YP Letters: Does pro-fracking MP speak for Ryedale or for his party?

THERE has been much debate in the pages of this newspaper recently about the pros and cons of so-called fracking, about economic and ecological matters as well as shale gas being a future part of the UK’s energy mix.

For my part, I believe I have an open mind but am yet to be convinced about the long term safety of the industry, together with the impact that not only the wells but the associated traffic and other industrial necessities of gas production will have across the country.

I currently have greater concerns about those MPs, including my own, Kevin Hollinrake, who appear to be actively promoting the industry as if employed as public relations staff.

In an article in The Yorkshire Post in July 2015, Mr Hollinrake is quoted as saying: “No economic benefit, vested interest or party political pressure could ever lead me to support something I believed would have a detrimental effect on our countryside or the health of local residents.”

Compare that then to comments made earlier this month: “Having weighed up all the arguments I have concluded that fracking should go ahead in the constituency so long as it is monitored every step of the way.”

What has changed so drastically? Can Mr Hollinrake provide evidence to show that the industry is now safe, that there are no public health issues and that the tourist industry in the Ryedale and Thirsk areas will not suffer as a result of his push for the introduction of this heavy industry? If so, I await its publication.

In the run up to the general election in 2015, this new candidate promised, if elected, to “represent Ryedale in Westminster and not Westminster in Ryedale”.

In September 2015 he accepted that the majority of his constituents were against fracking and yet he ignores their views and makes a judgement along Conservative Party lines against their wishes.

This, I would suggest, is representing Westminster in Ryedale.

Only last week the same MP circulated a survey to his party members and colleagues and not to his constituents but said: “Just because it was only sent to Conservatives does not mean it is unrepresentative.” Really?

Yorkshire folk are not stupid but there are times when I wonder if those in Westminster believe us to be so. Surely the way forward is to obtain proof that the industry can conduct itself safely and to hold off the dash for gas until this is so?