Why are councillors so defensive? (From Wharfedale Observer)

Why are councillors so defensive?

10:56am Thursday 27th September 2007

• Print
• Email
• Share

SIR, - Wharfemeadows Action Group has from the start of the campaign stated clearly that its aim was to channel the opposition to the fencing plans of Leeds City Council through our elected representatives.

From the very beginning we have worked with and through many elected members at all levels and across all parties. That is what democracy is about.

Democracy also has to take account of the fact that mistakes can occur because of human judgments. That is why there have to be checks, controls and balances built in to an effective council system.

WAG has learned that our councillors do not always seem to understand the system they are part of. WAG has had to do its own research and get its information from officers working within the LCC's own Governance and Democratic Services department. We have even had to inform our elected members occasionally how these processes actually work.

Elected members should therefore be listening to what WAG is asking of them and not dismissing our research by saying they do not feel it is appropriate'. Who are they to decide for their electorate (on which they depend) what is and is not appropriate regarding these checks, controls and balances?

The request we made was for the LCC Scrutiny Board to be supported in its recommendation. We asked, quite reasonably, for a proper debate on the matter in the City Council chamber. This is not revolutionary.

WAG believes that this democratic process should be supported to protect the integrity of the fence inquiry. Many people are worried that if the fence is erected it will never be removed, whatever the result of the inquiry.

Others are concerned that if the fencing goes ahead, the inquiry will lose its impetus completely and will be merely a token exercise (like the so-called consultation' earlier this year). The issue should be debated at a full council meeting.

The debate would give the council its only opportunity to decide whether to support its Scrutiny Board's recommendation or not. It is as simple and as appropriate' as that. A reasonable outcome would be that the fence installation plans would be suspended (except for the area by the weir and children's playground).

Councillors Campbell and Downes appear to have no confidence in this democratic process. If this is the case, what on earth are they doing on the council? They say they support' WAG's position yet are not willing to use the proper council procedures to protect the inquiry which they have also fully supported'. They say a debate would be inappropriate' and ineffectual'. When the chips are down their heads have gone down.

We are not prepared to lie down and let the LCC Executive Board trample over all reasonable objections; this is neither democratic nor reasonable. That's why the people of Otley are so disgusted with the City Council. It's our money they are wasting, £165,000 to be precise.

WAG is encouraged by the Scrutiny Board's clear determination to get to the bottom of all this. WAG, however, witnessed the Scrutiny Board's recommendations being brushed aside in an ignorant and arrogant manner at the LCC Executive Board meeting on August 22.

The Joint Leader of Leeds City Council (Coun Carter) even referred to those opposing the fencing as Otley Town Council and Uncle Tom Cobley'. So much for the respect shown to the people of Otley by the dysfunctional leadership of the ruling coalition in Leeds Civic Hall.

Please be assured that WAG will continue this campaign until every democratic option available has been used. We would have preferred to have done this with the support of our elected representatives on the city council. We will continue without them. That is their choice.

WAG is, of course, most appreciative of the continuing support of Otley Town Council, our Member of Parliament Greg Mulholland and the 6,136 sensible people who are prepared to stand up and be counted.

Linda Lukats, Sylvia Reid & Tony Hartigan Wharfemeadows Action Group

Political football

Sir, Through your columns, I would like to respond to Lib Dem Councillor Millie Stott who asked for my views on a ban of quarry lorry movements through Otley.

She intimates that if I do not agree with her then I am against the people of Otley. This is utter rubbish.

Throughout my campaign I have indicated that if elected next year I will work for the best interests of Otley and Yeadon.

This does not mean however, that I will do it do the detriment of our neighbours, who would suffer through any selfish actions on our part. She should know by now that for every action there is a consequence.

Otley has a problem with these lorries, and there is no simple solution.

If all parties accept Mr Mulholland's arrogant unilateral lorry ban then the additional cost to the aggregate trade would price it out of the market and the traffic would stop.

End of problem . . . . .. Or is it?

Leeds has a requirement to build almost 4,000 new houses each year. The stone has to be shipped in from somewhere and currently it comes from Greenhow, near Pateley Bridge. The demand for aggregate would still be there and another source would have to be found.

Leeds has already formally identified the huge Midgely Farm site on Pool Road close to Moor Road as the major source of aggregates to feed the city's needs in the years to come.

It is only a matter of time before a planning application is received and since the principle of extraction has already been agreed we will inevitably be faced with major new HGV traffic in and around our town once supplies from North Yorkshire dry up.

I could not support this for Otley, and with their current track record our city councillors would not even notice a planning application being submitted.

Mr Mulholland's big plan is a blatant attempt to use Otley as a political football. He would blame Conservative North Yorkshire County Council for not accepting his scheme. He arrogantly urges NYCC to accept binding, independent arbitration. The question is, would he, if it went against us?

He knows that following what would be an expensive hearing, the Traffic Commissioners would never accept a unilateral lorry ban as proposed.

A couple of years ago the parties involved including Hansons came up with an agreed compromise scheme which worked well whereby all quarry related traffic was required to avoid Otley on its return journey thus reducing the number of HGVs along Billams Hill.

The objectors were not satisfied with this, which leaves the voluntary agreement in limbo.

NYCC were happy with this compromise - although, notably every single Harrogate County Councillor (100per cent Lib Dem) said that the council had been too soft and that the whole lot should go through Otley.

The only way to solve this problem is to work together to come to another compromise agreement to reduce the quarry lorry movements through our town.

Mr Mulholland can help here - he should challenge Phil Willis, the Liberal Harrogate MP to give us his views on behalf of Harrogate residents.

Ken Creek Conservative Candidate Otley and Yeadon Ward 33 Milner Bank, Otley

Get on track with green alternatives

SIR, - I wish Greg Mulholland MP success. However, there are many other green solutions to the traffic situation which North Yorkshire could implement such as: 1 Direct all lorries to Skipton where the loads could be transferred to canal barge.

2 Direct all lorries to Threshfield where the loads could be transferred to freight trains.

3 Direct all lorries to Bolton Abbey where the loads could be transferred to freight trains, the Yorkshire Dales Railway would be glad of the increased revenue.

4 Direct all lorries to the railway at Harrogate where again the loads could be transferred to freight trains.

5. Re-open the Pateley Bridge to Harrogate railway. This would involve a short journey by road to Pateley Bridge but the valley may get a passenger train service as a spin off.

Readers may not be aware that the Swiss do not tolerate heavy lorries, where the railway exists, they have to travel piggy-back fashion on a railway flat car, the lorry drivers travelling in safety, comfort and speed in a railway coach.

Benefits are much less road damage and fewer accidents, no need to import expensive oil fuel. Swiss railways are powered by green hydroelectricity.

C V Barton Hasley Road, Burley-in-Wharfedale.

• Print
• Email
• Share