I REALLY don’t know how I feel about care costs. I suppose I should be getting in a rare old paddy as one who could soon be affected, but I am controlling myself.
What I am more incensed about it the dreadful waste of money this Government is engaging with, namely giving overseas aid to countries which are far better off than we are (Bill Carmichael, The Yorkshire Post, December 16).
India is now a wealthy country and houses more call centres for British firms and engineering projects. I could go on. To cap it all, the dreadful proposed waste of money on HS2 to save 20 minutes on train times to London, and yet the Government can’t afford to look after their golden oldies. What planet are we living on?
Care of the less advantaged and elderly should be the prime aim of this Government. I had great hopes for Theresa May, Brexit and this Government which have fast flown through my window. One thing for certain, they are all not going to make me feel guilty for my advancing years.
From: Graham Branston, Emmott Drive, Rawdon.
NOW we are told that councils will be allowed to increase the amount of council tax to fund improved care for the elderly (The Yorkshire Post, December 16).
Since the Second World War, successive governments have been aware of the ‘baby boom’ but failed lamentably to plan for the costs of the long term consequences.
Short term fixes/vote catching have been the rule, not prudent saving towards the increasing costs of the NHS, care for the elderly and state pensions.
Instead of local authorities being allowed to raise more money through council tax, it should be the Treasury that increases the rate support grant to authorities – with a specific requrement for allocations to improve community care provisions.
From: Cecilia Motley, Chairman, Rural Services Network.
THE Minister has ignored completely the fact that rural areas will have inevitably already have borne more cuts than other areas as their services start from a thinner base.
Social care is a national problem which should be addressed through national funding. Already rural residents pay much more in council tax – from on average lower wages – than their urban counterparts and this proposal will simply make that gap wider still.
It is grossly unfair. Recirculating money that is already in the system will not help anyone and will just inflict further hardship in my view. It will also hit the so called “Jams” (Just about Managing) hard in their wallets and purses and will – at a stroke – wipe out the small amount of help included in the Autumn Statement.
Let’s quit the EU right now
From: Don Wood, Howden.
AS we approach the six-month mark since Britain voted to be a free, self governing country once more, why are we still in the EU?
As anyone who has studied the EU knows, Article 50 is a trap to prevent any country from leaving. It was produced by EU federalist fanatics and the last thing that they want is anyone leaving their rotten little empire.
Article 50 is already doing its work, the court case currently at the Supreme Court is the first of many such cases brought to prevent us leaving this German attempt at controlling Europe by stealth. More cases are already in the pipeline, including one in the Irish high court.
What the hell has our leaving got to do with the southern Irish? If this case is allowed, then the other 26 countries that are subservient to this monstrosity can also start cases. It is just ridiculous!
There is no need for the Government to even use Article 50 at all. We can legally just tell the EU we have left and be out tomorrow.
We have had enough rhetoric and hot air from the Prime Minister and David Davis MP, we now want action, ignore Article 50 and get us out of the EU now, lock stock and single market.
That is what we voted for June 23 and that is what the people of Britain want and expect. Nothing less will do! In any event why start two years negotiations with an organisation that might well not even exist in two years time and almost certainly will not exist in five years time?
From: Hugh Rogers, Ashby.
INTERESTING new definition of democracy from “remoaner” David Seex (The Yorkshire Post, December 8) who seems to suggest that anyone who doesn’t actually vote against you, must, ipso facto, be regarded as a supporter and that the views of anyone who didn’t vote should, in future, be weighed in the balance along with votes actually cast.
Of course, I venture to suggest that if the vote had gone the other way, he wouldn’t have said a word. Does Mr Seex suggest we re-run all recent elections on this basis? A novel form of proportional represention perhaps. Or a load of old nonsense?
From: John Redfearn, Pickering.
PERSONALLY, while I usually vote Conservative, I would like to see an Opposition led by the likes of Chuka Umunna or a young Stephen Kinnock. Time will tell.