Ilkley Parish Council's decision astonishing when families in austerity

Public expenditure has been savagely slashed in the Bradford District and the district council forced to make difficult decisions about spending on services.

The Coalition Government has made it crystal-clear that excessive local tax rises will not be tolerated.

In response to these realities our out-of-touch parish councillors believe that Ilkley taxpayers should spend £20,000 on welcoming the Tour de France in July. Parish Chair and Conservative district councillors will be well aware that Bradford Council are already contributing a significant amount of money to support this event.

Money for the parish precept is collected from the households of Ilkley for the benefit of the households of Ilkley, to enhance services within the town. Lavishing 10 per cent of the annual budget on a one-day event does not satisfy this requirement.

Ilkley Parish Council has raised the precept by 48 per cent since 2011 whilst retaining a large reserve.

Spending decisions are made solely by them and without consultation with the electorate. This out-of-date and out-of- touch mentality does a disservice to the people of the town.

More of this precept should be spent on local initiatives and supporting vital services that can no longer be wholly financed by the district council.

The Conservative-led Parish Council claims to believe in ‘localism’ yet persistently fails to involve Ilkley householders in decisions about how the precept should be spent.

Edward Wild, Ilkley

Spending to increase the quality of life for residents

Richard Reed criticises the decision by the Ilkley Parish Council to increase its precept by 22 per cent (letters page, February 13).

As Mr Reed points out, the Parish Council is free from the restrictions imposed by the Government on spending by local authorities. So the Ilkley Parish Council can remedy some of the problems caused by the compulsory cuts in Bradford Council spending.

It is not difficult to think of examples. The town and its visitors would greatly benefit from re-opening the public toilets opposite the station, surely a must for a tourist town. There is a desperate need to maintain the popular paths up Heber’s Ghyll and from the paddling pool to the White Wells. Intervention by the Parish Council could ensure the long-term survival of the Manor House.

Such spending would greatly improve the quality of life of Ilkley residents and encourage the visitors who are the lifeblood of the town. Mr Reed asserts that the clubs and societies subsidised by the Parish Council are well able to raise money themselves. If so, the money they receive could very usefully be diverted elsewhere.

Sir Rodney Brooke, Ilkley

The ‘bedroom tax’ shows contempt for constituents

I was interested to read that local MP Kris Hopkins is opposed to Ilkley Parish Council’s proposed precept increase, citing “pressures on people’s pockets”.

Presumably he believes the good people of Ilkley are so poverty-stricken as to be unable to afford the crushing burden of an extra 8p per household per week.

In his capacity as Undersecretary of State for Housing, Mr Hopkins is partly responsible for overseeing the introduction of the changes to the housing benefit system known as the “bedroom tax”, which will inflict an extra burden of £14 per week on anybody in receipt of the benefit who lives in a home with a spare bedroom.

Amongst the hardest hit by this levy are disabled people who, being forced to live in specially adapted housing, are unable to move into smaller accommodation.

This week, proposals to exempt such people from the charge were opposed by Mr Hopkins, with the callous remark that these people simply “need to change their ways” with regard to how they spend their money.

If an increase of 8p-per-week in Ilkley’s precept demonstrates “contempt for local residents”, as Mr Hopkins states, then I dread to imagine the degree of contempt in which he holds the many thousands of people who constitute the poorest and most vulnerable in our society and upon whom he and his government are currently intent on inflicting further misery.

Andrew Scull, Main Street, Addingham

Do Ilkley people realise the disruption Tour brings?

I am utterly amazed at Ilkley Council’s 22 per cent (tax) increase plans. I have to agree with both Councillor Sandy MacPhearson and MP Kris Hopkins’ comments.

Whilst I agree the Tour is a major event, how can the council justify £20,000 on the Tour unless it is to compensate businesses which are going to lose heavily by the fact that Ilkley will be turned into a cul-de-sac for a day – road closures from 7am to 3pm, says Leeds City Council.

Does anyone know how many people in Ilkley realise how much disruption there will be? From 7am to 3pm you will be able to use the Moor Road to go eastwards but from Ilkley westwards will be impossible, unless you consider the Beamsley road a possibility?

The town will be split in two, in addition to becoming a cul-de-sac.

I for one do not welcome the Tour and, probably will be getting out the previous day and going to a B&B somewhere well away from the Tour. So, yes, someone will benefit from the Tour from my pocket, but not Ilkley. Last year we had the misfortune to be on holiday in the Lake District when the Tour of Britain passed through, so we have first-hand experience of the inconvenience of the Lakes being split into two halves.

Peter Miller, Ilkley

That is why your council tax doubled under Labour

According to the The X-Files ‘the truth is out there’ and so far as the local Labour Party is concerned, at last it is. Last week Councillor Carl Morris, in reply to my Town Council Budget letter, let it out when he said ‘The truth is that the Labour Party believes in people making a little bit of an extra contribution’.

So there we have it, good old-fashioned ‘tax and spend’ and it’s why your council tax more than doubled under the last Labour government. It is why this council spends 71 per cent (£247,000) of its budget (£345,000) or 93 per cent of your precept (£265,000) on itself.

Coun Morris also complained that I play politics. If holding a ‘governing’ party to account on behalf of residents by questioning and challenging its spending and policies is playing politics than I’m afraid I plead guilty. After all, as they say, ‘to govern is to choose’ and I just happen to think Otley Labour has chosen its priorities poorly.

Finally, the point (lost completely on Coun Morris) about highlighting the failures of overspending on offices and toilets and the reduced income from those toilets isn’t a criticism of the success or other of the offices or the toilets, but a criticism on his and Labour’s failure to show any sort of planning acumen or financial control. Carl, it’s not about votes, it’s about competency!

The reason this all matters is because before this council, and indeed this town, is the looming potential refurbishment of the Civic Centre, with its complicated conversion, its vast costs and the need to have a council that can deliver on quality, on budget and on time. To the Labour group on the Town Council I ask, for the sake of our town now and in the future I hope you know what you’re doing. I have yet to see any evidence that you do.

Coun Sandy, Lay Otley & Yeadon – Leeds City Council and Otley Town Councillor – Danefield Ward

Now is time to attract more visitors and boost economy

Born and bred in Otley and as a regular visitor I have seen the town come and go over the years, and in recent times I am pleased to think there has been a steady regeneration.

The old market town ambience is still there, with regular markets and the infrastructure for good shops, there is a selection of supermarkets, and a selection of new and revamped pubs into which customers are creeping back.

Now is the time to attract more visitors and give a fragile economy a boost.

What is it that would attract visitors to Otley – the river and its environs, of course! Not as it is now, with a scruffy auction site, a closed café in the shadow of a scruffy old school building, a scruffy old swimming pool with scruff all around.

I read in your paper that the auction site is for sale and that Dunnie’s Cafe is to become a care home.

I’d like to read that the plans are to redevelop the auction site into a swimming pool with visitor car park, the old café and school into a new café and care complex (if care is what you need), the old swimming pool area into something attractive and desirable, and perhaps even to have boats on the river – but I don’t suppose I will!

With a million or so potential trippers and spenders just over 10 miles away you would think someone would see the opportunity.

Chris Graville, Leadhall Lane, Harrogate

If they’re legal tender, why are coins not accepted?

I have found parking meters in more than one county which will not accept the new 10p coins. Bradford Council has informed me that “there was a faulty batch manufactured in 2012”.

As these coins are legal tender, I failed to see why they are not accepted and wrote to the Royal Mint. Their reply included the following information: “(The coins) were initially due for introduction in January 2011 but, after consultation with the vending industry, the Economic Secretary took the decision to defer the introduction of the new nickel plated steel 5p and 10p coins to January 2012. The composition of the coins has changed and the parking company would have been fully aware of this. The vending industry had 18 months’ notice.

The Royal Mint recommended that machines are calibrated to wider tolerances to avoid any reocurrences.”

You will note that there was no reference to any “faulty batch”.

Members of the public are faced with a dilemma if they find themselves with no access to a ‘correct’ coin. They can either underpay – and run the risk of a hefty fine – or overpay. In either case, the relevant council wins! Can anyone offer a solution that is fair to all?

Jean Wilson, Ilkley

Increasingly dispirited about amount of dog excrement

I wouldn’t want to be seen as some obsessive, but I am getting increasingly dispirited about the amount of dog excrement on the pavements of Otley (and doubtless other places as well). For a while it seemed that dog owners were becoming more responsible; collecting their detritus and getting rid of it in the many bins provided for this very purpose. As well as spreading disease, dog faeces is also unpleasant to clean up when it is inevitably walked indoors by unsuspecting family members. I am not sure what, if anything, writing to the local paper will achieve apart from perhaps encouraging dog owners to consider their behaviour and clean up after themselves.

Francis Denning, Cambridge Terrace, Otley