Tuesday's Letters: Crime-fighters should get back to basic policing

Police chiefs appear to be blissfully unaware of the day-to-day

problems which we face in our local areas.

The plain facts are that our streets and town centres are not being policed effectively.

This issue does not appear to be at the top of the policing agenda.

Instead, they are going off at a tangent, chasing elusive organised criminals instead of getting back to basic policing, protecting communities and maintaining a safe environment for law-abiding people.

Is Mr Whyman aware that many areas are plagued by groups of feral young people, intent on violence and intimidation? And that people are afraid to walk around where they live for fear of encountering these psychotic creatures, and, of course, residents know that there is unlikely to be a police presence.

Surely any available resources need to be put into serving local communities?

If they had an inkling of what happens in the real world, the powers that be would not waste manpower on a scheme that will not benefit ordinary people in the short term, but will, of course, make it appear

that the police are taking action to fight crime.

If Mr Whyman can collaborate with the officers under his command and cajole them into providing a service that enables persons who observe the law to dwell in peace in an environment where we are free to move around without fear or intimidation (which isn't happening at present) then he will be doing a worthwhile job.

If not, this scheme will fail to address the more immediate needs of decent people and Mr Whyman's appointment will be a total waste of resources and public money.

From: PA Ellis, Bankfield Avenue, Kirkheaton, Huddersfield.

Going with the flow not the answer

From: N Duckitt, Wormley Hill, Sykehouse, Goole.

YOUR article headed "Flooding on farmland sparks agency clash",(Yorkshire Post, February 6) deserves comment.

The farmers trying to grow crops alongside the River Idle are aware that there is a deteriorating drainage situation because the flow of the Idle is restricted owing to lack of maintenance by the Environment Agency.

Innes Thomson, flood-risk manager for the Environment Agency, states: "Dredging would not help more water down that river."

He is a good Environment Agency disciple, spreading the message put out in a statement in Farmers' Weekly, in August 2007, by Baroness Barbara Young, the then head of the agency.

She stated that dredging the rivers would have made no difference to the 2007 floods. The policy adopted by the EA is that rivers should flow naturally to the sea.

This policy is OK where rivers flow down steep gradients, but, where they flow across flat areas, in my opinion they should be contained by banking and the flow maintained by dredging.

There is ample evidence to show that the EA policy is to let low-lying areas flood and revert to swamp, undoing all the good work by farmers and drainage boards over the centuries.

Is the Environment Secretary, Hilary Benn, sincere when he asks for maximum food production, and have the EA any plans to reintroduce "stilt walking" to the newly created swamp lands which they are promoting alongside the lowland rivers?

Acceptable behaviour

From: John Atkinson, Ashfield Road, Shipley, West Yorkshire.

ONCE again, your correspondent, Mrs Hunt (Yorkshire Post, February 10), has hit the nail on the head with her comments about Tiger Woods and Mr Riseley's letter (Yorkshire Post, February 3).

I, too, had to read Mr Riseley's letter three times before I could understand what he was getting at. His views on what is acceptable behaviour in today's society are bizarre.

It is sad that the lifestyles and vast wealth achieved by sportsmen like Tiger Woods (and, to a lesser extent, John Terry) are accompanied by so many temptations.

It appears that there are many opportunities to behave badly and not enough incentive or desire to behave well.

Yet the real role models like Jack Nicklaus or Arnold Palmer or Roger Federer seem to manage it without difficulty.

University challenge

From: Natalie Dickinson, Scarborough Lane, Tingley.

I AM a student at Leeds Metropolitan University. After reading about the 6,000 reduction in university places offered to undergraduates, I was somewhat alarmed and disgusted.

In today's world, it is becoming increasingly important to enter into

higher education and obtain a degree as the job market is very competitive, so, if people don't have this opportunity they could end up in a dead-end job that they simply don't enjoy and which doesn't challenge their existing knowledge.

The economic crisis is the most likely reason for the 20 per cent increase in university applications this year, especially with people aged 21 or over.

This shouldn't be conveyed as a bad thing as it is fantastic that

people are recognising the need to act in this difficult financial situation.

In my opinion, the Government should not put a cap on the number of people who can attend university and they should definitely not reduce the number of applicants they are willing to subsidise.

As Culture Minister David Lammy said: "Getting a place at university has always been, and should be, a competitive process."

If this goes ahead, many people who deserve a place at university will be rejected – something I find extremely unfair.

Why democratic government isn't always right

From: Len Fincham, Warrels Road, Bramley, Leeds.

IT looks as if David McKenna knows very little of modern world history (Yorkshire Post, February 13).

I do agree, however, when he states we should stop meddling in foreign countries' affairs. It's too easy to get sucked into unwanted

calamities such as Afghanistan.

Contrary to his ideas of past British history involving us in India, for instance, I do assure him I was there during the Raj and I spent many long days learning the language and about the religious customs.

I had to respect all faiths and welcomed it. In fact, I now have many Asian friends. Likewise, I expect immigrants coming here to stay and become nationals, to speak our language and respect our culture and faiths.

What few modern Brits know is that when colonialism ceased (and not just us when we gave up our empire, but when the Dutch, French, Italian, German and Spanish followed) the world erupted in tribal warfare, and the legacy is still with us today.

When the Dutch came out of the East Indies, Indonesia had a serious civil war, as did the Congo when the Belgians ceased to govern there. South Africa was taken over by the Boer influence and apartheid developed after we had left them to it.

After the First World War, we set up a Shah in Baghdad to successfully keep both tribal sides quiet but as soon as he was dethroned, trouble started, with Saddam Hussein, a military officer, finally taking over.

There are many other examples where, in the course of time, colonial power played its part in maintaining order and instigating a better form of democratic behaviour or government.

Of course, these countries wanted self-government and were activated into demanding it by sometimes honest and sincere individuals like Mahatma Gandhi, who was heartbroken when the sub-continent of India was divided into two.

One could say colonialism kept the world relatively quiet and stable until insurgency began to emerge and demand self-government.

I too believe in self-government but in this modern, over-filled world of ours, democratic governing isn't always the answer.

It is why I pray the United Nations develop, determined to assist in establishing proper long-term government in unstable countries.

A world of difference

From: Phil Bland, Brooklands Lane, Menston, Ilkley.

I REALLY enjoyed reading Douglas Hurd's article about various Foreign Secretaries and their approach to foreign policy (Yorkshire Post, February 10).

What a contrast to today's insipid, self-serving mob of politicians when you read that Palmerston's approach was "that a British subject, in whatever land he may be, shall feel confident that the strong arm of England will protect him against injustice and wrong". Clear-sighted leadership if ever there was.

Contrast this with the pathetic response of the Royal Navy and our Government when they allowed Somali pirates to kidnap two elderly

British sailors from their yacht in the Indian Ocean without a shot being fired.

David Milliband should have Palmerston's words engraved on his desk.

Power and the people

From: John Browell, Moorlands Road, Birkenshaw, Bradford.

TONY Lodge (Yorkshire Post, February 4) implies that the CEGB was something of a dinosaur held to ransom by the trade unions, grossly over-manned and stiflingly over engineered.

It had an excellent safety record. There were fewer fat cats. It was owned by the State, not by foreign government-controlled companies and venture capitalists. It provided jobs; people in work pay taxes.

Walter Marshall and his team would have some time ago presented the Government with a strategy for building replacement power stations. There would have been fewer inefficient direct gas-fired units and the highly subsidised wind farm farce would probably not have happened.

EU leaves us with one option

From: Brian Hardy, All Hallowes Drive, Tickhill, Doncaster.

WHAT a lot of meaningless, mind-numbing twaddle from Timothy Kirkhope (Yorkshire Post, February 9).

A Tory election victory in this country will not make the slightest difference to the superstate agenda being pursued by the European bureaucrats.

When will people like Mr Kirkhope realise that reforming the EU from within is an impossibility – there is no third way, we are either in or out.