Colin Speakman: Do not cut our national parks – they are our greatest asset

Tax rises and public expenditure cuts are seen as inevitable by all main political parties. Some of these cuts will be extremely painful, hitting the elderly, the infirm, people on low incomes

disproportionately.

In such circumstances, it is easy to suggest that our two national parks, the North York Moors and Yorkshire Dales, should be targeted for such cuts. Reductions of up to 35 per cent in authority budgets are forecast over the next five years. After all, national parks are something of a luxury are they not, compared with "real" needs such as schools, hospitals and transport?

But such a view is shortsighted. Yorkshire's national parks are among the region's greatest assets. They make the quality of life immeasurably better for the people of Yorkshire who can easily enjoy the immense health-giving benefits of green space, well marked footpaths, and rich cultural history.

The landscape is also a huge tourist attraction. A study in 2006 showed that businesses in Yorkshire's National Parks generated annual sales of 1.8bn in the local economy, representing an annual economic impact into our region of 576m. Over 65 per cent of these businesses depend wholly or partly on the special qualities of the landscape for their success.

The annual cost of running the Yorkshire Dales National Park is 6m per annum. That sounds a lot of money, until you reflect that in 2009, after Britain's major financial institutions were rescued by astronomic sums of taxpayers' money, no fewer than 2,800 people in the City of London each took home over 1m in pay and bonuses. Just six such cheques would finance the Yorkshire Dales National Park.

Everyone accepts that, in lean times, our national parks must share some of the pain. Many people living within the Dales tell of frustrations and irritations of planning decisions and would be happy to see a reduction in what they see as "generous" staffing levels in both parks. But recent independent Audit Commission reports have found that both park authorities are actually remarkable efficient, well managed and cost effective institutions that consistently meet performance targets.

The truth is that if cuts are implemented as envisaged, the so-called "core" statutory planning functions, especially development control which is inevitably the most controversial function of a national park, will remain unchanged.

What will be cut will be visitor and environmental services – the maintenance of footpaths, access, visitor centres, education and outreach work, archaeology, conservation projects with farmers and landowners.

A major casualty will be high-profile green transport schemes such as Moorsbus and Dalesbus which give access to thousands of people who have no other means to reach the National Park and attract many visitors, including many from overseas, for whom well integrated public transport networks linked to walking and cycling trails are a prime reason to visit the area.

Cutting such activity is the equivalent of burning the seed corn of economic recovery. Tourism businesses in national parks depend on visitors coming to the area to enjoy the facilities and services provided by the public authorities. Cutting bus services, failing to maintain footpaths and closing visitor centres will severely damage the credibility of tourism not just in the parks but in the whole of Yorkshire.

Clearly national park authorities must look carefully at every activity to cut duplication of effort and waste, above all to see if management structures cannot be simplified, with a focus on tangible outputs not meetings and bureaucratic procedures.

Partnership is key, such as the Yorkshire Dales Society's not for-profit subsidiary group, the Dales & Bowland CIC, which now operates and markets the highly successful Sunday DalesBus network.

However, cuts in national park and county council funding threaten precisely these and other key partnership and conservation projects. Unless the park has resources to support such initiatives, only core planning and bureaucratic structures will remain in place, but achieve little.

Public investment in institutions such as national parks does not vanish into space, nor even into off-shore bank accounts like City bonuses. Cash goes directly into the local economies of areas like rural North Yorkshire. Salaries and wages are spent in local shops and businesses, and national park money funds vital contracts for many small independent companies and local traders.

Cut that funding and everyone will suffer as vital spending is withdrawn, as fewer visitors come as essential services and facilities are cut. Ironically, less taxes will be paid by local people and visitors to finance the remaining services, an inevitable spiral of economic decline.

If London politicians force these cuts on our national parks, it is the people of Yorkshire, not London, who will suffer.