Forthright Frazer urges others to write

Frazer Irwin, of Queen’s Road, has been a regular contributor to the Gazette’s letters page since the early 1980s, taking up issues ranging from flooding to bridle paths, and frequently challenging the council over services and facilities.

He has taken issue with dog fouling on the moor, missing milestones and Ilkley residents’ attitudes to the travelling community over the years.

His views and straight-to-the-point writings have made him one of the town’s more forthright and often outspoken residents.

Now Frazer, 62, has decided to dedicate more of his time to carrying out research for books, and hopes others will carry on where he leaves off.

He says he has had breaks from his public musings in his 25 years-plus letter-writing career, but always started writing again after readers asked him what had become of his letters. This time, however, Frazer wants others to get writing to the Gazette.

He says the town’s growing population must include potential letter writers, some of them possibly better qualified than himself.

“I’ve come to the conclusion we’ve got a lot of new people in Ilkley, they’ve got university degrees and they know how to use a computer a lot better than me,” he said.

However, readers may not have heard the last of Frazer. He plans to maintain online blogs, and says he may send the odd contribution to the Gazette in future.

Editor Sheena Stavert said she was glad the Gazette hadn’t heard the last of Frazer, and backed his call for others to get involved in debates about local issues through the Letters page.

She said: “Letters are welcome from all readers. The traditional method of putting pen to paper works just as well as email, so not having access to a computer should not deter anyone from writing to us.”

Submissions for the Letters page should be sent to The Editor, Ilkley Gazette, 8 Wells View, Ilkley LS29 9JD, or emailed to sheena.stavert@wharfedalenewspapers.co.uk.

All letters submitted must include the author’s name, address and daytime telephone number. Only on request and at the editor’s discretion, will an author’s name be withheld on publication.

Letters are accepted on the understanding that they may be shortened or amended for space or legal reasons.

Let’s get on with the business of government

Over the past year or so, Gazette readers have doubtless struggled with the self-righteous letters from Andrew Dundas and his supporters on the subject of the community governance review of the Ilkley parish.

Since failing to convince the Keighley area committee of the validity of his claims about the review, Andrew and his confederates have fallen back on the only tactic left to them: to peddle unfounded accusations about the process, the legitimacy of the parish council and the competence of council officers.

Thankfully most of Andrew's ridiculous comments regarding the review and the decision of the Keighley area committee have been admirably countered by others, who I am sure will contradict his latest missive (Letters, December 10). However, I note that Andrew has been joined in his foolish attack on the parish council by Brian Whittam (Letters, December 10), who maintains Andrew’s fiction of only one ward of the parish council holding elections and the majority of parish councillors being “unelected”. As with Andrew and his adherents three weeks ago, Brian should have checked his electoral law before blundering into such a silly argument. If he had done so, he would know that if a person stands for election to a local council and is returned unopposed, they are deemed to have been elected to that office. Many councillors find themselves in this position, including some in our neighbouring parish and town councils.

The reason for most current members of Ilkley Parish Council being returned unopposed at the last parish election in 2006 was due to the absence of any opposition candidates, who, I recall, were withdrawn from the contest on the flimsy grounds that the wards they were due to contest were somehow unfairly constituted. This situation was exceptional, as most previous elections, including those when I stood for election, were contested. Quite simply, the election in Ilkley South ward was contested at the last parish election as four candidates (one independent and three Conservatives) stood for election to the three seats available. The most recent by-election in the same ward called in 2008 following the resignation of one of the parish councillors for that ward, was in fact contested by an independent candidate and a Liberal Democrat. Contrary to Brian’s assertion that democracy has suffered, there is nothing to stop people from other political parties or independent candidates from standing for elections in any of the Ilkley wards.

In much of the correspondence over the past few months relating to the review, a question has been asked as to what the advantages would be for such a review. If I am not mistaken, no convincing answer has been given to this question, which is unsurprising, given the real, underlying reason for calling the review. Comments made by Andrew and others about creating smaller wards to benefit independent candidates, together with the proposal to divide the Ben Rhydding ward and create a new ward in the town centre, show a clear determination to gerrymander the ward boundaries to give advantage to the other parties, who have repeatedly failed to secure seats in Ilkley wards on a party-political ticket. It must be depressing for Andrew, Brian and their few allies to realise that such are the views of most Ilkley electors, that even if the ward boundaries were changed, it would probably make little difference to the outcome of local elections.

Along with Gerald Goldsborough, Andrew and others, I attended the last area committee meeting and found nothing amiss in the proceedings. The members of the committee considered all the available evidence before reaching their decision to recommend maintaining the status quo, while the local authority has in fact followed due process prescribed by the legislation in conducting the review. I understand that Andrew is attempting to persuade local residents to protest against the committee’s decision. I trust that the electors of the parish will not be swayed by Andrew’s spurious arguments and will support the recommendation of the area committee, so that we can move on with the serious business of local government without unnecessary distractions.

Heathcliffe E O Bowen

Woodlands Rise, Ilkley

Eventually, an answer – and the answer is none

Andrew Dundas, or should he now be called Lazarus, writes a diatribe (Our town is in a democracy, governed by the law of the land, Gazette Letters, December 10). Having waded through it I was able to determine the thrust of his letter, which is, ‘If it is mine I want it’, the politics of the playground. He goes at great length to quote a precedent at Enfield, regarding voters and voting boundaries, but unless I am mistaken, he was informed at the meeting we both attended, that it did not apply, so why mention it?

He also takes me to task regarding the petition on the subject. He may believe, and transmitted that belief to the petitioners, that they were petitioning for voting and ward boundaries, but were in fact petitioning for a review on the subject, and that review has taken place.

There is an accusation that the chairman, (he refers to him as the election agent for some reason unknown to me), made up his own rules as he went along. If he believes this to be true, then officially question the legality in an open letter through the Ilkley Gazette, with the replies printed too. If he is not prepared to do that, then we can all draw our own conclusions.

Eventually, he has given an answer to “What are the advantages to the Ilkley electorate”, and regardless of the diatribe to which I have referred, the answer is none.

A G Goldsbrough

Fieldway, Ilkley

Splendid cafe facility is well worth a visit

I had Christmas lunch at the Oasis Cafe on Church Street, Ilkley, last week. For readers who are not aware, the cafe is a joint venture between Bradford College, Churches Together in Ilkley (CTI 2000) and All Saints Parish Church. The aim of the project is to provide education and training for students with learning difficulties.

The food was delicious, attractively presented, and the atmosphere was warm and welcoming, just the tonic to dispel the winter blues! Good value, too, at £12 for a Christmas meal of three courses. Food at the Oasis is easily up to the standard of any good restaurant!

I do hope that Ilkley residents and visitors alike will try out this splendid cafe facility for themselves in the near future. It is well worth the visit!

The Oasis cafe is open from 10am until 2pm on Tuesdays and Fridays during term time.

Kathy Best

DDA representative on behalf of Ilkley Parish Council

A new Scout hut is all that Addingham needs

I was interested to read in the Ilkley Gazette how the community meeting to discuss the proposed Addingham Recreation Centre was described as ‘a very positive event’ by the parish council chairman, Alison Widdup.

As Addingham residents number around 3000, and the number of attendees was around 100, of whom quite a significant number, I understand, were Scouts and Scout leaders who were there to assist with a register of attendees, and the parish councillors themselves, I was just wondering how the meeting could have been described as ‘positive’. How is Councillor Widdup interpreting the views of the vast majority who did not attend?

Perhaps Coun Widdup’s understanding of the word “positive” differs from everyone else’s. All that is “positive” is that Addingham “positively” needs a replacement Scout hut and nothing else!

Fiona Mann

Addingham

Copenhagen more about t-shirts than science

I have just returned from Copenhagen, I felt I simply had to find out what it was all about. As I suspected, it was more about t-shirts than science. Thousands of people enjoying the friendly welcome of the city, but objective scientific appraisal there was none.

I mingled with youngsters from all over the world. None of them could even begin to discuss the subject with any authority.

Then the politicians arrived, more jamboree, more posturing, more promises of tax payers’ money for dodgy Third World countries whose leaders covet more Rolex watches, Mercedes Benz cars and Rayban sunglasses. And all this based on CO2 being a ‘pollutant’ which it is not, the globe boiling in 2050, which it won’t, that independent scientific opinion believe the ‘debate is over’ which it clearly is not.

One theme displayed strongly – money is the driving force. You would not believe how much of it is slushing about, most of it earmarked for those who already have plenty.

Godfrey Bloom

Euro MP for Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire, Member of the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee, European Parliament