Politicians betraying us
Letter of the Week: Andrew Pearson, Cleckheaton
This country is moving towards people vs parliament.
Government after government have acted on decisions they know to be against the wishes of the vast majority.
Issues that should have been sorted years ago are put to an inquiry – a dreaded word – and kicked into the long grass.
Abraham Lincoln, one of America’s favourite Presidents, used to say “Trust the people”.
Our lesser fry in Westminster choose to differ, and get themselves into all sorts of confusion because of party politics.
On 1st July, 1916, at the Battle of the Somme, thousands of British troops were ready to go over the top at the sound of their officers’ whistles.
Twenty thousand brave young men lost their lives on the very first day.
Their sacrifices were to make our land ‘Fit for heroes’. You can only wonder what would go through their minds if they were able to come back today.
Those were the days
From: Name and address supplied
The housing shortage, unemployment, overcrowding, failing health and education services, alienation, inter-cultural strife and terrorism are just some of the problems that stem from the mass immigration that has been forced on us these past 20 years or so.
The majority of the electorate were never in favour of immigration on such a scale but of course the politicians knew better.
And after having created chaos out of order, our politicians are now forced to spend a disproportionate amount of their time putting a positive spin on the mess they’ve made.
Their problem, though, is that their oft-repeated mantras, “celebrating the joys of diversity and the wonders of multi-culturalism”, are sounding increasingly absurd – for the simple reason that they conflict with the reality that we can all see about us.
We may indeed have benefited in some ways because of immigration, but that is not the point. The question is, have we benefited after everything has been taken into consideration; do the benefits gained as a result of immigration outweigh the costs?
My conclusion is that they don’t.
And I believe many of our politicians and public servants and media people are coming to the same conclusion. But because they have a vested interest in maintaining the multi-cultural fantasy which they helped create, they are not just reluctant to draw attention to its faults, they are unwilling even to recognise them.
Hence their failure to act when presented with evidence of the Muslim peadophile rapist gangs operating in this country.
The priority for our politicians, police, social services, and mass media is painting a positive picture of the multicultural society; they were even willing to abandon our most vulnerable children to a life of rape and torture in its cause. And they only acted when they had no option but to do so.
Years ago, the perpetrators of these evil crimes would have ended their miserable lives at the end of a rope. And they’d have been joined on the scaffold by those public servants who were too cowardly and self-interested to do their duty. Oh for a return to such days.
Indignity of the loo card
From: E Leggett Batley
Just can’t wait card? Loo-ny idea.
How many of your readers would want to show someone a card or show a medical certificate to get access to a loo? I don’t think many!
Imagine standing in a queue with card in hand. Not very dignified! This is not giving equal access. Why should others know a person’s medical information just to use a loo. Get the padlocks off our public toilets!
Let’s have less council executives at £100,000+ a year each and put the cash towards employing cleaners for our public loos.
I can’t believe chief executive Adrian Lythgo got £163,802 (2011-12), more than the Prime Minister, who only gets £142,500. I don’t think either of them are value for money!
Toilets are a human right
From: Marlene Lees, Thornhill
I read the article in last weeks Press re. Jason Church. I really do sympathise with Mr Church, I too have a problem which makes leaving my house almost a non-starter.
I can’t go anywhere unless I know there are toilets nearby. Birstall toilets have had a reprieve until the end of the year. Then what?
I put the question to a councillor; the reply was, “I dont know”.
I know you can use the library toilets but this doesn’t help if the library is closed.
Batley has a bus station – no toilets. Cleckheaton has a bus station – no toilets. Surely this is a health hazard for a lot of people
Something should be done about this.
Col’s answer for markets
From: Magic Col, Dewsbury Market
Because the problems of the town centre retail are so multi-faceted, the culprits can always slip out of grasp.
I pay no business rates (small business relief) and I believe landlords must now pay rates on empty shops, which is some pressure to get them occupied. That is government help. Kirklees are the markets’ landlords.
On a Friday, a £16 stall rent for 50 stalls on the second-hand market is a strangulation of the town’s business.
It is physically impossible for 45 of them to make the national living wage on the business coming into town.
Further, my business is paying £601 per month to Kirklees for three days’ trade per week – effectively £60 a day.The strangulation of Friday’s trade brings this cost up to £90 per day.
Now it’s virtually impossible to break even.
If you charged £3 a stall and got 270 stalls on a Friday, Kirklees would make £10 more, but (to Mrs Ellam from last week, your friend in the cafe might have to make another 800 cups of tea; he might have to make another 100 meals for the new stall-holders. If, instead of 400 regulars, we started to get an extra 4,000 people coming into Dewsbury’s Friday second-hand market he might be asking you for anybody needing a job!).
If you then opened up the whole town centre to another 300 £3 stalls, I think you would have a Klondyke. I think Kirklees might be hard pushed to employ enough traffic wardens to stamp out the new business.
Then I would do it to Wednesdays and Saturdays – it is so simple. An idiot could do it.
It’s a million-pound plan for Dewsbury written on the back of a Kirklees parking ticket.
If you actually want people to work in Dewsbury town centre and claim fewer benefits, as you have hit us with a tsunami of immigration of people who can only spend at the 10-20p level, you can no longer expect the small retailer to pay rent at the ‘money grows on trees’ level – the one that props up the privileged life of the Kirklees public sector managers, the £600 per week-plus Lords and Ladies of Kirklees.
Town’s been taken away
From: John Cross, EDL, Dewsbury Division
Trish Makepiece claims that Dewsbury market and town centre has suffered a decline since the terror plot was revealed.
What a load of rubbish. It’s not the EDL, or the failed terror attack that has had an effect on the loss of trade around the town.
It’s emptying because you are ripping off the old traditional stall-holders, those who have worked what was once the best market in Yorkshire for generations, while you bend over backwards to help newcomers – and we know who they are.
It’s the years of the biased attitude towards a certain section of the community who have been allowed to take the town centre over, just like the rest of Dewsbury.
Dewsbury Market now bears more resemblance to a province of Pakistan than a Yorkshire town.
People have had enough. Mrs Makepiece and the councillors who claim to represent the whole of the Dewsbury people have sold out the town and its identity.
The town no longer appeals to Dewsbury people and you know why that is.
There comes a point when people don’t want Asian music blaring out from every stall.
The non-Asian community want to come to Dewsbury and visit a market which resembles its culture.
If only you stopped buttering up to just one section of the market, opened your eyes and ask the whole of the community, you would realise what the problem is relating to Dewsbury’s decline.
Promises but no answers
From: Angela Ellam, Dewsbury constituent
I attended the final public consultation meeting regarding the proposed changes to Dewsbury Hospital on 21st May.
My overall impression was a lot of aspiration and very little substance.
Although the panel of representatives from the Mid Yorkshire NHS Trust were very clear about their plans to reduce services at Dewsbury Hospital, they were much less clear about how they were going to make it work.
Their plans appear to be based on the premise that the Trust will be able to meet the medical requirements of patients when they need it, that GP practices will be able to provide patient-focused primary health care services, that community healthcare providers will be able to deliver all the healthcare required in the community, and that the Council will be able to organise social care where and when it is required.
I would like to know how they are going to make these things happen.
I am sure that many people will share my view that in terms of influencing the Trust’s decision, the public consultation is a sham.
The Trust has already decided that the current arrangements are not viable and that there is just one option for the future reconfiguration of services.
In terms of consultation, the Trust is simply going through the motions because they have a duty to do so.
However, it is still important that people respond to the consultation.
It demonstrates the strength of feeling in Dewsbury.
It exposes potential problems that the Trust has not considered and it makes sure that the Trust is held to account.
On this last point I’d like to know what the quantifiable benefits of these changes are, how the Trust will be monitoring the delivery of these benefits, and who will lose their job if they are not achieved.