Check out today’s YEP letters
More support for fellow Jewish MPs
Edna Levi, by email
In your interview with MP Fabian Hamilton (YEP October 2) he pointed himself out as a long serving member and hoped to represent his area for many more years.
When he commenced his “service” anti-semitism was not as rife as it is now. Anti-semitism is a hateful pernicious belief and is directed against Jewish people and separate from anti-Israel feelings.
I feel that Mr Hamilton should have given his support to his fellow Jewish MPs who had the courage to voice their concerns.
Governments not encouraging healthier nation
N Bywater, Morley
Smokers and obese people in Yorkshire could soon be refused routine surgery in bid to save NHS cash.
A similar policy has been proposed in London hospitals and it could become a NHS wide policy.
The decision by Vale of York Clinical Commissioning Group - under the latest restrictions, patients in the catchment area who have a BMI of 30 or more will be barred from routine surgery for non-life-threatening conditions for a year.
Our present and previous governments have done very little to encourage a happier and healthier nation.
You can go into most hospitals and find vending machines that give out unhealthy chocolate snacks and beverages.
It may well be healthier for people to eat nothing. But we are all just consumers, all they want to do is make more profit.
Our governments have made most people richer, but because we are all seen as individual and consumers, our unhealthy bodies will just be fixed by the NHS.
Schools can’t dictate on food
L Goodwill, by email
What right do schools have to dictate what pupils eat?
Surely schools are there to educate, not “police”.
Feel sorry for both parents and teaching staff. Yes your so -called healthy food is better, but that’s only an opinion today, next week it will be another “fad”. I am 56, healthy and grew up on what’ scalled “stodge” now.
What about the sardines?
Alan Slomson, Leeds 6
I note that Beverly Golesworthy (Your views on packed lunches, October 3) asks “How can you take fish in a packed lunch for goodness sake?”
What about fish cakes, smoked mackerel , sardine sandwiches, etc. etc - all cheap and easy ways to fill a lunchbox?
Teachers should not interfere
Shaun Kavanagh, by email
Is education changing direction by staff worrying too much about what pupils eat rather than what they learn in school?
What a parent provides for their offspring is their responsibility and not the school.
If the child is happy eating food provided by a parent or guardian, they should be allowed to enjoy this and then concentrate on their studies instead of being embroiled in nonsense by overzealous staff searching food boxes.
Teachers should not interfere as they are there to dictate on educational matters not on food intake by pupils.
That is not their role and never has been. If schools wish to provide food then fine, but that would then raise the question, will the pupil want to eat what the school offers? The answer might well be a resounding no.. It is not for schools to dictate eating policies but to ensure those in their charge are happy, and if that means children are eating what they enjoy agreed and provided by their parent(s), then teachers should stop interfering and get on with what they are paid to do – teach.
Happy children make for good scholars and should not be centre stage for stand-off situations between parents and teachers. Whilst teachers might wish to offer suggestions regarding healthy eating they have no right to search or seize items of food from a pupil (albeit temporarily). To do so is an insult to the integrity of the parent.
It is ridiculous, unnecessary and an infringement of privacy for school staff to search the baggage of a pupil unless the search is in relation to items considered to be a danger to others or involving a crime, but certainly not food.
Governing bodies, including school staff, are over stepping the mark by such actions. School staff should concentrate on teaching, not searching for crisps etc.
We need guarantees
John Appleyard, Liversedge
The turmoil at Ryanair and failure to give passengers proper information about their rights is to be debated in Strasbourg.
Hundreds of EU citizens have been affected and many have lost money.
It’s good news that the Civil Aviation Authority is now acting tough and threatening court action unless Ryanair complies with EU law.
But for us in the UK, that begs the question of what happens after Brexit?
What rights will we have then? Another issue where we need guarantees from the government.
Why were trees uprooted?
Jaimes Lewis Moran, Member of Leeds Green Party
In my political/activist-based (Green) Party one of the things we cherish is the social and environmental benefits of having trees and green space.
However much to my disappointment I’ve found the council often uproots these without good reasons.
One place in particular is a heritage local spot (Wilsons Manor/Seacroft Hall) on South Parkway near Leeds East Academy. I’d like to ask these following questions:
1. Why was it necessary to chop up dozens of trees
2. Why hasn’t the local council consulted its residents?
3. Judging from the size of these trees, did they have ‘protected’ status (expect a fine for their destruction LCC)
4. What measures will be taken to replace them (especially considering trees improve air quality and act as sound-proofing - near schools and main roads/everywhere)
5. Lastly, will this lead to more private, or desperately needed council housing?