Letters to the Editor

SIR, - Christmas is the season of goodwill to all men and is also pantomime season.

To deal with Councillor Phil Coyne's letter in last week's 'Wharfedale' first, on July 1 at the Environmental and Economic Development Committee meeting of Otley Town Council, an item came up on the agenda entitled Christmas Lights.

This agenda item was put forward by the ruling Labour group; it was agreed to explore a scheme in which instead of hiring fixed pieces for lighting columns, the council would locate and pay for Christmas trees and lights and shops would provide electricity.

No mention was made of the removal of lights from Market Street, Newmarket Street, outside the parish church, outside HSBC Bank Triangle, etc. I am also totally amused by the comments made throughout this time by Coun Coyne for the removal of bright, plastic tinsel motifs from around the lampposts, etc.

Coun John Eveleigh and Coun Coyne have recently been Town Mayors and I arranged for the improvements in the town's lighting and was praised by both. Now we have a Conservative Town Mayor, suddenly the lights are cheap and nasty and have to be replaced by more traditional lights.

I would urge Coun Coyne, etc, to visit Falcon Close, Athelstan Lane,. Weston Estate, etc, and publicly condemn the people in these areas for trying to bring some festivity into the town. The centre of Otley now has around 50 lampposts which are up to Leeds standards for maintaining a Christmas motif.

The money put into this operation amounting to approximately £4,000 has now been kicked into touch by Coun Coyne and his ruling group. Each year, new Christmas trees will have to be purchased along with replacement lights, timers, etc. So the cost of this will be equal to the cost of providing motifs.

I am also still awaiting the written consent from the property owners and the shop/business owners giving permission to drill into the walls, etc. in putting up the trees and lights. After all, this was a point raised by Coun Coyne and Leeds City Council when I tried to expand the use of trees a couple of years ago.

Moving on to Coun Ray Dunn's letter, I find his comments to be in keeping with the pantomime season.

To comment that I spoke disrespectfully about the Labour members of Otley Town Council and about Otley Christmas lights is not technically true. I was only stating the facts and as they are the ruling party and hold the chairmanships of all the committees, the blame for the lighting fiasco rests with them.

Had the lights been picturesque and on a par with some of the other local towns and villages such as Guiseley, Burley-in-Wharfedale, Yeadon, etc, there would no doubt have been numerous pictures of the ruling Labour group's magnificent lights.

I have already previously mentioned how the Christmas lights issue was dropped on to the council members in July and must repeat that there was never a vote taken when that issue was first raised.

Coun Dunn mentions honesty and integrity. I find this comment coming from a good Christian soul to be totally untrue. I believe that my record within the community is second to none. Regarding photographs in the 'Wharfedale' and articles, etc, not only do I run many organisations voluntarily for the good of the town, but I also run a charity. I know there are 14 councillors other than myself and yet only once, as far as I can remember, has a councillor ever helped me and that was Coun Lawrence Ross and ironically that was to raise money for the Christmas lights a few years ago.

Finally, may I wish everybody a Merry Christmas and all the best for 2003.

Councillor Nigel Francis

6 Pearson's Buildings

Otley.

Taxing issue

SIR, - Your paper had under the News in Brief column a short piece concerning our MP, Harold Best. Very briefly it told of the improvements for carers following recent Governmental changes.

Your letters column had a letter from Malcolm Naylor lambasting both the Tories and Labour. At the same time Malcolm declares himself as a socialist.

Perhaps Malcolm would like my kind of socialism; please note, my kind of socialism. Not necessarily that of my party. Means testing to me is perfectly fair providing that the means test is fair and appropriate

The fairest means test is income tax. For me, government can do away with VAT and NHI and just have income tax as the only means of taxation. Malcolm may be right about decrying means tested benefits because under the current system there are always anomalies and those who are too near the edge to be comfortable.

Our income tax is not means tested. A person on a comfortable income pays just the same percentage tax as does the Beckhams, the Blairs, the McCartneys and the so call fat cats of British industry and commerce.

Many of these industrialists have stated that they do not necessarily want the money, they want the ethos, the accolades and the respect that hefty salary increases warrant. This is fine, let them have it.

Let us also have tax which is progressive. Let us have 50 per cent, 60 per cent, 70 per cent, 80 per cent, 90 per cent. This would be a truly progressive tax and it would do away with all other forms of means testing.

Malcolm Naylor, and others, would be able to have the same benefits as those who are less affluent than him. However, those benefits would be taxed. Of course this is a pipedream; it will not become party policy (more is the pity).

Nevertheless it would do away with many anomalies and would make pay awards much fairer. There has been controversy over the 43 per cent rise of Calderdale councillors. A Tory councillor stated that 43 per cent of very little is still very little.

He is right of course but our firemen seem able to get only 4 per cent of not very much yet those on upwards of £1 million per year seem to have no difficulty in getting double figure percentage increases and they only pay 40 per cent tax and exactly the same percentage VAT as does Malcolm, Naylor.

Coun Ray Dunn

42 St David's Road

Otley.

Public conned

SIR, - It gives me no pleasure to remind readers of the dire predictions I made before the last General Election on New Tory Labour's hidden agenda to means test pensions and increase retirement age.

Means tested pensions are now a reality, but in New Labour speak it is called minimum income guarantee.

New Labour has just announced the first step on increasing retirement age, as yet, not compulsory, but as a kite flying exercise to gauge public reaction. The attacks on the elderly and disabled have been a constant feature of this Government ever since it came to power in 1997. Little by little they are devaluing the quality of life of elderly and disabled people and concentrating resources on the young.

These are more useful to the interests of capitalism as units of production and consumerism whilst the elderly and disabled are given the status of burdens. Hidden assaults include the removal of tax relief of occupational pensions and withdrawal of married tax allowances for those born after 1935. The most recent attacks have been to introduce means tested charges for non-residential services, effectively taxing age and disability and imposing discrimination not applied to other sections of society. The arguments used by Councillor Sherry Bradley against abolishing charges for home care, that it would increase Council Tax on elderly people who do not use the service, ignores that neither do they use education, but are still expected to contribute to its cost, which is far and away the largest cost on the Council Tax.

She also says she is afraid the members ( and cost) of those using the service would increase as those who currently employ private suppliers take advantage of a free service. She overlooks the prosperous private sectors in health and education where people still use and pay for private providers even when a free service is available. Labour spins and looks for ways of presenting distorted propaganda to serve its own miserable unprincipled purposes.

Its main achievements are its ability to con the public into believing the opposite of what is actually happening.

When one looks at the company the Prime Minister's family keeps, one can easily see where his skills have been acquired. New Labour is the most dangerous Government I can ever remember and as we move nearer and nearer to yet another war, the man with the power is one who cannot be trusted.

Malcolm Naylor

21 Grange View,

Otley.

Farm's thanks

SIR, - I would like to thank the people of Otley for their generosity at the 'Spirit of Christmas Day' event on Friday December 6.

Lineham Farm Children's Centre was chosen as the Victorian Fayre Charity, but although the annual event was cancelled, we were invited to come along and join in the day's festivities anyway.

Everyone was very friendly and it was also great to meet several people who knew of Lineham Farm before it was converted into the holiday centre for disadvantaged children it is today.

We raised £577 from our stall and carol singing collections and the raffle run by Wharfedale Newspapers at Safeway raised a further £120 bringing us a fantastic total of £700.

We are so grateful to the school children who helped us raise these funds by entertaining the crowds so beautifully and to Mike Gittins and the Victorian Fayre committee for being so supportive beforehand as well as helping to collect on the day.

On behalf of Lineham Farm Children's Centre, I would like to wish everyone in Otley a happy and peaceful Christmas and to assure you all that this money will be put to good use providing valuable holidays for children who need a well earned break from their often difficult lives.

LISA BARNES

Appeals Manager,

Lineham Farm,

Eccup.

One-man band

SIR, - Do you remember Don Partridge;

The guy called the one-man band?

It seems to me, he would be ideal,

To play in Yeadon Bandstand.

There isn't any room for very much more.

You couldn't swing a cat round, that's for sure.

So here's to the band, hope you get your space soon,

Then you won't have to play in a tiny mushroom.

Mrs J M Chaffer

Haw Lane

Yeadon.