Yet again, the councils definition of “consultation” seems to be “we will consult with the electorate, but we will proceed regardless”, (remember the Sunday parking charges a couple of years ago where 70 per cent voted against, but the council still implemented the charges).
Judith Blake endorses the plan, along with others, but this is a politician who supports an airport rail link which is nowhere near the airport, who builds a “cycle highway” but closes care homes and day centres, promotes Leeds as an outward looking city, but fails miserably the cities own residents.
The plans now go to government inspectors for assessment, let’s hope the inspectors raise real concerns over these plans and demonstrate common sense by resigning them to the ever enlarging library of council failures.
It is up to us, the people of Leeds to make sure the Site Allocation Plan fails. Party loyalty is one thing, but supporting madness and criminal damage is another.
Please listen to your voters.
Protest at cavalier attitude
I Shaw, by email
I feel that I must write to protest the cavalier attitude adopted by the Leeds City Council over the recent decision to build a multitude of houses on green belt land despite the protests of over 45,000 council tax payers in the city.
This objectionable, spendthrift council must remember that we voted them in and just as easily we can vote them out. The ghastly errors in the past made by them, such as tram systems, trolley bus, and bicycle lanes that nobody uses but cost a fortune of the council tax payers’ money.
Money spent on idiotic schemes such as 20 mile an hour signing, that no one takes notice of and is impossible to police. To mention just a few of the half baked and horribly expensive ideas promulgated by this council. An election is coming up for some of them this May, so let’s show our disapproval by voting out those hard left Labour councillors, and replacing them with someone who has some idea of how to manage the public’s money. If it were their own hard earned cash they would be far more circumspect in how it was spent.
Contemptuous dismissal of objections
G Fleming, Leeds 18
THERE can be no more contemptuous dismissal of local objections than that of Leeds City Council’s with regards to their sites allocations plan.
Despite 2,000 responses to the original plans to build on green belt land in Horsforth their department now deem it fit to increase the amount of land to be built on.
It now seems somehow ironic that the original Site Allocations Response Form was headlined ‘Your City Your Plan - working with you to find the best location for new homes, green space etc.’
It would appear the opinions of 2,000 people are not to be given any credence at all and are to be further diminished by increasing the size of green belt land to be used. Not so much working with us but against us. Furthermore, their plans are in direct contradiction of their own published Core Strategy on so many levels:-
1. To maintain and enhance local character and distinctiveness.
2. To protect and enhance environmental resources including green space.
3. To encourage biodiversity and urban cooling.
These are just three of the many noble intentions of their strategy which also states that the quality of the environment gives Leeds its distinctive character and identity.
I feel sure that Horsforth residents and many others around the city (judging by the number of recently published letters on this subject in your paper) would have no argument with the above aspects of the policy, but will now view LCC’s consultation process with not inconsiderable cynicism.
Poverty of confidence
Jaimes Lewis Moran, Seacroft
you won’t be surprised to find there’s a poverty of confidence not just locally, but all over the UK.
This is what I’ve found Poverty Truth Leeds Commission is realising, that there are many people in our society who feel they as individuals have no influence, not just in a personal aspect but in terms of the decisions which govern lives. It’s my sincerest hope that initiatives such as this will, in the long-term, bring an end to unnecessary poverty traps and the like.
By using our genuine stories of hardships and aspirations to tell the ‘real’ poverty truths, and also by working together with business leaders and their institutions to realise that our combined knowledge can effect or indeed #EndUkPoverty.
Time for change on drugs policy
Alan Slomson, by email
You report (YEP, March 30) yet another awful case of an elderly pensioner who was attacked in their own home.
In mitigation it was said that the assailant’s attack was “linked to his addiction to heroin”. Why don’t we go back to the earlier policy which allowed heroin addicts to get drugs on prescription?
This cut out the criminals, and removed the need for addicts to commit crimes to pay for their drugs. A policy of this kind would make us all safer in our own homes, and would probably also be safer for addicts.
Only criminals who profit from the drugs trade would lose out.