Letters: The real issue

Road safety was brought to the attention of the Worsall Parish Council some weeks ago by a group of parishioners, quite openly and not behind anyone's back, as things should be.

Last week there was one fatal and two other major road accidents on the B1264 within the parish boundary, all involving motorcyclists, hospitals and helicopters for two of them. The parish council was already, and is, working with the highways department seeking to enhance the local road safety measures.

Meanwhile, extraordinary speeding continues. I am aware that the urgency is understood by those involved in the matter of road safety.

In contrast, what a ridiculous over-reaction we have suffered to a secretive anonymous complaint about the incorrect spelling of the name of a local lane at Low Worsall.

Articles in the papers, letters to Editors, involvement of a local and respected historian and a request for help to the parish council from Hambleton District Council.

No-one has remarked on the complainant not only writing anonymously but, presumably the same person, also indulging in the vandalism of the sign itself.

How sad it is, or is it just a tragic sign of the times (no pun intended), that even in an easily-resolved matter such as this, the complainant decides to ignore speaking to any of the parish councillors, or even writing to us. It says a lot for the integrity of the parish council that, regardless of the complainant's sad attitude, they have investigated and responded to the district council that the sign is indeed spelt wrongly.

Signed "Piersburgh Lane", it is more correctly, as per my map of 1781 indicates, "Peirseburgh Street"!

Peter Barton (D&S, June 27) offered a correction and even that is wrong. He goes on to refer to a local councillor spiking the matter when it was raised a long time ago.

I can assure him that it was not one of the current parish councillors, and I, for one, do not "spike" matters brought to my attention as a parish councillor.

Am I over-reacting too? I don't care if I am.

OWEN EVANS

Worsall Hall,

Yarm.

Off-putting

Sir, - I think most people will be disappointed at having to pay £4.50 to enter York Minister (D&S, Jun 27), but with only a quarter of the visitors putting something in the box, something had to be done.

Yet the charging could turn out to be as counterproductive as its predecessor when asking for donations and at the same time pointing out that they would expect the offering to be no less than £3.50. Had they first pointed out the huge cost of maintaining such a building and asked the public to be as generous as they possibly could with their donations, things might have been different.

If the million visitors a year could be persuaded to average £1 a head it would help solve their problems. I couldn't think of anything more off-putting than a charged donation.

DOUGLAS PUNCHARD

Bylands,

Keldholme,

Kirkbymoorside.

No confidence

Sir, - You have been kind enough to publish a number of letters from me on the unacceptability of the chief executive of Hambleton District Council investigating serious complaints against his senior colleagues.

My complaint about the council's complaints procedures has now been rejected by the Local Government Ombudsman. I have been told she cannot intervene unless injustice has actually occurred - it would seem she has no role in preventing injustice occurring in the first place.

She has no reason to believe the chief executive is potentially biased - an assertion I find ridiculous given his close relationship with his colleague and the nature of his exchanges with me, some of them in your columns;

If injustice did materialise, then it would not matter because she is there to act as a long-stop - an assertion I find just as ridiculous.

The ombudsman's bizarre decision came as no surprise because I had been told by a member of her staff even before I submitted the matter formally that she was unlikely to accept my complaint because she had approved the council's procedures before they were implemented.

Notwithstanding her apparent confidence in the chief executive and the council's procedures, I was subsequently told I could if I wished submit my complaint to her directly. This was astonishing given that I had previously been told that, by law, she has no discretion whatsoever to accept complaints unless they have first been considered by the council.

My complaint has not and will not be submitted to the council. I have asked repeatedly for an explanation of this flagrant discrepancy but none has been forthcoming. I have assumed this is because it is inexplicable.

Perhaps I can be forgiven for deciding I will not submit my complaint to an ombudsman capable of such a bizarre decision on the council's procedures and incapable of explaining a flagrant discrepancy in her own procedures.

D F SEVERS

Borrowby Avenue,

Northallerton.

Yes, they are

Sir, - In reply to Nicholas Rhea in his article in the (D&S, Jun 20), where he wondered if some mobile phones are disposable, I would like to assure him that they are.

Here at the Butterwick Hospice at Bishop Auckland we give out Freepost envelopes for old mobile phones and inkjet cartridges (except Epson), which then go for recycling. Large concerns such as offices, factories etc can have boxes for toner cartridges, mobile phones and inkjet cartridges for which there is a free collection service. The hospice receives cheques for the value of these form the recycling company.

Should anyone require these Freepost envelopes or boxes, please ring the hospice on 01388 603003 and we will be only too pleased to supply.

BERNARD HARRISON

Volunteer recycling co-ordinator,

Butterwick Hospice,

Bishop Auckland.

Not wanted

Sir, - I see that the shortlist of rail companies to run the new Transpennine Express franchise is down to two - First Group and Connex. As Connex has now been sacked from its current franchise in the London-Kent area, surely it should be removed from consideration as a company capable of taking on this important franchise.

S SMITH

6 Thirsk Road,

Northallerton.