Letters to the Editor

still locked in battle over hut

Sir:- I feel it necessary to write on behalf of our Parish Council to explain to village residents the up to date position with our scout leaders, following Martin Ellis's letter last week.

Mr Ellis seems to have avoided two relevant facts:-

1 He himself is a member of Addingham Parish Council and if in doubt of any fact should surely have asked.

2 Far more importantly the Scouts were offered alternative accommodation i.e. the youth centre, but they have failed to indicate why this may not be acceptable. In fact at a recent meeting Mr Ellis supported the council and the proposed move.

To clarify. In February 2003 prior to the public announcement of a likely medical centre, I contacted the Scouts (Mr Ellis) offering them the Youth Centre as an alternative venue. They actually visited the premises in late May 2003. By October we (the Parish Council) had heard nothing officially from them despite several requests. Eventually, after further requests, a meeting took place in late January 2004 and it was left that the Scouts would re-consider their position and advise us of any needs. Again after months of non-communication, and in complete frustration, we wrote giving them a notice of intention to terminate the lease on the premises. This was purely to create a reaction from the Scout management.

In fairness it has.

Maybe a letter to the Parish Council rather than to the press may have been more beneficial to the Scout movement, as today we are still awaiting an official response.

When I was young the Scout moto was 'be prepared' now it seems to be 'bury your head in the sand and wait.'

Gordon Campbell,

Chairman,

Addingham Parish Council

Hear us out

Sir:- As someone who has been involved with the scout movement in the village since 1972 I would like to make the following points.

In 1972 the scouts used the then youth club as a meeting room.

Along with John Cumberland, at the time group scout leader, we decided that sharing a building did not allow us to conduct scout and cub activities as we would like. With the help of the then parish council, in letting us have a nominal lease on the present site, various donations and grants we built the present head-quarters.

A few months ago I attended a meeting of the scout committee where we were informed in strictest confidence that a medical centre was proposed for the site, and we would have to move.

We agreed in principal that we could not oppose the plan and we would look at the youth centre as a temporary home.

The next week, despite the supposed secrecy, an article appeared in the Gazette stating we had agreed to move to the youth centre as a permanent solution. This was not the case.

When we explained to the parish council that the youth centre was not a suitable permanent solution because we needed to leave in place displays, teaching and information posters, art and craftwork etc.

This was represented at the council as the leaders could not be bothered to clear up after themselves, an insult I feel, to the people who give their time voluntarily.

The committee also pointed out that we needed storage space for the large amounts of camping equipment etc. that the group own.

In addition the leaders also felt that the building was too big and impersonal for the many quite young children in the group.

The committee then met the parish council and explained that we did not feel we should give up a £100,000 facility without investigating the possibilities of having a replacement building provided by the commercial company who are building the centre and getting the land at a nominal price compared to other similar projects.

The council agreed to look into this, then criticised us heavily at their next meeting and in the press.

I would like to point out that some 60 children a week (with a waiting list) enjoy the benefits of the troop and at a time when everyone is concerned about the lack of facilities and exercise for young children the scouts, cubs and beavers should not be dismissed lightly.

I feel we have been badly represented in the press by the parish council.

M J Pearce,

88 Main Street,

Addingham.

Don't do it

SIR, - I do hope that people will think hard and long at any proposals to turn the Grove into a one-way thoroughfare. The consequences of such a proposal would be very far reaching.

1 A greater number of vehicles (from east to west under the proposals raised on your front page last week) would use residential areas stretching from Margerison Road, Clifton, Ben Rhydding Road, Crossbeck, Cowpasture, across Wells Road, Parish Ghyll Drive, Victoria Avenue and many others.

2 Shops along the Grove from at least W H Smith westwards and down Cunliffe Road would suffer loss of trade which can be ill-afforded given the rates on the Grove.

3 All traffic that feeds down Riddings Road would be pushed into the busiest site at the top of Brook Street leading to more frequent tailbacks to the traffic lights.

4 Since the further reduction of car parking spaces one already traverses circuits twice or more and one-way would exacerbate this.

5 The many elderly residents in town will find it even harder to access shops leading to diminishing trade.

6 One-way circuits in small towns invariably drag traffic unnecessarily into other areas.

I totally agree with Coun Martin Smith that the current situation both keeps shopping and through traffic away from residential areas and at the same time effectively slows it down.

BARBARA J CUSSONS (Mrs)

4, Curly Hill,

Ilkley

Time for audit

SIR, - Conservatives have renewed calls for an independent audit of speed cameras after the publication of new statistics showing mixed results.

The results of a study released by the Department of Transport show that while the overall number of fatalities following the installation of cameras were down 40per cent - roughly a hundred people a year - at sections of road and traffic lights covered by cameras, a quarter of cameras had made no difference to accident rates.

Of 1,793 sites examined, 384 registered an increase in the number of people killed or seriously injured in the year following the installation of cameras.

West Yorkshire was reported to be near the top of the list of areas with the highest proportion of questionable camera sitings. This is hardly surprising if we consider, for example, the five new speed cameras recently sited on Halifax Road, heading out of Keighley.

The survey also showed that income from camera fines was £68.8 million in 2002-03 and that after the deduction of £54.3 million in operating costs, the Treasury received a windfall of £14.6 million. An earlier report by the Home Office showed 1,411,300 motorists were caught by speed cameras in 2002 - a fivefold increase since the introduction of cameras in 1996.

These are very disturbing figures. While Conserv-atives welcome the reduction in fatal accidents attributed to well-placed cameras, the alarming increase in deaths and serious injuries at many other sites is a matter of serious public concern.

Earlier this year ministers rejected calls for a review of camera sites. These latest statistics highlight the human cost of such complacency.

Robert Collinson

Conservative

Parliamentary Candidate for Ilkley

Driver check

Sir:- Your readers may be interested in the following:

Every driver should drive to the best of their ability every time that they use the roads and should try to improve their driving skills, but finding out how to do this can be difficult.

The West Yorkshire Group of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) are holding an open evening at Otley Police Station on Monday, July 19. Drivers can come along anytime between 7.30pm and 9pm to talk to members of the group and have a free assessment of their driving with one of the group tutors. These include former police officers and driving instructors.

hey will go out with you in your own vehicle for about 20 minutes and give a de-brief with constructive advice on how to improve your driving.

Bookings are not required but further information, if required, is available on 01535 642007 or frank@drive2000.org.uk

Frank Parkin

Main Street,

Haworth

Don't do it

SIR, - I feel the provocative tone of your story "Barrier plan to prevent

'invasion' by gipsies" is highly inappropriate and will only serve to raise

tension and incite hatred against the Romany people who visit Ilkley every

year. These people have been coming to Ilkley and camping in the same spot

for many generations. Longer, indeed, than many of Ilkley's current

residents have lived here, and certainly for longer than the Ilkley and

District Angling Association have owned the land.

Shouldn't the people of Ilkley be extending the arm of friendship and work

together to resolve any differences they may have with the Romany community

who share the use of this land, instead of building a wall to keep them out?

As a result of the construction of the 'bund' all of Ilkley's residents will

have their access to this stretch of land limited. Talk about cutting of

your nose to spite your face! Those responsible for this decision should hang their heads in shame.

Bryn Redman

Tivoli Place,

Ilkley

Sir:- The Grove gets a new pavement, new lighting and new trees the fountain at the top of Brook Street gets re-paved, and all the flower beds are spruced up ready for Ilkley in Bloom inspectors.

Has nobody noticed the disgraceful condition of the tourist map at the top of Brook Street near the pedestrian crossing. It has been unreadable for many many months and now some'ne has bro'en the glass 'protecting' the map.

J.G. Ridley,

Address supplied

Thank you

Sir:- We would like to thank everyone who braved the elements and came to our garden sale last Sunday and contributed so generously to the Macmillan Yorkshire Dales appeal. It aims to raise £450,000 to provide much needed specialist cancer services for local people.

We raised over £500 on the day and there are still more plants left in the garden.

Chris and John Martinez

Denton Road,

Ilkley