CALLS are flying around demanding Councillor Cowling’s resignation. Is she the problem? Well partly, but only in part. This is how Ryedale District Council (RDC) works under her regime.

The chief executive has a proposal for Ryedale. (This in itself is, of course, good – a chief executive without proposals, ideas etc would be useless). This is followed by the senior officers; it then becomes an “officer’s recommendation”.

Councillor Cowling, as leader, then slavishly follows. In turn, this is followed equally slavishly by the Tory councillors. This is a “council conga”.

The people who should make the decisions are the councillors. As the largest group the Tory councillors should propose policy. This would be expected to be followed by the votes.

In the conga council we are in the position where the Tory councillors almost always support the officer’s recommendation. The opposition councillors are unable to persuade the Tory councillors because they, the Tories, are not deciding but following.

This is costing the taxpayers of Ryedale dearly: l £200,000 plus lost from the first Wentworth Street Car Park application – the Tories followed the officer’s recommendation.

l £200,000 plus lost from the second Wentworth Street Car Park application – the Tories followed the officer’s recommendation.

l £600,000 plus lost to Affordable Housing and Public Open Space – unlike other councils no challenge from the Tories. The Tories followed the officer’s recommendation.

The solution is for the Tory councillors to think, challenge and where appropriate, vote against the council conga. Until this happens, replacing Councillor Cowling will make no difference.

They have their chance this week. If the Tory councillors stop the sale of Wentworth Street Car Park then they deserve a new leader. If they continue with the farce of selling Wentworth Street Car Park and wasting Ryedale taxpayer’s money then they deserve to be led as they are.

John Clark, Liberal Group Leader

 

Thanks for help at coffee morning

RE: Macmillan Coffee Morning Friday, September 25. I would like to thank all the people who donated money, and the ones who gave raffle prizes. These people made the coffee morning at my home such a huge success. We managed to raise a magnificent amount of £330 for Macmillan Cancer Care.

Kathleen Cuthbertson, Malton

 

Truth needed on fracking please

HOW refreshing that John Dewar recognises the inaccurate information regarding fracking in North Yorkshire. Is he the operations director of the same Third Energy that employed Tessla last year, who categorically told me that their survey was totally inadequate for anyone wishing to frack?

Perhaps it is not the same Third Energy which assured local residents in its public consultation document that waste water would be piped away from Kirby Misperton, but in its planning application is saying it will be tankered. This will add to the number of HGV movements which were estimated at 266, but in the application now amount to 910.

John Dewar talks about discreet operations, hence presumably, the need for a screen of 42 shipping containers around the site at Kirby Misperton to muffle the noise. We were told that this operation would be for a test well yet the application is also for nine years of gas production.John Dewar’s claim that fracking will provide employment is surprising since the planning application states that no local jobs will be created. Can we once and for all nail the myth that fracking at Kirby Misperton will provide energy for Ryedale? It echoes Amber Rudd’s statement, “Local gas for local people”. All electricity comes from the National Grid and to suggest otherwise is misleading. As for gas, along with many others in Ryedale, our village is not connected to a mains gas supply.

As long as we are in receipt of inaccurate and misleading information, it is difficult to accept the truth of all the other statements, fed to us by Third Energy and their supporters.

Peter Allen, Cawton

 

Real cost of energy production to land

SHALE gas extraction, or fracking, threatens to disfigure large areas of northern England.

You could take a pragmatic view and say that it is an expediency to provide a quick source of energy to uphold our present lifestyle. But that ignores what it will cost us in the upheaval and disfiguration it leaves behind in the ordinary countryside, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty or even our National Parks.

Not only that but it contributes yet more to the damage caused by global warming. However, fracking is only the latest example of how we mismanage our energy needs. We have been here before.

It seems that to produce energy areas of humanity, wildlife and countryside can be sacrificed regardless. Look at the ugly legacy of spoil tips left by the mining of coal and the number of miners killed in the process.

Consider the hazard of nuclear explosions and contamination or the storage of waste matter said to be dangerous for hundreds of years. Oil production also causes many problems from frequent and damaging oil spills. Worst of all, these are mostly carbon-based fuels and we have only just begun to feel the effects of global warming. The pattern of short-term expediency repeats itself.

Will nothing stop the relentless urge to produce energy regardless of the true cost?

Renewable sources of energy – wind, solar and water – could probably provide the majority of our requirements given the right encouragement and development. Why then has so little been done to develop green energy? But despite much talk, little real progress has been made and in some ways is in decline.

The neglect of renewable energy in favour of short-term advantage should be reversed. Renewable energy is safer, cleaner and will ultimately help us all to survive and prosper.

A Killelay, Hovingham