In some countries, the answer would be a military coup, but we tried the military dictatorship a long time ago and found it wanting.

Part of a solution might perhaps be in the selection of our representatives.

Currently, the job of MP is the only one for which one needs neither experience nor ability. Should prospective MPs be required to go through some form of examination and aptitude test, law-making maybe improved as a consequence.

That way at least the Prime Minister would once more revert to being a negotiator rather than the virtual dictator which he has recently become.

On the other hand, I have far more respect for the common sense of the average voter than I have for MPs who retain utter confidence in the rightness of their decisions, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Politicians have shown quite clearly that they are very frightened of the referendum – because it is as likely as not that the public will give the "wrong" reply, as the only opportunity to hit back at the rulers.

Switzerland (which had the great good sense to stay out of two World Wars and the EU) and California use referenda quite freely in order to respond to the wishes of their populations, and what democrat could possibly object to that?

Surely it would be worth a try? Is there any better idea, or are we by now too lacking in courage or conviction to contemplate change?

Do we prefer to moan and groan about things, because actually to do something would involve both thought and effort?


Recklessness as tractors sped to work


From: Paul Gosney, Main Street, Bishop Monkton, Harrogate.

I HAVE lived in the small village of Bishop Monkton near Ripon for 26 years. One evening last week, local contractors moved in to harvest forage wheat for a local dairy farmer complete with large tractors and trailers speeding through the centre of the village from field to farm and back.

On route, these tractors, driven by young men, needed to pass one of the local pubs, situated on a T junction, where early evening customers were sitting outside enjoying a beverage.

The tractor drivers seemed to be playing to the audience, the more people watching and commenting among themselves on the speed and the danger these tractors were posing, the faster they attempted to negotiate the junction. They would have been more at home at Silverstone.

The pub landlord phoned the contractor to express our concerns only to be asked if he had seen the weather forecast, told he must be "one of those townies" then the phone was put down on him.

I have been involved in farming for 45 years, I understand that harvesting is dependent on weather "windows".

However, this does not excuse their recklessness. To slow down would not have delayed the tractors by one minute arriving at either field or farm, but would have meant the village was a safer place.

Alternatives for drivers

From: Jeff Pearey, Director – Head of Leeds Office, Jones Lang LaSalle, St Paul's House, Park Square, Leeds.

I REFER to your article (Yorkshire Post, July 16) "Congestion cash could herald road charging" about the prospect of road congestion charging in Leeds following the successful bid by local city transport chiefs for Government money to research ways of cutting traffic.

Like any other car-borne commuter, I would be concerned about road
charging in the absence of investment in other travel services.

And if our cities like Leeds gets C-Charging ahead of other regional centres (Manchester is having a public referendum; Edinburgh came close; Cambridge was considering it), this could be detrimental to Yorkshire's competitiveness in the longer term.

Motorists must have a genuine alternative if we are to tackle road congestion. The long term growth of the city region is dependant on the population having access to a first class public transport system.

Investment in our public transport is critical, but previous disappointments with initiatives such as the Supertram illustrate that this is a delicate matter that will require careful exploration and consideration, before any long term decisions are made.

Sold short by the pubs

From: M Toft, Windsor Avenue, Silsden.

WITH regard to selling beer in metric glasses (Yorkshire Post, August 7) readers may have noticed that in more and more pubs beer drinkers are getting about 10 per cent less in their glass, because of the big heads that landlords are putting on to every pint.

Since a pint is 568ml, that means drinkers are getting just 500ml, half a litre. A nice perk, but illegal, of course. Unofficial metrication, and of course the landlord still takes the money for a pint. This is happening even in London, where traditionally the beer should be flat. Perhaps the Campaign for Real Ale should be worrying about this rather than what the price of a pint may or may not be in 2012.

I do seem to remember that Tony Blair's 1997 manifesto promised pint glasses marked with a line. Guaranteeing 100 per cent liquid, excluding the froth head. Another Labour broken promise.

Unhealthy regulation

From: Dr Bob Heys, Bar Lane, Ripponden, Sowerby Bridge.

MEMBERS of the public in Yorkshire and elsewhere, are currently being urged by the Department of Health to volunteer for service on the Local Involvement Networks (LINKS) now being established to replace the NHS monitoring and advisory services formerly provided by the recently abolished Patient and Public Involvement in Heath (PPIH) Forums.

Public spirited individuals thinking of responding to such appeals should bear in mind that, as I discovered to my cost as a PPIH Forum chairman, membership of such "public authorities" will debar them from the help and support of the Ombudsman service should they have cause for complaint regarding the activities of their local NHS Trust.

This insidious regulation should surely be withdrawn.