Monday's Letters: Park and ride objectives are being achieved

I WRITE in response to your article "Taxpayers taken for a ride" (Yorkshire Post, January 7) which suggests that the park-and-ride sites on the A638 in Doncaster have not represented value for money.

When the A638 Quality Bus Corridor was conceived and built with funding from central government, it was done so to increase the number of people using the bus service along the route, by speeding up bus journey times, by improving bus punctuality, by improving accessibility, by providing park-and-ride as a realistic alternative to the car, and by encouraging bus operators to invest in new buses.

Its aims and objectives were not and have never been about solely filling the two park and ride sites.

All of these objectives are being achieved. We have seen substantial growth in bus patronage along the route, buses now take much less time to make the journey and there has been no detrimental impact to journey times for other traffic also. Buses are much more likely to be on time than previously and 21 bus stops have been improved and eight new stops installed to improve access.

These are real and substantial improvements to bus transport along the corridor. In addition, the patronage growth we have seen has come despite a severe economic recession and when free parking in Doncaster town centre has been offered at weekends recently.

The experience throughout South Yorkshire is that where investment is made in public transport the numbers of people using it increases.

That is why SYPTE is proposing wholesale improvements to the entire

bus network in Doncaster, through its "Vision for Bus Services in Doncaster", which it will be consulting the public on over the next month and why we will continue to invest in public transport in Doncaster and throughout South Yorkshire.

****

Pantomime show by the politicians

From: Fr Neil McNicholas, St Hilda's Parish, Whitby.

GIVEN the time of year, perhaps, it's not surprising that the antics of our party leaders, with a General Election fast approaching, are as predictable as the plot of a pantomime ("Oh no they're not" "Oh yes they are").

We are facing a steadily mounting wave of policy promises all designed to gain our vote at the ballot box.

Don't they think we know that's what they are doing? Don't they think we remember all the broken promises that litter the terms of so many recent governments?

Yes, of course, its all about winning votes and getting into power and for that very reason every political leader is going to tell us what they think we want to hear and none is going to commit political suicide by nailing their flag to unpopular policies that could lose them votes. And yet just at the moment that is precisely what we need from our party leaders.

There is no avoiding the monumental proportions of the economic state of affairs that is going to be an albatross hanging round our necks for who knows how long. We are surely only too well aware that it is going to take severe measures to address the problem and so it is pointless the various parties trying to avoid discussing openly and honestly the policies that will have to be put in place regardless of who wins the next election.

Therefore, don't waste our time making promises that can't be kept, spending money we haven't got, offering pie in the sky when we need the bread of reality. Is there no party leader with the courage, the chutzpah, to tell it like it is – to trust the British public to accept that honesty and forthrightness are called for now more than ever before?

We need politicians willing to take the personal and political risk of being brutally honest with us for once and trusting that we will respect such honesty, respect being treated like adults for a change, and will cast our vote accordingly.

So then, what is the extent of the problems facing whichever party comes to power? What are the unavoidable steps that need to be taken in order to put things right? What is it going to cost us in financial and practical terms? What other things are going to have to be put on hold in order to give priority to this? There's no point in trying to avoid the inevitable and only after the election introducing policies that were always going to be introduced anyway.

Tell us now; take the risk; be honest with us; trust us with an informed vote but at the same time please ensure that our trust is well-founded and our vote not wasted. It may be the pantomime season, but the task of getting our country back on track together is not to be taken lightly.

****

We cannot trust Brown

From: Alan Ogden, Oxford Road, Gomersal, West Yorkshire.

GORDON Brown declares that he will deliver an age of aspiration rather than austerity (Yorkshire Post, December 31), as the Tories would do.

How can this man say this and keep a straight face? This is the man that for 10 years held the nation's purse strings. He allowed the financial taps to be opened fully, without any constraint, in order to feed his party's dogma and his own personal vendetta and hatred of the previous Conservative administration. All of which has eventually led to the dire situation we find ourselves in.

How can this man, who has led this country to near bankruptcy, have the nerve to declare himself its saviour, and that to vote for him and his party will suddenly turn the nation's fortunes round?

Does he take us all for idiots? He and his party have managed to achieve what all Labour governments do – run the country into the ground.

Gordon, whatever you say or do from now until the General Election, will be too little and too late. The British public no longer believes or trusts you and your Government.

****

Ordeal for wildlife

From: GH Alden, Ellerton.

CAN you help to save our wildlife from the disturbance caused by some dog walkers we seem to have?

The Derwent Valley is one of the most important wintering grounds for wildfowl in Europe. Yet people walk dogs along the river banks without thought for the damage they do (would you expect to walk dogs running loose through Slimbridge Nature Reserve).

Look at what is happening: one person thinks "I only disturb birds for a few minutes", then another comes 10 minutes later, then another and so on.

The result is wildlife driven off or dying from exhaustion.

Dogs should be kept on leads in sensitive areas and consider the wildlife for future generations.

Believe it or not, I walk my dogs and have done for years without need to roam, trespass, and disturb everything especially when things are hard for our wildlife.

****

Hospital car parking charges should be scrapped

From: MG Bisby, Kildale, Whitby, North Yorkshire.

I REFER to your leader column "Can the NHS afford to waive charges?" (Yorkshire Post, December 28) in which you state that hospitals are dependent on such a source of funding and to lose it may cause patients to suffer.

Firstly, my own view is that no hospital should charge for parking. When sick people and stressed relatives have need to visit hospital, the last thing that should worry them is finding the cost of parking prohibitive.

Parking charges of up to 5 per visit are now common – sometimes a close relative has need to visit more than once a day. A parking ticket at the James Cook University Hospital Middlesbrough used to be

valid for 24 hours – but not

any more. One has to pay to park every time one enters its car parks.

Secondly, we have the grossly unfair situation where only hospitals located in England impose parking charges. The NHS is funded by all UK taxpayers – why should one group be singled out to pay, in effect, an extra tax.

Thirdly, the Yorkshire Post, as well as many members of the public, seem to believe that their parking charge money fully benefits the hospital concerned. What is not generally realised is that many hospitals come within the scope of PFI arrangements – where the private sector benefits disproportionally from such charges. For instance, I recollect some figures once given for parking charge income at one of our local hospitals built under the PFI scheme.

In the period concerned, something in the order of 1.6m was raised from parking charges – of this amount, the hospital received only 0.6m and the private PFI contractor creamed off the remainder. Parking charges have since increased and so these figures are a conservative estimate – and this is happening year on year – a nice little earner for the private sector.

Fourthly, the ticket system now operating at our largest local hospital has changed from a flat rate single charge on entry to the car park to one which now requires one to join a queue at the entry barrier to receive a "clocking-in" ticket and queue to pay at the exit barrier to pay a variable charge, depending on one's length of stay.

Such queues at busy times with motorists scrabbling to find the correct money at the barrier machine can lead to delays of up to 30 minutes or longer, especially so in the dark winter period.

Previously, the flat rate charge system did not result in such hold-ups. It is also quite outrageous that hospital staff including low-paid cleaners and others should also have to pay each time they use the car park.

All hospital car park charging should be banned forthwith.