SIR - At a time when the Chancellor seems to be suggesting that we cannot expect the Government to look after us in our old age and we must take responsibility ourselves, I thought I would allow the readers an opportunity to scrutinise my investment strategy of the last 10 years.

In February 1995 I took out a 10 year life assurance policy with a £10,000 sum assured. The very nice man opened the ubiquitous lap top on my dining room table and whilst there was little talk of the life cover, (or their commission), much was made of the investment potential of what they were proposing.

Remember this was 1995 and the stock market was years away from the problems to be experienced in the new millennium.

The net premium would be £100.30 per month.

In 1998 they were back. An existing policy had matured and they were here to convince me to reinvest the proceeds, this time a lump sum, in 'Platinum Bonds Plus' of all things. Once more the computer was produced to show me what the future held based on a range of percentage growth projections. I felt a surge of responsibility through my very being.

We now fast forward to last week, ie the maturity day for the 10 year policy. Remember, £100.30 x 120 months of premiums equates to £10,036.00 paid in.

The value of the cheque: £10,057.80. A remarkable return of £21.80p over the 10 years.

To avoid being too depressed I have conveniently "forgotten" the inflation factor.

But believe it or not there was more to come.

Remember the 'Platinum Plus' policy? I received a letter a week later informing me that a "Market Value Reduction" of £3,200, yes £3,200, has been applied to, and I quote, "help secure a fair share of the with profits fund for all investors at a time of prolonged falls in stock market values". But wasn't that me last week?

In effect therefore it would appear that I am presently contributing £3,200 from one policy to secure my £21.80 "windfall" from the other.

I am no longer a young man and in some respects I can joke about the situation and write silly letters to my favourite weekly newspaper.

However can Mr Brown honestly expect people with mortgages and young families to set aside thousands of pounds of precious disposable income with such uncertainty surrounding the outcome?

Name and address supplied.

SIR - It is important that attention is given to the introduction of the Local Government pension Scheme Regulations. They are due to come into force on April 1.

The scheme covers people (like me) working in many of our public services including local government, further education and parts of higher education, the police and probation services, passenger transport executives, the environment agency and the community and voluntary sector.

The changes which these regulations will implement are of great concern. Anyone who has planned to retire at the age of 60, who would previously have qualified for an unreduced pension, and who is under the age of 60 on April 1 2013, will find that the benefits earned after April 2005 will be significantly reduced (by around 30 per cent) if they still have to retire at 60.

In addition, anyone under 50 on March 31 2005 will find that, if they are made redundant between the ages of 50 and 55, they will have no entitlement to a pension before 60. This would likely make more people dependent on state benefits.

These changes will have a seriously detrimental effect on many long-serving members of the scheme, especially the lower paid and women. Many who are 'burning out' or doing strenuous physical work will have to work five more years to be able to retire with a pension above the poverty threshold. If they cannot stay in work, they may well end up in means-tested benefits and on the taxpayer.

We need a positive agenda which would offer people choice through a flexible retirement age; some might choose to work past 65. A necessary debate between workers' representatives, employers and Government, about how best to modernise the scheme, should take place. These unfair amendments to the regulations make such a debate impossible. These changes are being implemented a year before changes to other public service schemes. The increase to the minimum age from 50 to 55 is being introduced five years before this change is required in private sector schemes.

The evidence shows that, although the cost of the LGPS has increased mainly due to the decline of the stock market, it is still sustainable and affordable. The agenda for changing LGPS should not be driven by political considerations or by the alleged 'pension envy' from the private sector.

The Government needs the goodwill of the public service workers. The proposed changes to public sector scheme retirement ages are already causing anger amongst the public sector workforce. We need a full investigation of the implications of these changes and a proper debate to take place about the new scheme.

Richard Allen,

UNISON Shop Steward

Settle Depot,

Raynesway Construction/NYCC Highways

SIR - I refer to the article (Craven Herald Feb 11) "Unique market stalls should be preserved".

They are certainly unique. No other town has to tolerate this untidy High Street, four days a week; other market towns only have stalls one day each week.

Skipton should attract tourists because of its history, its beautiful, wide, tree-lined High Street (which most days can hardly be appreciated) and useful shops selling quality goods.

It is no wonder Craven Court properties are never full to capacity. Not many up-market firms would want to come to a town which experts would have us believe thrives because of its plastic covered stalls.

The answer could be to prevail upon the High Street owners to stop letting their frontages and for a covered market to be established as in other areas like Keighley, Harrogate and Burnley. This could be managed by Craven District Council.

One solution would be for the market to occupy the ground floor beneath one of the multi-storey car parks proposed. This would give the market traders a more convivial working environment not, as at present, plagued by the vagaries of our climate, and their vans could be parked in an adjacent designated area.

It would also result in the removal of the large vehicles which clog up the High Street mornings and evenings and the rubbish left on the setts at 5pm.

Do we really need Leeds-based firms (as quoted in your article) to tell us what is appropriate for our town?

Margaret Carr,

Home Farm,

Gargrave.

SIR - Robert Foster in his letter of February 11 refers to John Prescott as a Yorkshireman. I always understood that he was born in Wales.

The A59 and A65 were considered dangerous in the 1930s and are probably safer now than then. Hard to believe but true.

Bob Kayley,

Main Street, Carleton.

SIR - Your crossword compiler should double check his sources. Crossword no 379, clue 16 down could give great offence to any relatives of Audrey Hepburn.

Spencer Tracey's life-long love was Katherine Hepburn.

Mrs J Burniston

Ingleboro' Drive, Barnoldswick.

SIR - At the end of last year I made a film on both DVD and video entitled 'Steam through the Aire Valley', the proceeds of which go to the Yorkshire Dales Macmillan Appeal at Airedale Hospital.

Altogether £400 has been raised and through your paper I would like to thank everyone who purchased the film. Special thanks also to friends who helped to sell them.

Jim Hartley,

Aire Valley Drive, Bradley.

SIR - So, the A65 is going to be closed to allow repair work (once again!) a few questions spring to mind!

Why is it that the first we hear about it is in the local paper the day before work commences ?

Why does it have to be on weekends - the busiest days tradewise for all businesses along the affected corridor? If two days together are required, why not Tuesdays and Wednesdays (for example) for a few weeks?

Why was no consultation done with businesses etc?

Why does the diversion have to be such a massive one, taking traffic away from Gargrave, Coniston Cold and Hellifield via Gisburn, when there is a perfect solution simply by turning traffic left at the Black Horse junction in Hellifeld and across to the Gisburn road (and vice versa for traffic coming from Settle)?

Why is it that I, and all the other affected businesses, are made to feel like small fry who count for nothing in the grand scheme of things? Yet we all stand to lose significant amounts without any comeback whatsoever!

And the biggest why of all....

Why in the name of all that's sacred wasn't this work done at the same time as the previous road closure a mere two years ago?

Of course I live in a dream world....This is after all the Highways Agency we are talking about where communication and common sense are "buzzwords" which, apparently, are often discussed but little used!!

In disgust (and probably totally wasting my breath)

Stuart Gledhill

Dorothy Ward,

Gargrave

SIR - I have read with interest your recent articles regarding the setts on the High Street in Skipton. The main problem, it seems, in doing anything with them in the way of repairs etc is confirming ownership of the land and setts.

If, as you say, neither Craven District Council or North Yorkshire County Council own the land and if it's not possible to confirm which shops may have curtilage rights over the areas, I find it a bit strange that the parking authorities are able to enforce parking regulations and levy fines on the land.

As the land does not appear to be owned by the local authorities it must be either privately owned or common land. If it is common land then the common man should have unfettered access on to it at all times and if it is private land then it will be the responsibility of the land owner to impose whatever restriction they see fit on parking and levy fines etc.

Are we to assume that the money raised from parking fines is being put into an account that the owners, should they ever materialise, can have access to? I think not.

Also how can the council charge the stall holders on the market for using the land when they freely admit they don't own it?

Perhaps until this situation is sorted out the parking police would be better employed elsewhere and the local council should look long and hard at the legal position regarding charging the stall holders for the use of the setts.

Mark Carter

Low Greenfield Farm Cottage

Buckden

SIR - I have been reading with interest the articles regarding the additional taxi test, and the arguments from both sides. Seeing both sides of the debate I had reserved my opinion, until Saturday night.

Not being able to get my usual taxi firm due to them being exceptionally busy, I rang one of the other large companies in Skipton to collect myself, my wife and two friends from a local pub. We had had a nice meal, a couple of beers and a lot of laughs, in all a very good night. However, we hadn't bargained for the taxi journey from hell!

I should have twigged that it was going to be an exciting ride after the driver twice started to set off, whilst my wife and friend were getting in the car. This was quickly followed by a 'Starsky and Hutch' style exit from the car park with wheels spinning. We progressed down Grassington road into Skipton never under 50mph, and when we reached the 30mph area, there was no application of brakes, just a progression through Skipton itself at a busy 'throwing out time' at the same speed. A race up the cobbles up by the Albion was accompanied by "this is the fastest way". We arrived home at breakneck speed, a few doors from my house because he was in too much of a hurry to take any notice of my directions. He then proceeded to take my friends home at the same dangerous rate of knots, as they told me later. To cap it all, a journey that usually costs us £3.50 cost £5.10!

Various comments were made to this driver about his speed, but to no avail, he either did not understand what we were saying or was ignoring us. At the end of the journey he did, following protestations say "oh, did you think I was driving too fast".

To be very serious though, this driver was driving too fast, in a dangerous manner, and had no thought, concern or care for his passengers, other road users or pedestrians. We felt like we were just inconveniencing him whilst he made his money.

We have informed his taxi company, the council and will follow this up to the end. But I personally feel that if this is an example of just one of our taxi drivers then unfortunately, the majority of good ones have to pay the price, and the further test and regulations should, and must be brought in.

Harry Metcalfe,

Moorview Way, Skipton

SIR - As a fellow recipient of treatment at HODU (Haematology and Oncology Day Unit at Airedale), I have read Nick Carter's reports 'Diary of a cancer patient' with a knowing eye.

I wish him well, but must confess to a recurring frustration at his failure to convey the excellence of the service on offer there.

The atmosphere is welcoming and friendly and the staff are expert, always caring and positive. There's always the chemo, of course, and the occasional medical procedure, but my visits there have been a pleasure. Chatting with other patients, I know they are similarly impressed. Well done, Hodu. You are brilliant.

Helen Handley,

Eshton Road Gargrave.

SIR - In the Craven Herald of February 11 (page 5, In Brief): Cookies help appeal.

Please! Biscuits not cookies. Keep your newspaper British at all costs - or else all is lost.

T Hall,

Haw Park, Embsay.

SIR - The Friends of Airedale Hospital social section, which holds its meetings each fortnight, is finding it difficult to form next year's programme.

They need entertainers or an entertainer to give an hour of their time from 10.30am-11.30am Saturday mornings to patients.

If anyone can help us to keep our programme filled will they please phone Charles Clarkson on 01535 652061.

Margaret Moorhouse,

Chairman,

Friends of Airedale Hospital.

SIR - Seeing local Pendle councillors celebrating the news that the area is to receive a million pounds with the possibility of a further four-million pounds, may we, the public have a say on what it is spent on and not just for the councillors to fund their own pet projects.

May I suggest that the money for West Craven spent on CCTV is spent sensibly - buying one camera that takes a photo where the image is clearly identified as opposed to buying several cheaper cameras which take an image that I defy anyone to identify, is a waste of money.

In modern times technology is so good a camera 150 miles in space can take a photo of a car tax disc that can be clearly read - this should not be too difficult should it?

Don't waste this money on rubbish. One small point, would councillor Whipp care to tell us where the money came from that bought the champagne?

One more point, shouldn't the councillors be finding ways to bring people to the town to shop and spend money, not drive them away, which is what the totally unnecessary disc parking is doing. What was the problem before? If it isn't broken why mend it? Just another way of persecuting the car owner.

A few short years ago people may remember I wrote a letter to the paper and Pendle Council when it was published that the old Palace Cinema was going to be demolished - that it would be better for the vacant land to be used for a service area for Healds supermarket, Garlicks, Skipton Building Society and off licence. This would keep Church Street congestion free, and that if houses were built Church Street would be gridlocked as it was at the time, and still is today, when deliveries are made.

The houses were built, Church Street is gridlocked at times and will be forever: Amen! Another good example of university educated brain power up against the brains of a delivery driver which I was at the time. I came across on a daily basis, nationwide, places where disc parking has had to be introduced because of bad town planning by the likes of inexperienced councillors.

With a little careful thinking great deeds can be accomplished.

Pete Gardiner

Ethel Street, Barnoldswick.