Possible chance to relax bus subsidy proposals?

You will remember that the council was proposing to withdraw the whole of the bus subsidy for the Pride of the Dales Bus Service 74, which runs between Ilkley and Grassington, and replace it with a Dial-a-Ride service.

It was also proposing to reduce the subsidy for the Pride of the Dales Bus Service 72 which runs between Skipton and Grassington from 12 to eight journeys per day and between Grassington and Buckden from seven to four journeys per day.

The public consultation has now closed. Thank you to everyone who took the trouble to contact the council on this matter. The council received 2,138 submissions from businesses, organisations and members of the public, including 130 specifically regarding the proposals for Wharfedale. A paper was prepared for NYCC’s Transport, Economy and Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee which was held on December 19 2013.

The majority of the proposals for cuts to bus services are largely unchanged. However, the proposals that went to the Committee for the Pride of the Dales Bus Service 74 between Ilkley and Grassington have now been revised to just a reduction in the bus subsidy which would allow three return journeys per day to be funded.

The paper does not provide details of the timetable for such a service, so whilst this change of heart is welcome, it is difficult to judge whether this level of service will meet the needs of users and the proposal still represents a significant reduction when compared to the current timetable of five return journeys per day.

It is interesting to note that the proposed overall package of measures to reduce the bus subsidy is estimated to achieve annual savings of £2m – far deeper and harsher than the Council’s original target of £1.1m.

So there should be an opportunity for NYCC to relax their proposals – to listen to their constituents, bus users, businesses and organisations – and still meet their budget targets. And if we are not happy we need to let them know – even if the consultation period is now over!

According to the NYCC website final recommendation and proposals are planned for publication on January 7. A copy of the committee paper can also be found on www.dalesbus.org.

Jan Stallworthy, Wharfedale Court, Ilkley

Towpath route surfacing could reduce cycle use

While I support the idea of cycle lanes/routes to promote safer cycling into towns (I possess two road bikes) the proposed cycle route between Leeds and Bradford is more likely to reduce the number of people cycling.

This is because the plan includes covering the towpath of the Leeds-Liverpool canal with Tarmac all the way from Leeds to Shipley.

This stretch of towpath is already used by hundreds of cyclists everyday because it provides an off-road (non-Tarmac) alternative for people with All Terrain Bikes (ATBs) and Mountain Bikes (MTBs). Sales of cycles show that the majority of bicycles sold now are ATBs and MTBs rather than road bikes.

While a few short sections of the towpath are difficult for using a road bike on, these can be improved/repaired using man-made materials. (I have helped lay/repair wheelchair access tracks and bridleways for various countryside groups and have always used natural materials).

Covering this extensive stretch of towpath with Tarmac will cost millions at a time when local governments are facing savage cuts to their budgets and a government block on £1bn to fund major transport projects.

Using natural materials to improve the towpath could be done at a fraction of the cost.

If local authorities have got millions to spend on Tarmac, why not use it to fill in potholes on the hundreds of quiet back-roads so cyclists can ride safely throughout the area rather than spending this money on just one route that is already safe for cycling?

Laying Tarmac along this stretch of towpath will also ruin it for the thousands of people who use it for off-road walking and running every week.

Ironically The Canals and Rivers Trust – who are carrying out the re-surfacing – suggested people should use the canal towpath for walking over the festive period. Hypocrisy!

To avoid opposition to this scheme the Public Consultation was held a week before Christmas and was poorly advertised. Since the Canals and Rivers Trust had already decided how they were going to proceed with this work the ‘consultation’ was a sham.

The work, which is due to begin in the New Year, should be halted until the public have a proper chance to air their views.

Martin Phillips, Tinshill Lane, Cookridge

Paying over the odds for outdated technological toy

I wanted to respond to an article published in your newspaper about the proposed iPads at Prince Henry’s Grammar School in Otley.

I would encourage Nick Girling to visit the parents’ forum on Facebook to get a full picture of why parents feel so against this scheme. There isn’t space here to cover the articulate, well-considered thoughts being expressed by many parents on the page.

I would also welcome his views – after all the Facebook page is a parents’ forum where open, healthy, informed debate is happening, something that is needed to make informed decisions: - facebook.com/groups/218781794966618/ I also wonder just how much educational experience Nick Girling actually has. As a long-standing university lecturer in this area, I must disagree that not giving students iPad will ‘hold them back’.

In my experience, with university students, I’m constantly trying to get them to do the ground work before they begin to play with the technology. I can also assure you that my children will view the new iPad as toys first and occasionally do some ‘homework’ with them.

Regarding the cost, again, many well-reasoned comments have been given on the Facebook page, but simply expecting parents to pay well over the odds for what is essentially an outdated technological toy isn’t something that will offer our children much educational value.

It’s a well-marketed gimmick (professionally speaking) – there are many cheaper more advanced alternatives, but a proper debate needs to be had and parents need to know the facts before they make any decisions.

I also feel saddened by his disregard towards the cost. Many parents have two children and £20 a month is a substantial amount of money, especially in our current economic times.

Not everybody can afford this, which is why it is my belief that the vast majority of parents (who haven’t sent forms back) are unsure about the scheme.

Please do visit the Facebook page if you need more information and reasoned respectful debate. But please do consider it a forum for all things PHGS related – I didn’t just set it up to campaign against the introduction of the iPads, but that is the first topic of conversation.

Jason Theaker, Otley

Thanks for box of goodies from Good Neighbours

May I, through your newspaper, say thank you for the lovely box of goodies, packed and delivered by the ‘Good Neighbours’. It was a lovely surprise. Thank you also to the sponsors for making this possible.

May I also say thank you to the band of volunteers who produce the ‘Talking Books’, giving people like myself who are visually impaired a way of ‘reading’ your paper, with your very kind permission.

Thank you to all, it is very much appreciated.

Mavis Gurton, Queens Road, Ilkley

Kerb has been dropped at the most dangerous place

Did your parents ever tell you not to cross the road on a blind bend?

Evidently some people at the Highways or Council weren’t told. For some strange reason someone has dropped the kerb at the curve of the bend to Ben Rhydding Train Station.

This is probably the most dangerous place you could have put it, and even more so for someone in a wheelchair or with pram. Mad!

David Walker, Hangingstone Road, Ilkley