Vital role played by parish councils

In his letter Mr Dundas poses a number of questions regarding the funding of the parish council and the ability of the present council to run services, but I think he misses several vital issues. While I do not speak for the parish council as a whole, I believe Mr Dundas's comments deserve a response from a serving member of Ilkley Parish Council.

Last year Ilkley Parish Council set up a Constitutional Working Group to investigate the range of options for increasing executive powers and examine the future role of the parish council in the district. An interim report was produced, explaining the background to the current constitutional and funding situations, and offering a number of options for future development. Far from reacting to outside pressures, Ilkley Parish Council put itself under scrutiny in order to examine its continued role in the communities of Ilkley, Burley and Menston.

The whole concept of parish councils is that they are a statutory tier of local government, made up of elected members put there by the local electorate. Unlike district authorities, parish and town councils are closer to their communities, managing a range of services and addressing 'grass roots' local issues. The majority of parish and town councillors work hard on behalf of their communities to achieve results which the communities really need and want.

I find it interesting to note that Mr Dundas's comments about electors thinking they might not need a parish council are sharply at odds with the proposals put forward in the Government's recent Rural White Paper, which are supposedly aimed at devolving power to parish councils and strengthening local democracy.

Perhaps Mr Dundas does not support his Government's proposals and would prefer the people of Ilkley, Burley and Menston to be represented exclusively by district councillors or by an unelected forum, rather than by a democratically elected parish council, over which local people have some control through the ballot box.

As far as the funding arrangements between the Bradford parish councils and the district authority are concerned, there are strong arguments for the 1974 'agreement' to be renegotiated. Changes in local government in the intervening years and a greater emphasis on devolving powers to local level, have probably made the agreement increasingly obsolete.

It can be argued that the funding arrangement has prevented Ilkley Parish Council from taking on any executive functions, thereby stopping a democratically elected tier of local government from exercising it's statutory powers. It might be possible to reach a new agreement with the district council, for example, incorporating surety of grant income together with some devolution of powers and the ability of parish councils to raise their own funds for local purposes.

While many members of Ilkley Parish Council have been re-elected for several terms of office, they have invariably fought contested elections with representatives of other political parties and have been chosen by a clear majority of voters.

Furthermore, members of Mr Dundas's political party served on Ilkley Parish Council until the last election in 1999 and the present parish council is composed of representatives of the other two main political parties. It appears strange that Mr Dundas cites the alleged presumption of automatic re-election as a weakness in managing parish council finances, but I wonder if his criticism might stem from his own failure to secure a seat at the last parish council election.

In spite of his doubts about the abilities of many councillors, I find it heartening to read that Mr Dundas will support the parish council if it decides to manage local services or projects. Although it remains to be seen whether the management of local services will be devolved to Ilkley Parish Council, and there is no certainty that local people will be asked to pay directly for their own parish council, I have no doubt that parish councillors will continue to make decisions in the best interests of the whole community.

Coun HEATHCLIFFE BOWEN

6 Woodlands Rise,

Ilkley.

Parish points

SIR, - It is unusually generous of Mr A Dundas (Gazette Letters, April 19) to highlight the benefits and service given to the communities by Ilkley Parish Council (IPC). Such a pity he then falls into his usual mode of talking about the 'privileges' that Ilkley and district enjoy against other parts of Bradford District.

IPC has long encouraged the extending of parish councils in the district, recognising that three district councillors (who don't command the high salaries and many 'office and travel expenses' of our MPs) cannot meet every demand. As a result there are now eight parished areas where once there were only five.

It may be that there is a case of 'horses for courses' and that areas which have less input of voluntary work, less historic experience of their own area (i.e. compared with the old urban district councils) can benefit from area panels/neighbourhood forums.

But with the exception of Wharfedale these have not been a resounding success to date, have cost us all hundreds of thousands of pounds since first instigated and the thinking seems to be that the practice of doling out parcels of money will blind people to the fact that most of that money was their own in the first place but just not allocated out by Bradford.

The Ilkley and District parished area produces some £9.6m in Council Tax (domestic only). Bradford Council raises some £103m. There are 30 wards in the district so each ward might contribute £3.2m. IPC covers one and two thirds wards so pays nearly £4m above the average.

IPC's budget is around £8,000 with much of this going on meeting venues, advertising public meetings, insurance and work on the UDP Audit Fee etc. In addition, it has the use of office and some facilities in the town hall which, despite Bradford taking away the education office, job inquiry facilities and some social services, still provides an important function in the town.

There would also be election charges to add on but as these tie in with Bradford and national elections they are at a minimum. Next to nothing compared with the £9.6m put into Bradford.

Why then should Ilkley precept for services it already pays for? It's parish councillors are voluntary, the town produces an unbelievable number of volunteers - many of whom do things which are paid for by us in other communities and much of what is done gives pleasure to many other people within and outside of Bradford.

Some devolution of monies for named projects needs exploring but the staffing, legal and insurance costs in this litigious age would need careful examination.

Mr Dundas's figures are equally misleading. One year ago Otley residents were paying £36.33 per D band household extra. Do residents really want that?

BARBARA CUSSONS

4 Curly Hill,

Ilkley.

Critic criticised

SIR, - I am not at all sure about Simon Raven's 'too clever by half' reviews in your newspaper of the Ilkley Concert Club series of chamber music concerts. My interpretation of the knowing looks between the artists at the end of April concert was more along the lines 'Wow! We pushed our luck there - but fantastic, we got away with it!'

Indeed, I said almost exactly that to the chairman while the stage was being cleared. Given such an interpretation, I would prefer to believe that these two superb artists decided that they simply 'could not follow that', and encores would have spoilt the magic that they had just created (their finale of the Saint-Saens sonata had been phenomenal).

In a similar vein, the Russian State Symphony Orchestra recently gave a memorable concert at St George's Hall in Bradford - the printed programme ending with a fantastic performance of Tchaikovsky's fifth symphony.

The audience was ecstatic and were treated to three encores, including the inevitable 'Pomp and Circumstance'. The encores were tremendously appreciated - but wouldn't it have been better to leave the hall humming the march tune from the last movement of the Tchaikovsky?

I would suggest that Philippe Graffin and Pascal Devoyan were absolutely right - and congratulations to them. An intellectual reference to the 13th century is all very well, but let's stick with the music and enjoy it.

A P Hudson

23 Clifton Road,

Ben Rhydding.

Hotel backed

SIR, - I refer to your front page news 'Residents fight Ilkley hotel's entertainment licence renewal' (April 12). As an ex Ilkley resident, I was not surprised to read that people living in the comparatively new houses adjacent to the Craiglands Hotel are complaining about noise etc., because my husband and I predicted this when they were first built.

Don't these house buyers ever leave the estate agent's office to look at the surroundings of their proposed new area? Or do they view on a dark winter's night in the middle of the week when all is quiet?

The Craiglands has been running dinner dances for decades and people have always left by car and presumably made the associated amount of noise - weddings are a more recent thing but nothing unusual for a busy hotel.

I think it would be appalling if this hotel - which after all helps the tourist industry of the area and caters for local needs - was to lose its entertainment licence because of some short-sighted individuals.

Maureen A Pollard

Fairholme,

Renton Drive,

Guiseley.

Housing 'con'

SIR, - This weekend I sat down to read two reports, one in the Ilkley Gazette and the other in a South Oxfordshire village magazine.

Like Ilkley, the residents of Sonning Common had long campaigned for affordable housing for local young people who were being forced to leave their village and friends to find cheaper housing. Eventually some land was procured for cheap housing and houses were built.

Everyone supported the scheme because it was what they wanted.

But there was a snag, an important snag. The politicians, as is their wont, didn't clearly explain the fact that this housing would be allocated on a points system covering the whole of South Oxfordshire. In consequence only one local family was allocated housing and the rest were from other regions.

If the people of Ilkley want the properties of the proposed affordable housing to go to local people, as indicated in your article (April 19) by Audrey Brand, they must demand positive assurances from the council now before it is too late.

J D TAYLOR

7 Heather Rise,

Burley-in-Wharfedale.