SO council officials made the decision about the horse trough cum urinal cum water feature in St George’s Square. No surprises there then!

I’ve long held the belief that important decisions are not made by elected representatives. But for the scrutiny committee to express outrage and to pass the buck is too much.

In an organisation as unwieldy as Kirklees Council it is essential for an accurate trail to be seen.

The labyrinthine nature of Kirklees seems to rival the Politburo in the former Soviet Union.

I would also like to know how much the thing actually cost. Surely officers should have been compelled to reveal this to the committee, accepting, of course, they know.

Surely it about time that the Cabinet took the officers to one side and told them who actually is in charge!

Trevor Woolley

Linthwaite

Belt-tightening time

I AGREE with Ray Thompson’s sentiments regarding the ‘top brass’ in Kirklees (Mailbag, April 13) but ask, are we, or should we be, concerned for the 1,500 council workers in Kirklees who may lose their jobs?

Are these the same council workers who demanded and gained a pay rise last year and now, with the support of Clr Mehboob Khan, are claiming another pay increase?

Isn’t anyone in Kirklees aware that our country is in serious financial difficulties and that wage increases and bonuses of any kind are out of the question for at least two years? In some instances, they cannot even be maintained at the same levels.

As in the private sector, austerity measures must be implemented and cuts in the salaries of any council employer earning in excess of £80k must be made.

But our councillors and the senior executives employed within Kirklees will remain in Cloud Cuckoo Land.

Who in their right senses would implement bonuses in excess of £1m and employ plasterers at a wage in excess of £80k?

We hear from chief executive Rob Vincent that we are actually cutting the number of heads of departments in Kirklees. He has not told us the cost of this cull with pay-offs, retirements and gold plated pension top-ups.

Unfortunately this has been overseen by a bunch of councillors ‘not fit for purpose’.

Oh for the quality of councillor of the old Borough who were in these privileged positions for the good of the electorate and were accountable to same.

David Meredith

Fixby

Praise for Lucas Town

I AM writing on behalf of the Meningitis Trust in response to your story about Lucas Town (Examiner, April 14) who has beaten meningitis, defying doctors’ diagnoses that he will never walk, and has earned his first swimming badge.

Lucas’s story provides inspiration to us all, but particularly to those who have experienced meningitis.

At the Meningitis Trust we are constantly reminded how devastating meningitis can be, changing people’s lives in an instant and leaving some with lifelong after-effects.

Lucas’s story gives hope to many who are struggling to cope with the impact of the disease right now.

We provide professional support to people affected by meningitis, offering a lifeline to people struggling with the impact of the disease. We offer a range of free services to anyone affected – from counselling, to financial grants, to art therapy for children. We are also dedicated to raising life-saving awareness of the disease, its signs and symptoms and its after-effects.

We wish Lucas the very best of luck in his swimming to ensure he is able to walk – he really is such an inspiration.

Matt Clarke

Community Development Coordinator for Huddersfield Meningitis Trust

It’s not that taxing

HAVING looked at the general election manifestos of the leading parties, they talk about ‘fairness’ but do not have a real goal or vision – an end product.

I would like to see at least one political party state that their aim is to turn Britain into an egalitarian society – in other words, reverse the current trend and actually reduce, rather than extend the gap between rich and poor – a gap which perhaps surprisingly has widened even under a Labour government.

There are several ways to be tried in a bid to achieve this with hardly any cost to most taxpayers.

On pay, we have seen recently that NHS executives have been given a percentage increase of over 6% – double the percentage increase for front line staff.

The whole method of settling pay by use of percentage increases is unfair as this only serves to widen the pay gap between those at the top and the lower paid. The government needs to intervene and make this method illegal.

Instead, pay increases should be a set figure (not a percentage) and this figure can be determined by collective bargaining in the usual way without any government interference.

The difference between using a flat rate figure instead of a percentage would be staggering. For example, under the current method, a nurse earning say, £20,000 per year is given a 5% pay rise and the executive on £100,000 gains the same percentage increase, the nurse would now receive an additional £1,000 per year, or roughly £20 per week. The executive however, would receive £5,000 increase – almost £100 per week. Prior to the pay increases, the difference between the two workers was £80,000 per annum, now it becomes £84,000 thus increasing the already large pay gap.

Instead, give all workers on all pay scales the same £20 per week (or whatever figure is agreed). This way, the differential remains the same but the workers lower down the pay scale would be far better off in ‘real terms’.

This method of settling pay rounds, coupled with progressive taxation, would go a very long way in achieving an egalitarian society.

One very real problem for people on low to modest incomes, including many pensioners, is that too great a proportion of their income goes on paying bills.

As a consequence, many people have to resort to using credit cards or digging into their often meagre savings simply to get by. This can’t be right. Therefore, my suggestion would be to re-nationalise utility companies and then only charge for the gas, electricity and water actually used. Standing charges would be abolished.

In addition, the rate of VAT (a tax which was only introduced by the Conservatives under the leadership of Edward Heath as preparation for entry into the European Union), should be reduced and eventually abolished as this is a tax which has a disproportionate effect on people on lower or middle incomes and is also a disincentive to spend.

The abolition of VAT would have the positive benefit of enabling the price of goods to be significantly reduced, thus encouraging spending, helping businesses, boosting manufacturing output and giving exports a competitive edge.

Of course, there would be a loss of revenue but this would be recovered from a more progressive direct taxation system. In effect, there would be a shift from indirect to direct taxation.

The above suggestions would of course only be a start, but these are the type of practical relatively cost-free measures that would begin to close the gap between rich and poor and create a genuinely fair society.

Robert Nicholls

Kirkburton

A difference to lives

ON Tuesday, April 6, I and two friends collected money outside Huddersfield Railway Station and outside the Galpharm Stadium to raise money for the charity Habitat for Humanity.

We raised £100.35 and we would like to say a massive thank you to everybody who donated.

The money raised will help pay for building materials and equipment to build houses for people who live in an impoverished village in rural Zambia.

The money will also enable us to buy clothing, toys and educational equipment to donate to the local schools and orphanages in Zambia.

Once again we would like to say a big thank you to everybody who very kindly donated.

This really will make a huge difference to people’s lives.

Rebecca Hollingdale

Shepley

Crime matters

IF I remember correctly R A Vant criticised my letter regarding those yesteryear crimes.

He said I should provide statistics and talks about the 1958 Conservative conference and what was said at that conference.

Does he believe that statement? As for providing statistics just whose figures are we to believe, mine, his, a political party? Without the rose tinted glasses we all know that whoever has been in power those figures have been massaged to make good report. Labour, Conservative, Liberal they all have their own take on the matter.

Reading between the lines Mr Vant seems to be of the opinion that I am having a stab at Labour well just at the moment they are the party in power and have been for some time. The Conservatives in the past have done much the same with these figures as Labour. I have just got sick and tired of being lied too over these issues.

I said that Mr Vant was entitled to his own opinion. I myself would not take any figures that have been issued by any political party as

correct.

What I was using was the yard stick of having lived through those times. Crime, drug abuse and unemployment in our area was low. I have at no time said there was no crime. There has been crime from the moment man stepped on this earth.

What rankles me is the fact that all our social problems have increased in my opinion and no one has set about reducing these issues.

Disregarding the political issue can Mr Vant honestly place his hand on his heart and say that crime and the social issues that we face today

are less than we faced 40/50 years ago? If the answer is yes then I must be out there all on my own?

R J Bray

Shelley