Poor who still take a pride in their families

0
Have your say

From: John Watson, Hutton Hill, Leyburn.

Once again, Bill Carmichael has hit the nail on the head (Yorkshire Post, September 7). How can there be child poverty in this country in this day and age?

It seems pretty obvious to 
me and, I presume, most people, that the vast sums paid out in child benefit is not getting to the child.

As he says, every day we see parents whose appearance suggests they are living off the fat of the land and probably child benefit as well.

Who does the research for Save the Children? Some of their statistics on which they base their “wisdom” seem pretty dodgy indeed.

They are suggesting that a family living on £17,000 a year are probably living in poverty. There will be many thousands of families living on a lot less who take pride in how their children are turned out and in their whole lifestyle.

Some will be in low-paid jobs but their pride in their families and responsibility to their nation forbids them from sitting on their backsides, doing nothing and sponging off the state.

There will also be a lot of pensioners living on half that amount.

My critics will say, where is your proof? You don’t need proof, you just need to walk round any town or city to see what the welfare state is responsible for.

What a contrast to our Paralympic athletes, suffering from all sorts of disabilities, who were a credit to the nation.

No moaning minnies 
among them, they trained for four years to try to be the best and some reached that goal. These are the children who deserve 
all the financial support 
 possible.

I suggest that Save the Children sticks to problems in the Third World where they are most needed and where in some countries poverty is endemic.

From: Keith Chapman, Custance Walk, York.

I RECENTLY read an article in a local newspaper on the Central Methodist Church in York running out of food for the deserving members of the community in this city.

At the same time, food has been and is being thrown away by large stores and suppliers due to being out of date.

One would think we were 
over producing food in this country.

The sad fact is that food is wasted and we need to look at how we cut down on waste, especially on the vegetable side, and have a more responsible policy in dealing with wastage while others starve.

Many times one can see those within the community looking in skips near shops for scraps of food and I wonder if this is England and not some Third World nation.

I wonder, does the Government realise that even in our country we are wasting food and have those within that may be undernourished wondering where the next meal comes from? It would appear that charity could be needed near at hand in the UK? It is all very worrying.

Social homes are answer

From: Kendal Wilson, Wharfebank Terrace, Tadcaster.

i READ with interest (Yorkshire Post, September 4) proposals fronted by Leeds City Council to come to the rescue of what we are led to believe are a huge amount of first-time buyers in what is already an inflated housing market.

Firstly, is taxpayers’ money to be used for their so-called helping hand scheme? There are already many defaulters in the existing mortgage market and there are thousands of empty homes from Leeds through to Selby and beyond.

Why for goodness’ sake do we keep referring to potential dwellers as first-time buyers? They are potential borrowers of very large sums of money. There is enough inflation. Why have borrowers dropping into more trouble?

We really have to own up and swallow some nonsense. What is needed are good quality social homes which are well-managed and allocated to go with emerging new British industries for British people.

Many of the types of jobs today will not pay any mortgage, so Government get the fair rent and greedy landlords who take all the earnings of the low paid will be obliterated.

Let’s get standards and our principles back.

The ending 
of a life

From: Canon Michael Storey, Healey Wood Road, Brighouse.

Sarah Louise Catt has been jailed for eight years for aborting her baby when he was almost full term (Yorkshire Post, September 18). Along with the judge, Mr Justice Cooke, I agree that “all right-thinking people would consider this offence more serious than manslaughter”.

The judge continued: “What you have done is rob an apparently healthy child, vulnerable and defenceless, of the life he was about to commence.”

Surely that boy’s life started at conception, despite the anti-Christian law of this land suggesting that abortions are acceptable up to the baby being 24 weeks?

How much more wrong is it to abort a child at “almost full term” or 23 weeks? Surely in both cases a life has been ended?