HERE are the facts. The residents’ parking scheme implemented in the area I live was installed without consultation after I moved in to the area. I didn’t ask for it or want it.
The parking is worse now than it was before the scheme was implemented. Why should we, who have been targeted to have such schemes, have to pay any more than any other road user? Is this because the council declare it so, if this is the case watch out as these schemes will be popping up in your street very shortly.
The zone surrounding my home has a waiting time of 30 minutes and because the local businesses have such a turnover of customers I more often than not cannot get parked in a designated zone. So this means I’m going to be paying for the privilege of not being able to park near my own home and those that don’t pay can and do.
Coun Richard Lewis states that it is a money making exercise as his quote “we are facing unprecedented financial constraints and are facing all options to face this challenge”. Well if we are why are you seeking an easy target? Shouldn’t everyone be contributing to the “Challenge” rather than those who you think are the easy target?
You also state there is a significant cost to implementing and maintaining these zones? The only cost I can see is the implementing of it and a parking enforcement officer who covers all the cost in implementing the scheme. There has been no upgrade of the white lines, cleaning or maintenance of the signs, or any new signs installed since the zones arrived.
If you do have a cost in keeping these schemes active, instead of charging the residents to park in them. Remove them all together and let those who want to park do so and save yourself some money in doing so.
Gary Heaton, Cross Gates
No warning about plans
The phrase ‘to practice what you preach’ seems very relevant at the moment with regards to the powers that be, councillors and members of Parliament, who are voted into office by the public, for the public.
If their views and recommendations are to convince the public, surely the public should be informed in the same manner as when these same people seek re-election into office.
I can only speak for the area in which I live, Aireborough, but I find it amazing that the council’s plans which have been published under the heading SITE ALLOCATIONS PLAN VOLUME 2.. AIREBOROUGH/DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT JUNE 2013 has not been sent to every household in the area, this would have given everybody the opportunity to make a judgment on their environment plans.
This was not done, in fact many people have not been informed at all on these very far-reaching plans. The area is already at strangulation point like other districts in this part of Leeds. It illustrates perfectly the words domino effect with the results on schools, medical facilities, traffic and basically everything which shapes our lives.
Some months ago these same people in public office were, quite rightly critical of the assessment that had been made on children’s heart surgery in Leeds and how their superiors had reached their decisions. I do sometimes wonder if these people live or come from a different planet. Is it any wonder that the general public have such little faith in these people?
Mervyn Williams, New Road, Yeadon
Trolleybus has to be resisted
THE NGT (not good thinking) is fraught with danger – financial, social, political and environmental for Leeds.
Like a gun fighter who once lost his nerve and his girl, our council is now desperate to regain credibility and make amends. Thus seeking the easy, first target in this case, the £250m trolleybus scheme.
It’s a case of mistaken identity and should be resisted.
Manchester reportedly has got a £500m EU loan for its tram system. We should follow suit. Indeed, like the Tour de France riders, we should ride in their slip-stream.
Manchester will (as always) either not be held to its repayments due to our withdrawal from the EU or will extend them over an indefinite period if we remain.
No city ever goes bankrupt and suffers punitive sanctions (ask Liverpool). Indeed, being indigent guarantees EU or UK assistance as a deprived area (ask Newcastle or Sheffield).
Unfortunately perhaps, but good housekeeping and responsible fiscal management are not rewarded.
They breed good habits, self-respect and admiration but leave you without infrastructure, prestige, amenities and facilities (ask Leeds).
Paul Kilroy, Spennithorne Avenue, Leeds
Housing can only get worse
DS BOYES is correct when he states we will never have enough houses in Britain, mainly because while there is a shortage all the political party cronies can continue to charge high rents yet poorly maintaining properties.
People coming to live in them have nowhere to go for help and get it, unless in council houses and there is never enough of them as it is. The new houses and renovation scheme starting soon is a help but like DS Boyes states, with mass immigration in full flow the housing situation can only get worse, not better.
A E Hague, Bellbrooke Grove, Leeds
Partnership scheme query
I’M NOT thick by any means, but I fail to comprehend what Leeds and Partners’ was set up to achieve, is it set up to deliver new jobs?
Given that the article (July 20 2013) warranted nearly a full page spread, detailing expenses, taxi journeys, hotel bills, air travel, it’s to be hoped that “inward investment” does what it sets out to do at present and in the future, and does deliver the goods.
And oh, the Comments Column explains things clearly!
Mavis Harrison, Saxton Gardens, Leeds
Value for money Royal family
THERE seems to be a lot of confusion over what HM the Queen is paid.
Many years ago, most of the personal property of the Sovereign was surrendered to the government in exchange for annual payments called ‘The Civil List’, with quite a few of the original recipients getting nowt.
The Sovereign also has income from Duchy of Lancaster and his or her heir apparent or Prince of Wales from the Duchy of Cornwall.
The Queen has the choice of four residences, ie Buckingham Palace, Windsor Castle, Sandringham and Balmoral. Former New Labour MP and now multi-millionaire Tony Blair had eight big houses at the last count.
Also one serving Labour MP has three homes and two from West Yorkshire who although own their London second homes are reckoned to actually rent them out and claim for a third one on expenses.
As for Prince William’s – one off – £1m home improvements, Westminster Council revealed some time ago that they had over 100 families of immigrants or asylum seekers getting £1,000 a week housing benefit, ie over £5 million per annum.
Compared to what our greedy, selfish, hypocritical politicians rip us all off for over and over again, I think our Royal family are much better value for money.
D S Boyes, Rodley Lane, Leeds 13
Hard skills, innit
ACCORDING to a CV Guide I have just read, I have a lot of hard skills.
Does this mean that, at a future interview, I can walk in and say “I’m hard, I am”?
Should at least guarantee a background role in EastEnders, perhaps, since that’s all Cockneys ever say, innit?
R Kimble, by email