YEP Letters: January 21

Homes Feature    6th nov 2016 'Upper Lake Roundhay Park, Leeds
Homes Feature 6th nov 2016 'Upper Lake Roundhay Park, Leeds
Have your say

Check out today’s YEP letters

Development would be ‘a blight’

Victor Flood, Roundhay

THE proposed “Go Ape” development in Roundhay Park would be a blight not only on the intended site but also on the adjacent upper lakeside and the entirety of Ram Wood.

The walk from Park Lane through Ram Wood is a joy, particularly in summer when the cool tranquil shade of the wood leads to the gentle sheen of the Upper Lake - which glistens peacefully through the trees as you near the woodland fringe.

With the peace of that final scene shattered, why walk through Ram Wood at all?

On a wider point - in 1871 John Banan purchased Roundhay Park for all the citizens of Leeds for their enjoyment and recreation and still continues to do so.

Let’s have cross party approach to NHS crisis

B Duffy, by email

Further to and in agreement with, E Lundy’s letter regarding the NHS (YEP January 18), isn’t it about time we had a cross party approach to the NHS?

All we have is constant carping from whichever party is in opposition at the time without any constructive dialogue or ideas to address the problem. Why not have an all party investigation and finalise funding for the NHS, which is ‘ringfenced,’ solely for the NHS, protected from political interference?

We can do it for overseas aid. National Insurance was meant to cover the NHS and care in old age but it just goes into the general public pot, an increase in income tax under any other name. No party wants to raise income tax so they just raise NI contributions.

Make hospitals responsible for recouping costs from drunks,’health tourism,’ with an incentive scheme. Doctors don’t mind chasing money when it comes to providing notes for insurance examinations, injections for travel purposes and other certificates!

The NHS isn’t the sole property of the Labour Party. It originated from a Conservative idea. It is a National Health Service NOT an international one.

Clock tower is so special

Jaimes Lewis Moran, Seacroft

In response to the comments regarding the Seacroft Hospital clock tower by Eileen Heaney (YEP Letters January 17), just because a building is disused that doesn’t mean it isn’t loved or appreciated.

Yet what makes this clock tower so special, is that it has been a constant landmark that ‘can’ be seen from miles away. Plus in my opinion it has more character and life to it, with its draped ivy and terracotta red coloured stones - unlike Big Ben (or as it’s been renamed, the Elizabeth Tower) which at first glance (in person of course) felt like a sterilised, caramel-coloured art exhibit.

No thanks, I prefer our humble clock tower here in Seacroft.

Silencing the remainers

Darren Dunwell, Leeds

Will the outlining of the UK’s Brexit stance finally silence the likes of John Cole and his ilk?

Theresa May has unequivocally stated we will leave the single market and customs union, a distinct message to the nauseating “Bremoaners” who have failed to get their heads around the rules of a referendum.

It’s not a game of football, there’s no extra time or replays, and the laughable suggestions of a second referendum only make the overly-vocal remainers seem unbelievably desperate. Just as a small child would stamp their feet and wail to try and get their way, we have the unedifying spectacle of thousands of supposedly mature UK citizens doing absolutely the same. Some have even threatened to leave these shores because they feel so dispirited, just as the celebrity “luvvies” in America claimed they would in the wake of a Trump victory, but guess what, none of them actually went anywhere. I find it incredible that such a large number of UK residents could be so naive to even moot the idea of a second referendum, the term “poor losers” is the kindest thing I could say about them. As leave voters go quietly about their business, as they did leading up to the referendum, the foghorn voices opposing them will only justify their courageous decision at the ballot box.

Brexit will not be easy

John M Collins, Alwoodley

Mr Meeson (YEP, January 17) in his reply to John Cole’s sensible letter (YEP, January 13) is typical of the way many Brexiteers have departed from reality to cloud cuckoo land.

He talks about a “12 million majority vote”, when the country was divided down the middle with only a narrow lead of less than four per cent for leaving the EU - and those who voted to leave included many who wanted to stay in the common market, but not be part of the EU. But he then suggests that the “vast amount we pay into the EU” could be used to fund the NHS, so repeating the nonsense uttered by the shysters who persuaded many to vote to leave. Anything we save in our payments to the EU will be swallowed up by the costs of leaving.

We have at present an open border with Eire and cannot prevent unwanted immigration except by closing the border and incurring enormous expense. And if, as Nicola Sturgeon threatens, Scotland goes independent and joins the common market, we will have to have border controls right along the Cheviots. At present the EU countries cooperate with us to prevent most of those who we do not want from coming in. If we have to take responsibility, the cost is likely to run into many millions.

And that is just one area of expenditure. There may also be increased unemployment benefits for those thrown out of work because their firms have moved to Europe. And increased expenditure on protection of our fishermen from poaching by other European fleets.

I hope we may succeed in surmounting the problems created by Brexit, but no-one should imagine it will be easy.

Devastated at closures

Tony Allen, Knottingley

It was hard reading the letter informing the people of Knottingley and Castleford that their leisure centre and pool will close for good on February 3, 2017.

No explanation, except the same old story...governments cuts...along with more cuts in the 2017/18 council budget and the promise that further cuts will follow. What about the results of the consultation period which was put in place by the council? Did this not have any bearing on the decision to close two pools and a leisure centre? Does the council really believe the Pontefract Pool can accommodate all the extra swimmers from Castleford and Knottingley?

Maybe the pool is big enough as long as people don’t want to lane swim, but the showers and lockers are hardly adequate for a big influx of patrons. I stopped going to Pontefract five years ago for this reason. If it was just down to finance, doesn’t the electorate deserve to know how a new £15m leisure centre can be built and financed and how three perfectly adequate centres cannot be properly maintained and kept open? If the same level of maintenance of the three existing facilities is applied to the new one it will certainly have a limited lifespan. I suppose in this day and age £15m is a small amount when you buy a professional footballer. But when a councillor is complaining about £24m cuts in the 2017/18 budget, £15m is brought into context.

The OAPs, schoolchildren and ordinary people who have used these facilities for up to 30 years are completely and utterly devastated. So saying some people will be disappointed does not come close. Previously some of the comments in the consultation asked if the existing centres could stay open until the new one is opened. People thought this was the worst scenario the council could come up with. But now it is revealed they will close February 3 and then the council will proceed with the planning application for the new centre. In the unlikely event of the application failing, there will be no pool at Castleford and no leisure centre at Knottingley. And no new facility in Pontefract Park - or is this the intention?

Why the strange rush to close them? It all appears a little odd. Have some schedules to be met? Have some contracts been signed?

Finally, I am sure Pontefract Racecourse will be well pleased with a fine, new entrance to the racetrack, especially if it is taxpayer funded.