We have no say in vital changes

However, Bob Wright's letter on behalf of our business community in last week's letters page encouraged me to put pen to paper to warn (with a capital W') fellow Craven residents/council tax payers of the potential effect on them of the proposed Single Unitary Council for the whole of the existing North Yorkshire area.

I believe in a true democratic process for any change and quite accept the times when my personal opinion or stance is over-ruled.

But I will not stand by and allow myself to be rail roaded into such an important change which has not been through a proper process of true consultation, which has not been properly costed and which, in all probability, is going to take even more out of my pocket and those of all Craven residents.

I know that there is great concern among the respective district councils about this local government review and I would be surprised if there wasn't. Turkeys voting for Christmas comes to mind!

However they are right to be concerned, not just for the security of their own jobs but because they represent you and me and we, their customers, are in for a rocky ride.

Fact: We were not given the opportunity to have our say, yet a Ipsos MORI commissioned opinion poll revealed a resounding 75 per cent who felt a single unitary council would be too remote and less in touch Fact: 71 per cent felt that the area was too big to be served by one council plus local councillors would have less power to improve things in their local area Fact: The county council says that the proposal will cost £13.5 million to implement and save £14 million although I understand that the detail behind these figures has not been given. The district councils disagree and say the early costs of the change will be around £23.8 million with additional costs of around £25 million. As a consequence they arranged for the proposal to be independently evaluated and that report put the cost of change to at least £34 million with ongoing efficiency savings of £12million!

I am also concerned that in the unlikely event of Parish and Town Councils being willing and able to take on the undoubted extra responsibilities, they will have to charge more - and remember parish charges are not subject to a cap!

So where do we believe that leaves us?

Don't say you haven't been warned.

David Charlton, Carleton.

Favoured schemes

SIR - More than 50 members of the public attended the planning committee meeting of Skipton Town Council when the plans to site the Children's Centre on the grounds of Parish Church School, Brougham Street, were discussed.

Members of the public who spoke, were in sympathy with the need for such a centre in Skipton, but objected to the plans for this site due to existing traffic congestion, road safety, security and the impact upon the local environment; no one spoke in support of the scheme proposed by North Yorkshire County Council; perhaps the meeting was not considered significant.

Town councillors then discussed the plans and unanimously voted against the development on this site.

This was a good example of local democracy in action which is in total contrast to the consultation and procedures so far afforded to local residents by North Yorkshire.

Many local residents, some of whom may well be future clients of a Child Centre, feel that the county council is pushing through this scheme, providing minimal information and using threats that central government funding will be lost if this scheme is not accepted without question.

Residents of Skipton could be forgiven for thinking that these are the tactics which an administration based miles away may employ in future to push forward their favoured schemes and policy should Craven ever become part of a unitary authority controlled from Northallerton.

Kevin Burton, Brougham Street, Skipton.

Not mentioned

SIR - I write regarding the Skipton Children's Centre.

In the Craven Herald article last week there is one outstanding omission concerning this centre, namely access!

Apparently it is intended that all traffic will proceed from Brougham Street via Dorset Street to Montgomery Street then, from the narrow track at the top of this street a section of the school wall will be demolished to make a permanent entrance to be used by everyone including builders of the proposed extension.

Elsie Clark, Montgomery Street, Skipton.

Silly decision

SIR - Whoever authorised roadworks in Long Preston at the narrowest and most congested section of the busy A65 on the main bank holiday of the summer needs his brains testing.

It was a decision of such mind-numbing silliness it could only have been made by a local authority.

It is on a par with the officially-sanctioned vandalism of the pipeline mess as a way of seriously inconveniencing the blameless and long-suffering British public Michael Greenwood, Greenwood Leghe, Ingleton.

Greater scheme

SIR - After noting in the Craven Herald of May 18 that 61 MPs have now backed the Skipton to Colne Rail line, I thought what a waste of time.

But then, after noting the rail map in the May edition of British Railways Illustrated, I now wonder, rather than taking from the other Lancashire-Yorkshire rail links, whether it has something to offer.

The map in the magazine gives a good idea of the railways of Skipton at their maximum.

I think the Skipton to East Lancashire Rail Action Partnership should, in conjunction with other interested parties, consider whether the clock can be turned back.

If my memory serves me correctly, the preserved railway at Embsay would like access to Skipton and the national park would like to improve access in Grassington especially in December.

Therefore, might a joint case be better at attracting funds especially if they are going to be very scarce until the Olympic Games are paid for?

The way these costs seemed to be going there will be no lottery funds until goodness knows when.

If funds can be attracted, might we then see through services to Bolton Abbey with bus service to the priory ruins etc and less cars in the car park? Might we see services to a platform in the quarry with bus services into Grassington?

One can dream but could not the line be rebuilt back to Ilkley with steam trains running between Skipton and Ilkley?

I would not want to deny the participants in the Games their moment of glory, but should the rest of the country pay for ever by losing vital transport links which can get them out into the countryside and give them access to major towns and cities and vital services?

Better trains services could mean less cars, so a greener environment.

So I am sorry but if I have to choose, I would refuse the Games because Britain cannot afford it and does not need them. Britain needs better transport, affordable housing, better NHS et al.

Ian R Bolton Knightsbridge Walk, Bradford.

Sick and tired

SIR - Having read carefully John Manley's letter of May 18 concerning the evils of the BNP and in the main while agreeing with most of its content, the old adage, "there's none so blind as them that won't see", did spring to mind.

I would have thought that someone as "well balanced and sensible" (his words not mine) as Mr Manley would realise why some people may be tempted to vote for these rather odious organisations, without necessarily being bad or stupid. They are more likely to be extremely worried and fed up.

Worried that minority terrorist groups are out to kill us "infidels", ie replace our wonderful country with something more akin to the dark ages - and fed up that Governments of all colours and persuasions do nothing to control mass immigration and pay more attention to the human rights of terrorists than to those being terrorised.

We could discuss this subject ad-infinitum but if I could just leave Mr Manley with this thought.

The next time you're stood shoes in hand after a full body search, at some woe-begotten airport, please bear this letter in mind and think: is it so inconceivable that some decent, law abiding, taxpaying citizens, are just getting a bit sick and tired of how this country is being run - and are clutching at straws in desperation?

Mr R Potter, Low Lane, Grassington.

Support role

SIR - On reading the correspondence of last week with regard to the question posed - Lady Anne and not Freddie Trueman - it would appear that Peter Rigsby of Beamsley is both misinformed and mischievous.

Firstly, my democratic involvement in the proposal to erect a tribute to Fred Trueman, arguably the best fast bowler Yorkshire and England ever bred, is merely as an enthusiastic supportive team player.

The sequence of events was an approach by several individuals with the support of the Trueman family to the Craven District Council with the wish to commemorate "Fiery Fred" in Skipton.

The initial steering group requested a representative from the Skipton Chamber of Trade and also from the Skipton Town Council, which nominated myself to assist with the project. The steering group is chaired by the Craven Herald editor and is not led by CDC.

Hopefully, having established the facts of the matter, I do hope my long-standing friend Peter, of Beamsley, agrees with me that "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing and certainly insufficient to question another's motives".

Personally I have been involved in the brightening up of Skipton over the past two years by way of Skipton in Bloom, part of which has been a cultural diversity to establish a sculpture trail within Skipton to portray important persons and events in the towns and Yorkshire heritage.

We have already identified the Lady Anne Clifford perhaps with her coach and horses as an intended early commission - subject to funding.

Your readers may remember we put our toes in the water with the sheep up the Bailey in conjunction with Skipton Building Society. Alas sheep rustlers intervened at that location, but fear not, the sheep will soon be grazing permanently elsewhere in town.

I would suggest it is not a question of no to Fiery Fred and yes to Lady Anne, but that hopefully both - and others - will stand proudly in Skipton, Yorkshire.

Robert G Heseltine, The Ginnel, Skipton.

No benefits

SIR - I am totally opposed to the proposed Sustrans Roadway' from Addingham to Bolton Abbey.

Before it is taken any further, I think the good people of Addingham should be told exactly what is involved. I feel that it should be clearly stated that this roadway' is not going to be the suggested footpath where one can stroll at leisure and in safety with children and dogs as the initial information suggests.

No, the true facts have not been made clear, this proposed roadway' has always been about encouraging cyclists.

One has only to walk on the B6160, the Addingham to Bolton Abbey road, and the minor Nessfield to Ilkley Road to know that cyclists and pedestrians do not mix too readily, particularly as the cyclists normally travel at some speed.

It is not long ago that there was in fact a fatal accident on Nesfield hill when an elderly lady was knocked down and subsequently died.

The footpath proposal would present the cyclists with an ideal race track, so one should ask, how would the residents of Addingham benefit?

The truth is they would not. It is being suggested that the footpath will bring trade to the village shops, but this is highly doubtful and I would suggest it would not bring in any more business; it is debatable as to whether the public houses would benefit either.

Addingham might initially get a few more visitors and their efforts to park would only add even more frustrations to the parking problems that already exist.

I note that some £8,000 has been involved in this proposal already re a proposed consultation period. Surely our district and parish councillors must look long and hard at this scheme before proceeding further because, as I understand it, all the landowners involved are against the proposal and the scheme cannot go further unless compulsory purchase is employed, as I understand it this would not happen as it is not council policy?

I would ask Addingham councillors to drop this hare-brained scheme now before any more money is thrown away. Put the council's efforts into making Addingham a better place to live for all residents.

Surely a car park must represent the most urgent requirement, not withstanding the more pressing issue of a medical centre; these are the things that require immediate attention. Get your priorities right and concentrate your efforts on the things that matter, things that benefit all Addingham residents and prove that the majority of the new and re-elected parish councillors were indeed not voted on for this single issue!

DV Scholefield, Wharfe Park, Addingham.

Word of caution

SIR - I am sure that Sally Nicholson of Barnoldswick practises her Hopi ear candle treatment in good faith and with great care and dedication (Craven Herald May 25). There are many alternative medical treatments that people find most helpful.

However as a physiologist I feel a word of caution is in order where the insertion of lighted candles into the ear is concerned.

There are many remedies that are no longer used, usually for good reason: just because something is ancient and was used for a long time does not mean it works or is totally safe.

Whilst it may be very relaxing lying in a warm room being treated by a caring therapist, there is no evidence that these candles do anything at all in relation to the ear, the sinuses or anything else.

Research published in a respected medical journal reported no effect of any kind, not even the "gentle suction" that is purported to occur. What was found was 21 cases of serious injury from burning wax falling on to the ear drum.

One must assume that such potential adverse effects are explained to anyone undergoing this treatment.

Lindy Williams Prospect House, Long Preston.

Pension priority

SIR - Millions of older people in the poorest countries in the world have no regular income or pension. For them, later life can bring persistent poverty, isolation and limited access to social services.

Help the Aged, the charity supporting the lives of disadvantaged older people in the UK and overseas, is calling on the Government to put social pensions at the top of the international agenda and to ensure social pensions are a vital part of all relevant aid, development and debt relief initiatives.

We ask readers of all ages to help bring about this change. Visit www.helptheaged.org.uk/pensionsnotpoverty and send an email supporting our campaign to Secretary of State for International Development, Hilary Benn.

Readers can also watch a short film I have made, with supporting interviews with older people.

Together, we can challenge world leaders to take action to ensure the poorest older people receive pensions not poverty.

Bill Bryson, Help the Aged Campaign Ambassador, Pensions not Poverty campaign.