Rejoice at plan for high-speed rail link

HOW depressing to read (Yorkshire Post, April 4) letters from no fewer than three people living in Yorkshire that building a high-speed railway link to the North is nonsense.

Even apart from the fact that we are regarded as one of the most economically depressed regions in the country and therefore crying out for more investment and better transport links, have those people even considered how much has been, and is being, spent in London on better transport?

The fact is that Transport Secretary Philip Hammond has done amazingly well in retaining provision for investment in railway infrastructure which points to the fact that the Government, for once in the last 50 years, has seen the necessity of giving Britain a rail system fit for the 21st century.

And what a change that some of it is going to benefit Yorkshire – so please let’s not carp about it, we should be rejoicing.

Feel better – be of help

From: John Rowe, Harrogate.

IN response to your feature on retail therapy (Yorkshire Post, April 8), while there may be some evidence for feeling happier when buying treats for yourself, can I suggest a better alternative?

Use your spare time that would have been spent this way doing something useful for someone else. Doing the shopping for someone who isn’t able to, would even include the retail element and there are many social aspects to helping others with difficulties.

This would give a four-times benefit – the feel-good factor from helping someone, the benefit to the person helped, you saved your money, and if it involved shopping, you might even get some retail therapy in the process.

Volunteering is easy (check out your local CVS website) and very rewarding. Most people I know who volunteer in this way say they get as least as much out of it as the person they are helping and there is no follow-on guilt from seeing all those unused pairs of shoes in the wardrobe.

And on the longevity of Taiwanese daily shoppers – maybe it is just that they are the people who buy and eat fresh, locally produced veg every day rather than supermarket ready-meals.

Huge price of over eating

From: Monika Close, Hallcliffe Crescent, Horbury, Wakefield.

CONGRATULATIONS to Zelda Haxby on winning Slimming World’s “Greatest Loser of the Year” (Yorkshire Post, April 7). It was indeed a remarkable effort, and her prize is well-deserved.

We often hear about people of truly gargantuan proportions, who eat equally gargantuan amounts of food, but what I always wonder about is, how do these people afford it?

Fifteen packets of crisps a day amounts to a lot of money, even when buying multi-packs; I’ve heard of people eating six take-away meals a day – you could feed a whole family on “proper” food for that.

I know one overweight woman who eats £5 worth of sweets every evening, which amounts to a staggering £35 a week. Just imagine the amount of fresh food you’d be able to buy for that.

Shirtsleeves mode is clue

From: Maxine Watt, Beeston, Leeds.

I SEE from your report about David Cameron “listening” to concerns about the proposed NHS reforms that he and his colleagues were in rolled-up shirtsleeves mode (Yorkshire Post, April 7).

Mr Cameron and his colleagues do this when trying to appear to have something in common with people such as nurses, whom they call front line staff and pretend to champion.

Front line staff are portrayed as good by the Prime Minister and his colleagues because we can see what they do whereas back room staff, people who do things such as set budgets and make strategic decisions for the future, are portrayed as less important and ripe for cutting because their work is less visible. And Mr Cameron can’t have his picture taken with them with his sleeves rolled up.

This is ironic when the policy that the Prime Minister is advocating for the NHS involves tying doctors up with back room roles such as dealing with budgets and buying services, taking them away from their frontline duty of treating patients, as at present.

Coalitions will rule forever

From: Alan Chapman, Beck Lane, Bingley, West Yorkshire.

THE debate on the referendum regarding the proposal to change the long-established parliamentary voting system is regularly the subject of published correspondence, and both sides are putting the case for support or rejection.

One of the significant flaws, if our voting system is changed to the Alternate Vote (AV), is that regular coalition-style government will continue, possibly indefinitely.

This is of great advantage to the third Party as they will always be part of the coalition Government.

Thus it is clear why Nick Clegg and the Lib Dem Party are seriously promoting the change. It also means that this third party group will always select the other main Party to join up with and, therefore, select the Prime Minister, but this has been the responsibility of the UK electors for hundreds of years.

Can anyone doubt that the third party uses the excuse of fairness deceitfully?

The AV system guarantees the Lib Dems remain in permanent governance of the UK. Do we really want Nick Clegg and his successors to have such an electoral advantage when they usually get less than 25 per cent of the General Election vote?

It would be out of all proportion.