YEP Letters: June 15

MP ‘ousted’ by influx of student voters

F and A Ward, by email

We don’t live in Greg Mulholland’s constituency, so have no axe to grind, but it seems sad that an MP who has worked tirelessly for his constituents for over 10 years should be ousted by an influx of student voters, if the report in your newspaper is correct.

We thought that students had to register in their own home areas, so how come so many were able to vote while living temporarily in Leeds North West area?

These young people will return home in due course, leaving the permanent residents to deal with any changes inflicted upon them, whether for better or worse.

Reservations about new homes plan

Angela Coggins, East Ardsley

Concerning the plans for Church Fields, East Ardsley, I hold deep reservations about the suitability of building 299 dwellings on such a site.

The negative impact felt by the community will be immense for a variety of important reasons. Access on to the A650, which is generally busy at the best of times, will severely impact the flow of an important public highway, strategically placed between the two motorways (M1 and M62), especially at peak times.

The notion that a school can be built on the same site at a later date (unspecified) will only exacerbate the problems concerning traffic. The local medical practice, Leigh View Medical Centre, a quarter of a mile away is stretched to over capacity and is currently running five-six weeks wait for a routine appointment. They have recently had to appoint two extra locums to try and extend capacity.

How they will be able to maintain a manageable and responsive service under the threat of an influx of more homes is, quite frankly, difficult to imagine, as the impact of huge building projects in the area (Middleton and Forest Ridge, Thorpe) has been felt.

There is great cynicism in the village about the ‘following through’ of promises by house builders, who run out of money or go bankrupt at the end of projects thus negating their contractual responsibilities.

The impact on schooling and admissions is also not addressed successfully. As you will be aware, the local schools are all oversubscribed, and this puts a particular strain on the most vulnerable of pupils, who require special assistance, as the staffing levels are already up to capacity. Some families will have to travel many miles to secure appropriate assisted schooling.

The area set aside for a ‘future’ school is already subject to scrutiny and as the building of a local secondary school, Rodillian, shows, it will be vastly oversubscribed, owing to the way the the education department calculate future uptake. 299 homes on such a compact, strategically unviable site appears to be the height of mercenary endeavour.

I am fully aware of the pressure on housing stock, but this is vastly over any kind of sustainable limit for such a small community for the reasons mentioned above.

Manifesto was fully costed

Alan Slomson, by email

The proposals in the Labour Party manifesto were fully costed (unlike the Tories’ manifesto), and to be paid for by increasing corporation tax (currently the lowest in Europe) and raising income tax for those with incomes above £80,000. So Terry Watson (YEP Letters, June 12) is completely wrong when he accuses Jeremy Corbyn of putting forward policies that “he knew could never be afforded”.

Anyone wishing to criticise Labour Party policy would be well advised to take the trouble of reading the manifesto before putting pen to paper.

Thanks for votes

Neil Dawson, Labour and Co-operative candidate for Morley and Outwood

I WANT to thank the people of Morley and Outwood who voted for me last week in the General Election.

There was a massive 6,000 increase in the vote for Labour since the previous election. The result showed clearly that the country did not endorse Mrs May’s policies and that politics has now entered a new era.

I will continue to stand up for the people of Morley and Outwood over the coming months and years.

Benefit sanctions are unjust

Jaimes Lewis Moran, Seacroft.

Benefit sanctions are in my mind an unjust crime against human decency.

They are proven to cost more in financial, social and healthcare costs, most of which are down to repairing the physical and mental strain that ‘claimants’ are forced to endure and are without doubt, the worst political ‘incentive’ to ever exist in recent times.

To quote Mhairi Black from the SNP: “Any government should not be making its own citizens destitute, yet this is exactly what this (Conservative) government is doing.’’ Seriously, benefit sanctions don’t benefit anyone!

Nothing in life is free

Jim Kirk, by email

I FEEL a deep repugnance for Labour under Jeremy Corbyn.

Hand on heart I can honestly claim I voted Labour in the General Election (out of loyalty to the party).

The horrors of the 20th century were brought about by men waving little red books chanting Utopian ideology. There is no such thing as an innocuous ideology. The young who fell for Corbyn’s free for all fantasy land know nothing of the suffering so called equality brings.

Why are the students that voted for Labour even bothering to go to university when the whole point of striving to better yourself is to create inequality. That’s why you go on courses to stand out, to rise above others!

All a successful person has to do to make enemies is be a success. Why would anybody want a government that hates success. Because they peddle the lie that you are in some way oppressed, that it’s not your responsibility to look after yourself, to make yourself a better person and in turn look after others. It’s much easier to let the state take care of you and tell you how to think.

Nothing is free in life, but Labour want you to imagine a society where you get out of bed and say ‘I exist, now give me stuff’ It can never work, money is finite. Labour doesn’t truly believe it can solve your problems, it doesn’t have to, they merely have to demonise them until you feel life is so unbearable that you are motivated to do nothing but take revenge upon it. That is the true objective of Labour under Corbyn’s leadership.

Saying no to more austerity

Tony Winstanley, Castleford

In reply to John Sutcliffe (YEP Letters, June 13), like most Tory supporters you obviously got such a shock by the election result that you still cannot accept that the reason for a resurgence in support for Labour is because many people in Britain are saying no to any more Tory austerity.

When the lead in the opinion polls were showing that Labour would be annihilated, the Tories and their supporters were ecstatic. They have spent the last two years verbally abusing Jeremy Corbyn. In return Corbyn pleaded for a new way for politics. A way by which people could express their views without facing such abuse, distortion and lies.

All this fell on deaf ears where the Tories and their backers were concerned, as they continued to deride and jeer at what they perceived as a wounded “animal”. The problem for them was that like all bullies, they were shown to be less than honourable when the one who is bullied fights back.

They retreated and started blaming everyone except themselves. Mr Sutcliffe decides its all the fault of people allowing themseves to be fooled and his attack on the young people of this country, especially students, is beneath contempt.

Everyone including Mr Sutcliffe is entitled to their opinion without being subject to personal abuse.