LIBERAL Democrat MP Greg Mulholland and Tory MP Philip Davies both worked in marketing before becoming MPs. You would expect then that less than 12 months after becoming MPs they would still have a basic grasp of the fundamentals of their profession.
Unfortunately, both appear to be keener on providing misleading soundbites rather than using their professional expertise for the benefit of the public.
Their ridiculous attack on the Department for Transport for investing in evaluating its communications strategy by measuring media coverage (Yorkshire Post, December 5) shows why politicians are held in such low esteem. As MPs, they have a duty to ensure that taxpayers' money is being spent effectively. Instead of using their professional expertise to provide informed comment, they have both jumped on to a populist bandwagon to mislead the electorate.
As a professional public relations consultant I, like every other taxpayer, would be most alarmed if money was being squandered on a communications campaign that was not being monitored and evaluated in order to assess how it can be improved to deliver more cost-effective results.
The Department for Transport has a duty to inform, listen to and consult with the public. That's what we all expect. We should also expect them to deliver value for money and to spend taxpayers' money effectively.
Evaluating media coverage is common practice throughout private business and the public sector. The Department for Transport is simply conducting its business in a professional manner.
Greg Mulholland criticises the Government's "obsession with spin" at the same time as proving, by his misleading comments, that he is master of the art of spin.
Sadly, both Mulholland
and Davies are more
interested in scoring cheap political points rather than contributing intelligently to the debate and concentrating on improving transport in Yorkshire.

Hospital's services under threat
From: Mrs B Kilby, Mere View Avenue, Hornsea.
HAVING attended another so-called public consultation meeting in Hornsea, at the Floral Hall, I am now even more convinced that the Yorkshire, Wolds and Coast Primary Care Trust is an expensive mistake.
The months of "consultation" are now nearly over, we have already had 22 beds in our highly-thought-of community cottage hospital cut down to 12, causing five cases to be turned away, and now we are threatened with loss of our Minor Injuries Unit.
No assurance has ever been given to this community that we will not lose this vital service –
a war memorial hospital built and paid for by public subscription to provide an essential resource for community health needs.
We were told at this meeting that the changes were not about money but about improving standards of clinical efficiency, and fostering closer integration between the community and services.
Hornsea has no A roads, it is bordered by the North Sea on one side, and has a rural hinterland of isolated villages. It does not need to be told that it should lose its Minor Injuries Unit in favour of dedicated excellent units elsewhere.
Our ambulance service is already overstretched for serious cases. No ambulance is based now in Hornsea. We also have an above-average number of elderly residents. It is a curious way of improving clinical facilities by removing them altogether.
Moreover, the Primary Care Trust is still basing its proposals on a meaningless set of statistics, ie, 12,500 patients registered with the local surgery.
Actually, hundreds of caravan visitors spend most of the year here, Hornsea Freeport gets 1.5m visitors a year, and there are three schools in Hornsea as well as others in the surrounding villages. All of these people, whatever their ages, may sustain minor injuries from time to time.
The uncertainties created by the Primary Care Trust have, understandably, affected the morale of the hospital staff extremely badly. One PCT speaker at least admitted this. I leave it to you to work out the consequences in terms of recruitment and retention of staff.

Age concern over pensions
From: M Claxton, Arden Court, Northallerton.
ONE point I have not noticed being made in all the arguments about pensionable age is the age at which people started work.
As people like myself (in their 80s) will clearly remember, 14 years was the age for leaving school, and even those in higher education very often finished
at 16.
Teachers were expected to be ready for the grown-up world in two years, not three, and apprenticeships ensured that children were out learning their jobs at the age when so many nowadays have nothing more to do than think up ways of making a nuisance of themselves.
As they started earlier, so they were entitled to finish earlier.
Why does this generation think the world owes it a living? I have only the state pension and my savings, like many others of my generation.
However little we earned, we saved some of it for our old age. Why can't they?

From: Raymond W Geldard, Skipton Road, Steeton.
THE so-called "two-tier" pension system is a misnomer because there are poor groups involved in this scenario.
Firstly, our wonderful representatives, our MPs, who have certainly redefined the phrase of "I'm all right Jack".
Secondly, the cosily featherbedded public sector, heavily subsidised by the third group in the private sector.
And then there is the forgotten group, pensioners themselves, many of whom never had the opportunity to contribute to
a company pension scheme until Margaret Thatcher's legislation opened the door – often too late.
If this group, many living on less than half the national average income, have somehow managed to save a few pounds and own their own home, they have to contribute through income tax and council tax. This is another example of robbing the poor to help the already very well-off.

Ultimate deterrent
From: Aled Jones, Mount Crescent, Bridlington.
WHATEVER one's opinion of the deterrent effect of capital punishment, there must be many like me who believe there is a fundamental saneness to the death penalty.
After all, if the deterrent effect to the death penalty is purely non-existent (and I don't disagree), at least there is one fewer psycho murderer stalking the towns and cities of Britain.
How easy it is to forget that scores of killings have been committed in this country by convicted murderers released from prison.
Moreover, look at the intrinsic fairness to the death penalty. Unquestionably, those countries which execute murderers do manage to provide "satisfaction and closure" to the victim's loved ones. It is sad indeed if a mother is told that the monster who killed her daughter is free to roam the streets in 15 years.
Many people say that capital punishment is a moral evil and is an un-Christian practice. But there is really nothing un-Christian about it. Indeed, the vast majority of Americans who support the death penalty do so out of biblical conviction, that is "an eye for an eye".
As for some crimes being so evil that death is the only proper punishment, I can quite easily endorse such a viewpoint.

A mother's forgiveness is a lesson for us all
From: Chris Schora, Gascoigne Avenue, Leeds.
AS I read about the determination of Gee Walker to find forgiveness, through her faith in Jesus, for those who had murdered her son Anthony in Liverpool (Yorkshire Post, December 1), I was convinced of the fact that not even the most evil act is beyond some redemption.
No-one would wish to lose their child, but, through her example, this brave woman has managed to bring forth some good.
If we followed her lead, how much bitterness and anger might be released? The legacy of forgiveness her son leaves could then extend beyond their community. What a message of goodwill that would be this Christmas.

Burning issue in the search for energy supplies
From: R Sumner, Cliff Road, Hornsea.
IT seems almost incredible that the Government is considering building a new generation of nuclear power stations. Nuclear generation is not only the most expensive form of energy, but it leaves a legacy of very dangerous waste which will be around for thousands of years.
We are facing the results of many years of unbelievable short-sightedness on the part of various governments.
We are now net importers of our main sources of energy. The present shortage of North Sea gas is entirely due to the way this very precious resource has been squandered by using it to generate electricity.
Many years ago, the National Union of Mineworkers' research department estimated that one medium-sized gas-fired power station used as much gas in a day as a city the size of Leeds or Birmingham would use in a year.
Generation by gas may well be marginally cheaper than coal, but this does not justify squandering such a valuable asset. This is just one more example of short-term thinking in the interests of slightly higher profits.
The almost total destruction of our coal industry is another example. The technology exists for clean-burn coal-fired power stations, but the present Government has followed the policies of previous governments in allowing a private company to destroy an asset which could provide most of our power for several generations.
The mines which UK Coal have effectively abandoned were developed with millions of pounds of our money, but these privateers have been allowed to chase quick profits by becoming, effectively, a real estate company which apparently values the land more than one of our greatest natural resources.
We have become extremely vulnerable, in terms of energy supplies, at a time when the whole world is concerned about terrorism. Do we place signs around nuclear power stations saying "Please do not bomb this unit?"
Will there be signs above the new undersea pipeline, which is to bring gas supplies from Norway, asking terrorists not to damage it?
Between them, Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair
have created a very precarious future for our children and grandchildren.
It is still not too late to rescue at least part of our coal industry and use clean-burn technology to give us time to develop real forms of renewable energy.

POINTS

Congested with unfairness
From: A Ramsay, Ashcombe Drive, Radcliffe.
CONGESTION charging is positively unfair, if not unlawful. Before we do down this road, we must impose
zero tolerance on all aspects of life, most notably on crime, alcohol, drugs and dangerous drivers.
Basically, what the charge amounts to is a tax that goes towards propping up an economy that is supporting criminals, dead-beats and asylum seekers, some of them so well-off that congestion charging won't trouble them.
Many less well-off conscientious workers will be forced to give up the comfort and convenience of their cars for the feared and troublesome public transport service.
Some might be brave enough to risk life and limb on a
bicycle, as many Londoners have. The fear here though is that cyclist fatalities have recently increased by 18 per cent.
In effect, the less well-off will become the slaves and, indeed, the victims of the nation's leeches and hangers-on. And as if things weren't bad enough, now our incompetent "fat cat" rulers want a pay rise of up to 22 per cent.

School should be saved
From: Fiona Colling, Ryde Avenue, Hull.
I AM a concerned parent writing about the intended closure of St Nicholas's Primary School in Hull.
This school, in my opinion and that of many other parents, is one of the best primary schools in this area. This has come about through years of hard work and dedication from the staff.
Hull City Council has been offered the school, free of charge, by the Sailors' Families' Society, but has declined to take up this offer. The reasons are that one of the buildings is listed, and that there is no sports field.
Surely a compromise can be found.
What really matters is the education and well-being of the children. Not only will the closure cause my son, and all the other pupils, a great upheaval, this school will be lost forever when it should be a flagship for Hull City Council's education department.

Binge benefits
From: JA Bulmer, Peel Street, Horbury, Wakefield.
HAVE the new licensing laws been introduced at the correct time of year to make it appear that they are having an effect on binge drinking? For, as we all know, at this time of year, people usually start to save themselves for the big festive booze-up.
The other factor of this not-too-complicated equation is the extra police presence and the "on-the-spot" fines for offenders. Was this another reason for the first, subdued weekend, of the experiment?