Wednesday's Letters: Judge local councillors by the real value they contribute

But the simple identification of the number of meetings attended is only the start of scrutinising members, they need to be judged by what they contribute and what they deliver.

It is a reflection that there are some in local government, unitaries, counties, metropolitan, district, town and parish councils who are there solely to know what is happening or to top up their wages or pension.

The true measures that should be identified, and your article did in some cases, is the amount of leadership, innovation in tackling the facilitating of enhancing the quality of life and handling of issues in their own local communities. Good members do that. A member needs to be seen by the community as having the strength of the conviction set out in their manifesto and not to give ineffective lip service to lobbyists. It is easy to pass the buck to anonymous officers.

I do not know where the figures for Selby District Council members meeting attendances or allowances came from, but they are wrong. I attend at an average of least three meetings each week, spend around 15 hours working on district business, plus report reading and researching for position statements, run the family group of companies, and so work a basic 55-hour week.

Selby District are into the era of smart working, including telephone conference meetings to avoid wasteful travel time.

My allowance equates to an hourly rate of little more than the minimum wage, the basic Selby member allowance is 4,100 per annum. You do not get elected for the allowance but for the reward of serving your community.

So please keep on naming the shirkers, shaming them and hopefully causing them to resign, but identify the many who give much that goes unreported.

From: Brian Percival, Deputy Leader, Selby District Council (Conservative).

Danger of cuts being too far and too fast

From: DM Temple, Walton Park, Pannal, Harrogate, North Yorkshire.

WE are alarmed at some of the moves the Government are making in order to reduce the fiscal deficit. While few would disagree that we need to prevent those who are claiming benefits falsely from doing so, can we rely on the bureaucratic machine to correctly sort them from those who are genuinely vulnerable and in need?

We have our doubts. Past experience shows that their ability to do this is suspect. For example, we understand that the Disability Living Allowance budget is to be cut by 25 per cent. It is difficult to see how this will not impact on those genuinely in need of this benefit since by simple logic it appears to presume that one in four claimants should not be receiving DLA benefit at all.

We would like to know specifically how this Government can reconcile policies which are likely to harm those in our society who rely on the welfare state with an increase in the overseas aid budget.

It appears that the axe is being wielded somewhat indiscriminately and the accusation of "too much too fast" could be true and lead the Government into dangerous territory.

From: Brian A Jones, consulting actuary, Clinton Street, Brooklyn, New York.

CLEGG & Co have fallen for an old trick. Focusing on US social security decades ago, President Roosevelt warned that excluding the people at the top from social benefits ensures that those benefits will be seen as welfare, not entitlements. As a result, they will not become (remain, in this case) part of the fabric of society.

The Tories are cutting off some entitlements "to the wealthy who do not need them". Next they will slash those benefits or at least let them wither on the vine, arguing that they just generate dependency. How much better, the Tory toffs will argue, with the Lib Dems barely noticing, to encourage people to stand on their own feet.

Here endeth, or at least shrinketh, the Welfare State. Maybe the NHS too.

Make sure aid goes to poor

From: Miss Judy Gibbard, Littlecoates Road, Grimsby, North East Lincolnshire.

IT is interesting to have a multi-racial society, but over the last 10 years we seem to have overdone it and we have, and are, letting in far too many immigrants.

We need foreign doctors, nurses and scientists, but I would have thought we now have plenty of our own people with computer skills, so there is no need to go abroad for them, and we should certainly make certain our own people are employed first, before looking abroad.

I hope businesses will stick to that. We should not continue to let immigrant agricultural workers in, because our own people are more than capable of doing the work.

I support international aid as long as the poor people receive it. We have been sending India and Pakistan aid since as far back as 1947; there is a big middle class in India and I believe they are building hospitals and clinics, but 50 per cent of the Indian people live in slums.

From what I have seen on the television, no social housing has been built for them. This is disgraceful, considering the amount of money poured in over many years. This is exactly the same in Africa. Most Africans are still living in terrible conditions. There are 200 slums around Nairobi Dam for a start. A large percentage of Africans in South Africa still live in slums such as Soweto and yet we pile money into South Africa.

When all this aid is sent to Africa and Asia some of the money should be spent on accompanying staff, to supervise the building of housing, hospitals and clinics, schools and infrastructure.

All these countries need these things; it is the only way they will develop. The conditions in all these countries are so bad, which is why we are getting so many immigrants coming in and we are so short of social housing and schools and universities are packed solid.

Farmers like light mornings

From: Malcolm Rainforth, Southfield Avenue, Ripon, North Yorkshire.

WELL, it's got round to the time of year when the clocks have been altered. It has given us lighter mornings (instead of being dark at 9am it is light at 8am). That is good for those of us that start work at the normal time. It is important. A lot of us are outdoor workers that start work between 6am and 8am so need daylight as early as possible. Then the school children at present go to school in daylight and come home in daylight – well, most do, but we farmers have a say and one hour in the morning is worth two at night.

From: Anthony Silson, Whitecote Gardens, Leeds.

MAYER Hillman claims the well-being of the nation would improve if the clocks were advanced by one hour (Yorkshire Post, October, 22).

During the last occasion this clock change was tried, I do not remember seeing many people jumping for joy as they made their way through the winter's mid-morning gloom.

Nor do I particularly remember the elderly gallivanting through the streets in the extra hour of evening daylight. Rather, I seem to recollect numerous moans about how dark the mornings were.

Perfect answer

From: Don Burslam, Elm Road, Dewsbury Moor, Dewsbury, West Yorkshire.

IT would be difficult to convince anyone who has suffered from the cuts, but I believe there is something of a silver lining to the situation.

For too long and far too often, we have volunteered, or been pressurised, into helping to further the imperialistic aggrandisement of the US. In future, we have the unanswerable excuse that we can no longer afford to become involved in any more overseas adventures.

At last we have an ideal opportunity to adjust our ambitions and targets to our rightful place as a third-class power. Other countries such as Germany, France, the Netherlands and the Scandinavian nations have consistently outperformed us in most of the indices of success.

For too long, we have struggled with a self-fitted ball and chain which has cost us dear in reducing our spending on our own people.

Nevertheless, I do not agree to cutting overseas aid. We have a moral duty to help the less fortunate in the family of nations.

Clegg can stick to his principles over EU vote

From: Peter Atkins, Northumberland Avenue, Hornsea, East Yorkshire.

OUR association with Europe started with our agreement to join the Common Market and to trade with them and that's all – which was fine.

Later, our government decided to make us part of the European Union, with all its far-reaching implications without the consent of the British people – which was not fine. Since then, we have had no control over our borders and consequently we have now become the most densely populated country in Europe and our quality of life has how fallen towards the bottom of the league of other European countries. They control 75 per cent of our laws – many of which are not suited to us.

The British people still have a democratic right to a referendum as to whether we stay in or opt out of the EU. This was suggested by our Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg in Parliament some two years ago, but was voted down by the other two parties. He now has the opportunity to bring this to fruition, so perhaps he will do this and get this matter settled once and for all.

From: Allan Davies, Heathfield Court, Grimsby.

TIM Mickleburgh (Yorkshire Post, October 25) repeats the nonsense that we were never told of the real implications of UK membership of the then Common Market. It was, however, the Treaty of Rome in 1970 which made matters abundantly plain. Pierre Uri, one of the drafters, wrote: "This in the long run implied, and was meant to imply, fiscal, social, monetary and ultimately, political union."

Why so unequivocal a statement has never sunk into the heads of the eurosceptics is beyond me.

Simple route to welfare state

From: Robert A Hawkins, Moor Hill Court, Laund Road, Salendine Nook, Huddersfield.

IN the 1950s, when I was starting in business, my accountant did talk about the introduction of a welfare state.

He said that – given you want a welfare state – there is a very simple way of doing it completely. From birth to death, everybody has a pension or welfare book which provides the basic amount of living costs at whatever stage of life you are.

When you are employed, this amount is deducted from your wage/salary and paid back just like National Insurance (which would no longer be required) along with the current tax.

With a simple tax rate, varying or not this would take care of all conditions and needs of everyone, and would reduce bureaucracy

tremendously. There would be just income tax, corporation tax and maybe capital gains tax.

Could the new pension proposal be the start of such a system?

True cause of foot-and-mouth

From: Phyllis Capstick, Hellifield, Skipton, North Yorkshire.

RECENTLY, there was a letter printed in the Yorkshire Post stating the foot-and-mouth outbreak of 2001 was started by a greedy farmer.

I believe (along with many others, who have thought long and hard about the events) that had nothing to do with a greedy farmer, he was merely a victim of a cruel government who wanted to reduce stock.

Faith in the power of protest

From: Iain Morris, Caroline Street, Saltaire, West Yorkshire.

THERE are many views and many sides to many topics in life which given time eventually come about. A good number of years ago, I was talking to a lady after an Anglican church service in Bradford who told me that the small, attractive brooch she was wearing represented Women Against Women Priests.