Letters to the Editor

SIR, - David Blake's article on the proposed East of Otley developments has my full support.

Planning is a misnomer here, there has been no thought on water displacement, the water table is very high in the proposed area and, in fact, it is on the flood plain (see the Environment Agency map of the area)

Where does all the run-off and soakaway go to once the land is covered with asphalt and concrete?

Do we really need 1,000 to 1,600 more cars trying to park in Otley, not to mention traffic from the new industrial outlets meaning more HGVs going through?

A total of 75 per cent affordable housing is pie in the sky. The developers will want to recoup their investment if they have to foot the bill for a bypass (and maybe build a school and surgery on the site). This means four to five-bedroom luxury homes.

Once the contract is through there will be little anyone can do to stop them moving the goalposts.

I cannot think why the Labour councillors have voted for this crazy plan. It would ruin Otley. One can't help wondering if there isn't some hidden agenda.

They will certainly lose votes over it.

Mrs S Lewis

Danefield Terrace,

Otley.

Planning rap

SIR, - I would like to register my protest at the obvious 'buying' of planning permission by developers in exchange for roads which should be provided by the Highways Authority in the above area.

In addition to this, permission is granted to pour more water into a flood plain area. This area is impossible to drain as the only outlet is at the side of Foul Causeway.

As soon as there is any quantity of rain the water tries to escape into the River Wharfe under Pool Road at Knotford Nook, at a level which is lower than the river.

During the last floods there was a specific instruction from the Government that residential building in or near to flood plains should not take place.

No doubt once again money and absent councils would seem to rule rather than commonsense.

John W A Harker

Midgley Farm,

East Busk Farm,

Otley.

Ideas 'half baked'

SIR, - Councillor Nigel Francis never ceases to amaze me. Last week, he claims to be an independent councillor yet he is Otley Tory representative on Leeds City Council.

One of his many problems is that he constantly puts his foot in it! His attempt to dehumanise asylum seekers baffles me. Even if these are his true thoughts it staggers me that he has the audacity to put such extreme views into print.

He also accuses me of being prepared to save Otley Civic Centre at some ridiculous cost which only he has dreamed up. Like his colleagues on Otley Town council his and their costings are given little thought and are dreamed up on the back of a fag packet.

He, along with Councillor Colin Campbell come up with half-baked ideas and say 'We only want what's best for Otley'. How very commendable but one has to ask from where is the money coming from?

Yes a 300-seater hall! How very wonderful. This, of course, takes up considerable square metreage, to say nothing of all the other facilities which he and his alliance propose. Let me leave it there because it would be futile to go on when his thoughts are not past the pipe dream stage of he and his colleagues. He is truly hanging on to a dream.

Please, Nigel, do not be ashamed of being called a Tory. Perhaps some of us would be deeply offended if referred to as a Tory but it really ought not to offend you.

Coun Ray Dunn

42 St David's Road,

Otley.

False assumption

SIR, - Can I correct Anne Lee? The piece of equipment to which I have referred is not the 'Silence Machine'. It is something entirely different.

If the rest of her 'facts' are based on similar false assumptions, how much credence can we give to any of them?

She boasts of entering Menwith Hill and stealing documents. Important and secret documents will be kept in a safe place. It is possible that the ones she took were deliberately planted, so that anyone stealing them would be totally misled.

She also says that she gave them to the press. If they had been of any significance, the Government would have imposed a D Notice. In addition, she would have been serving a very long prison sentence under the Official Secrets Act.

In any case, to boast about trying to compromise the safety of the service personnel who are defending her rights is, to say the least, highly unethical.

All of these women should go and read the names on their local war memorials and remember that there is nothing glorious about being dead. Those people died to preserve their freedom. Anne can probably recall one of Otley's dead from her schooldays.

Finally, a soldier's epitaph by Kipling:

"If some question why we died

Tell them, "Because our fathers lied."

Do not be one of the liars and betrayers.

Gordon Bradley

15, Kineholme Drive,

Otley.

Sell-off fear

SIR, - The recently published Unitary Development Plan document talks about selling off council owned land at Holt Park for development.

Presumably it envisages this land will be sold to Asda, which will enable them to build on playing fields. Asda have already made their intentions to build here clear.

Does Holt Park need a much bigger supermarket? The current supermarket at Holt Park serves local people's needs. A much bigger supermarket will lead to a massive increase in traffic.

It could lead to other supermarkets going bankrupt, who can't compete. Local shops servicing a small area reduce the need to travel. Huge shops to serve a massive area lead to more congestion and pollution. The extra traffic generated will lead to more children suffering from asthma.

More heavy goods vehicles delivering to the store will disrupt people's lives. A large number of older people live at Holt Park and increased traffic will make it harder for them to cross the road. Holt Park was built in the 1970s and has a swimming pool, school, library and doctors surgeries all, which serve the local community.

Having these facilities close together minimised the need to travel Losing playing fields to development will mean children will have fewer places to play and this will mean more noise for older people.

The land at Holt Park should not be sold off. We need to protect and preserve our green spaces for future generations. Our green and pleasant land should not be turned into a concrete jungle. The needs of ordinary people in Holt Park should come before the needs of a multinational company.

Mick Beaty

Friends of the Earth,

74 Kirkgate,

Leeds.

Council arrogant

SIR, - The arrogance of Leeds City's New Labour Council at the recent budget meeting is a reflection of the undemocratic practices which have infected central Government.

Not only did they refuse to listen to campaigners against means tested charges for elderly and disabled people but, insulted us. The insults ranged, from patronising, to outright abuse.

In spite of amendments to abolish charges by all three opposition parties and independents, New Labour forced through its budget regardless of the damage it will do. The arguments they presented would have been thrown out by any court of law. But then, this is not a law.

Opposition Councillors Andrew Carter and Mark Harris presented reasoned and robust arguments showing how the budget could be maintained and still abolish means tested charges, but this was to no avail. New Labour had made up its mind months ago and presented ill-informed speeches from Labour Councillors, Walker, Wakefield and Bradley. There was also much bullying and intimidation of backbench Labour councillors from Chief Whip Gerald Harper.

Councillor Walker in spite of all evidence to the contrary, insulted our intelligence, by saying, he wanted to prevent millionaires from having access to social services. I challenge him to tell us how many millionaires attend day centres, and how many are receiving benefits.

Taxing and means testing vulnerable people is apparently necessary to fund the lifestyle of councillors at the Civic Hall. Some, who have just received extortionate rises in allowances, use the Civic Hall like a gentlemen's club and enjoy free meals and car parking.

Even patients visiting hospitals have to pay car parking, but not councillors.

Malcolm Naylor

21 Grange View

Otley.

'No politics' plea

SIR, - I entirely agree with Coun Nigel Francis that party politics should have little or no role to play on town and parish councils, which exist to serve their communities and not the interests of any political party

However, I fail to understand why he has to go as far afield as Morley to find his model, when he has only to look to his neighbours in Horsforth. As someone who entered politics in response to Roy Jenkins' desire to 'break the mould', replacing as far as possible conflict with co-operation, it has been a privilege to serve on a council where all councillors, of whatever label, have worked together as a team in the interests of our town.

For two of its first four years, Horsforth Town Council has elected a chairman who is not a member of the majority party, something that could not happen on less enlightened councils where the old, inevitably counter-productive, confrontational culture persists.

Coun. David Read (Lib Dem)

Horsforth Town Council.

Protest praise

SIR, - I write in support of the young people from Prince Henry's Grammar School who organised protests last week against the war in Iraq.

They were brilliant. They were full of energy and life and argued their convictions against the war convincingly. Friends who have seen the young people in the media have all been impressed with their confidence and clarity and it's good to see young people spontaneously speaking up for themselves.

Liz Carr

1 Mount Pisgah,

Otley.

Use ward names

SIR, - With reference to naming roads for the Raven Group (High Royds Hospital).

Surely it would be apt to use the names of the wards which have unfortunately been closed down.

P Thackray

15 St Oswald's Garth,

Guiseley.