YEP Letters: April 3

Have your say

Check out today’s YEP letters.

An omission at re-burial of King Richard III

Brian Johnston, Burmantofts

THE DISCOVERY and re-burial of the remains of King Richard III was of remarkable historical interest, and carried out with sensitivity. However, it was marred by one important and significant omission.

Richard III was a Catholic Monarch in pre-Reformation England. It would have been a noble gesture if the powers that be had allowed his mortal remains to be buried according to rites of the Catholic Church.

In these ecumenical times, this is no slur or criticism of the Church of England who, as expected, conducted the burial to the high standard of the Anglican tradition. However, Richard III remains a Catholic, and Catholics have a right to a Catholic burial, as well as Holy Mother Church to claim her own.

It’s right that the last Plantagenet Monarch should rest in one of our mediaeval Cathedrals – Catholic Mary I rests alongside her Protestant sister Elizabeth I in Westminster Abbey – but could not a Catholic Requiem have been celebrated in Leicester Cathedral with the kind permission of the Dean and Chapter?

Tories just stand for greed

M Burbage-Atter, Rothwell

IN RESPONSE to the letter from Malcolm Nicholson (Your Feedback, March 27), during my lifetime (I am nearly 80) I have never benefited from any budget except for the small annual increase in the personal allowance. Indeed I did once vote Tory many years ago because a certain politician persuaded me I had never had it so good.

I shall be most interested in the number of votes which each party obtains.

To me the Conservatives stand for greed, greed and more greed.

According to the press many people are worse off under this government so unless they wish to become even poorer their votes should go to any non-Tory candidate.

I must confess to doubts as to the abilities of the Labour Party leadership hence I will vote for a change by voting Ukip. If they don’t have a candidate in my constituency then it will be a no vote.

Affordable homes plan

Coun Peter Gruen, Leeds City Council

I WANT to thank Mervyn Jones for his timely letter (Bring housing crisis to an end, Your Feedback, March 25).

In Leeds we are seeking a renaissance of new social housing – through our own programme we are looking to create 1,000 new council homes in the next few years.

We are also looking to foster growth of affordable accommodation both through both the public and private sectors.

Of course, we want these houses to be high quality and in the right places.

We know that even these plans have a limit – most notably because of limits set by the Department for Communities and Local Government and because of yet more inducements to get people to buy up council homes – some of which haven’t even been built!

With some sensible changes we would look to be able to make even more affordable homes in Leeds.

Political leaders in Leeds have written to central Government asking them to look at these issues. Clearly we will not be receiving a response in the next few weeks, but I hope we will be able to keep you up to date when we hear back.

Labour’s working class

P Pretty, Leeds

In reply to Malcolm Nicholson, Labour is and always has been the party of the working class.

Privilege is the byword of every Tory, as Cameron’s performance on TV proves – not knowing how many use foodbanks or live on zero- hours contracts.

He probably spends more on champers andlooking after his privileged mates than people earn in a month.

Maybe Mr Nicholson should get the train to London and sit at his side.

Why are these risks taken?

A Hague, Harehills

I NOTICED that our taxpayers’ money for a £4.87m loan is in doubt as a developer of a flagship hotel scheme warned that it was heading into administration (YEP, March 7).

The Leeds City Region Local Partnership Enterprise approved the loan to GB Group in 2013 to help build a hotel near the Leeds Arena. With a fancy name like theirs you might expect them to know what is a safe risk but why gamble with millions of taxpayers’ money?

We are tightening our belts and facing serious cuts to almost everything, so why are these risks taken?

Will anyone lose their jobs if we do lose out? It seems that apart from the public it is carry on regardless.

Fast food outlet questions

Liz Goodwill, Leeds

With regards to “fast food outlets” and the “harm” they do (and personally only as an odd treat), isn’t it slightly odd that according to the YEP’s figures the highest percentage are in so-called “deprived” areas?

The ones with more “convenience stores” as opposed to “proper shops” such as butchers, bakeries, greengrocers etc that Leeds City Council have priced out of suburbs with their ridiculous business taxes, but yet permitted umpteen takeaways, despite there being too many already, to open up.

Within five to 10 minutes walk of me, I can count on seven takeaways, if I wanted delivery probably 15 at least. But if I want a “proper” butchers, greengrocers, bakery I’d have to go to town.

Oh, and I live roughly a mile from the city centre.

Write to those responsible

Steve Adams, Leeds

Richard Williams (Your Feedback, March 16) informed us that this is the second time he has written to the YEP in respect of refuse collectors leaving wheelie bins in the middle of pavements after emptying them, but complained that this had “fallen on deaf ears”.

Well Mr Williams, have you actually given this lack of response any thought?

Maybe if you had written to Leeds City Council (the people actually responsible for bin collection) and not the YEP, you might have got some action.