Letters to the Editor

"For many of the kids it was the most exciting night of their humdrum lives", is the most outrageous statement I have heard in a long time. He then says: "It was exciting for those who threw bricks".

I think he should be reminded it was not exciting for the police who risked their lives that night, or for the 300 who were seriously injured. Nor was it exciting for the people who were deliberately locked in a burning building.

The fact that there were no deaths was a miracle.

It is doubly scandalous that someone like Lord Ouseley can trivialise these barbaric acts to the level of playground pranks and it leaves me despairing for the future.

He was the one who suggested, in his report, that the Asian and white communities should learn to live together, yet with one thoughtless statement he has alienated 80 per cent of the population of the Bradford area and driven another wedge between those communities.

M Wood, Westercroft View, Northowram.

SIR - If Lord Ouseley had any credibility, then clearly he's lost it with his comments about the sentences given to rioters. Does he realise the damage done to the national and international image of this city?

My wife is Russian. Her parents live in Moscow, one of the worst cities for violent crime. During the riots they phoned to ask whether we were all right, having seen the images on TV! These images went around the world.

Lord Ouseley is fanning the flames of discontent by giving credibility to the view that the sentences are excessive.

The main reason why the riots occurred in 2001 was because in 1995 the city's leaders hadn't got the guts to pursue convictions. This led to a sense of "we can do what we like" in the inner city.

Those who played a part in the riots - however small - can expect to pay a high price. I can do without Lord Ouseley making more pathetic excuses for petty criminals.

Councillor Robert Reynolds (Con. Wyke), Westminster Crescent, Clayton, Bradford..

SIR - I admire the role played by Herman Ouseley in opening out the debate on Bradford's future, but I'm not sure his latest reported comment on the sentencing is helpful (T&A, July 19).

There must always be a concern to ensure that individuals are fairly treated by the criminal justice system. On the other hand, the violence last year included some very serious crimes, of a kind that most reasonable people would say should attract extended custodial sentences.

The problem is that it all depends on circumstances, and the circumstances of the riot remain unclear. It makes a lot of difference whether the missile is a pebble or a brick, and whether it is thrown into a derelict building, or at someone's head.

I do not believe that anyone knows enough about what happened a year ago to be confident in their overall judgement of the pattern of sentencing. The danger is that opposing views on the fairness of the sentencing will become entrenched on two sides, and become yet another factor in social division for the future.

There is a strong case for an authoritative piece of research to set the pattern of sentencing in its factual and comparative context.

Alan Carling, Wilmer Drive, Heaton.

SIR - So Lord Ouseley is finally showing his true beliefs. It seems that his eminently sensible report was a mere aberration in that it failed to blame the innocent and exonerate the criminals, and he is now back-tracking, presumably in search of cheap adulation from a narrow section of the public.

David Simpson, Hirst Avenue, Heckmondwike.

SIR - As an exhibitor at Bingley Show in the past with horses and now with dogs, I feel we have been let down by the cancellation of this year's show. We could have, like many other supporters, entered at either Bakewell or Cartmel show but like to support our local show, though perhaps not in the future.

First we were moved across the river, then next to a cricket field on Beckfoot Lane, then another move to the Bradford & Bingley Sports Club. And I understand if the show had been held this year we would have been moved again next to the building site for the relief road.

Surely the resident of Aire View Avenue could have put up with the traffic for one day. Think of the pleasure it gives young and old, and the good causes the money goes to. Now it is costing the show considerable amounts in compensation.

Judges could have taken other appointments. Trade stalls could have gone to other shows. I feel perhaps there could be a lack of interest if the show goes ahead next year.

One wonders why the organisers didn't check first for access as they knew there was some objection two years ago.

Miss M B Booth, Hainsworth Wood Road, Keighley.

SIR - Hoyle Court Primary is NOT to close, as you report. It is only a proposal, and a somewhat ludicrous one in view of the fact that it is the highest-achieving school in Baildon and 17th in the Bradford District as a whole.

The authority has not taken into account the house-building currently taking place in Baildon on former school sites and elsewhere which will inevitably mean more children in the area.

The parents of these children will prefer them to attend the school with the best results. As it is Hoyle Court has a waiting list for its new intake already for both Nursery and Reception, these numbers continuing through each school year.

Bradford Education has, therefore, made an incorrect prediction of numbers.

Estelle Morris, the Education Secretary, is committed to the raising of standards in schools, so I think she will be appalled at the proposal to close a high-achieving school such as Hoyle Court, (Woodlands Primary being another example), when Bradford compares unfavourably with the country as a whole.

I will be writing to inform her that Bradford Education is going directly against government policy.

E M Baxter, Hoyle Court Road, Baildon.

SIR - I felt sickened when I read in the T&A that yet more schools are to be "axed". At the meeting at Hoyle Court Primary School it was made quite clear that this is only a proposal.

It is a brilliantly successful school, with the best SATS results in Baildon and 17th in the whole of Bradford. There is a waiting list for pre-school for the next two years.

The LEA say the school is under-subscribed. There is a deficit of only 26 children, which will easily be made up as parents, now with fewer schools to chose from, select the school with the best results.

So that prospective parents are not frightened off it needs to be made clear that our school will not close! The emphasis must be put on the fact that this is only a proposal and a completely daft one in my opinion.

Mrs L K Martin, Cliffe Avenue, Baildon.

SIR - I couldn't believe my eyes when I read in the T&A (July 16) that Hoyle Court Primary School was one of those proposed for closure.

This school had a new extension built only last year. I wonder how much that cost? In fact, work is still going on at the school.

It is the only school in the lower part of Baildon and it is unrealistic for young children to have to travel to the top part of Baildon.

Children are people, not statistics, and should not be shuttled around willy-nilly.

Nancy Richardson, Kirklands Close, Baildon.

SIR - I am deaf and I am writing this letter to complain of the services that are available to the hearing community but not the deaf.

In this country, people cannot communicate with the deaf because they do not know sign language. I shall give you some examples of how the deaf are treated unfairly.

1. It is impossible for me to get a taxi because of my deafness.

2. When I am shopping, the assistants cannot help me.

3. Buses have no texts to show us the different stopping points. There is insufficient information on buses.

4. There is insufficient signed information on TV.

We need an improvement in services for the deaf.

Nageena Shazadi Aurangzeb, Agar Street, Bradford 8.