Letters to the Editor

From the Telegraph & Argus, first published Wednesday 29th Jun 2005.

Spare a thought for the residents

SIR - I am glad the Mela was a success and the weather was fine for all those who enjoyed themselves, but please could the organisers spare a thought for local residents and cut the noise levels.

We live three streets away from Peel Park and over the weekend needed the windows and doors open because of the heat.

Saturday didn't seem too loud, but on Sunday the music got louder and by 6pm was unbearable. This continued non-stop until 8.15pm, despite the thunderstorm.

If we had been watching TV with the volume up full it would not have been as loud.

When the Mela started, it was said it would move round the Bradford parks, but this is the fourth year here.

Please, will somebody have sympathy and put a noise limitation on for future years.

We should not have to shout at each other to make ourselves heard.

Also, this street and adjoining ones are an old people's complex where residents' families and friends visit at weekends.

Nobody could get down to visit and there was nowhere for them to park. It was choc-a-bloc and we were not given parking permits or `residents-only' signs.

Mrs E Higgins, Chatham Street, Bradford

No help to a mum

SIR - Am I wrong to assume that First's `kneeling' buses are there to assist people getting on to buses who cannot easily get on or to make it easier to get a pram or pushchair on and off?

Or is it so they can get down on their knees to ask forgiveness for making people's lives difficult?

The other day my wife got on the 576 to Queensbury with our newborn son. The driver didn't lower the bus and he also never lowered it to assist her with getting off.

I find this appalling behaviour when clearly she was struggling to get the pram on and off and all the driver had to do was push a button to lower the bus.

With such dire standards, no wonder more and more people are turning away from public transport.

Matthew Morley, Hill Top Road, Thornton

Poll on Odeon

SIR - In th editor's note to Bob Watson's letter of June 22, you state "The Odeon was a red brick commercial building, similar to many such buildings across the country". Rubbish, what an insult to the architect.

This multi-brown rustic brickwork at the higher levels in Flemish bond is one of the best you will ever see. Take a good look, as if our super-heated experts get their way, it could be gone.

Regarding the Listing refusal, I received the reply "Too altered internally" to merit a listing status. They did not even look inside. I personally have built a lot in stone, but there's nothing wrong with good quality brick as in Leeds super city.

The 77 per cent you quoted as supporting the Masterplan and lake is misleading, as we have talked to many thousands of people during our campaign, the majority of which did not want that lake, and consider it a joke.

Prove all of this by having two polls with only two options.

POLL 1:

1, Do you want the Odeon demolishing? or 2, Keep the exterior fabric, and refurbish the interior?

POLL 2:

1, Do you want that lake? or 2, More substantial, open spaces?

N E Littlewood, Huddersfield Road, Wyke.

Just not practical

SIR - It has been reported that 77 per cent of those who took part in a survey supported the Masterplan.

I would like to think that all Bradfordians, with the possible exception of Maud Marshall, realise the difference between a concept and practicality. For instance, the final plans for the Broadway redevelopment are vastly different to the giant rotunda in Alsop's plan.

Likewise, whatever becomes of our beloved Odeon site, I doubt it will sprout giant glass mushrooms as per the plan.

Why is it then that the monstrous lake seems to be sacrosanct?

The other day, while seeking shelter from the unaccustomed heat, I sat for a short while among the mature trees to the rear of the magistrates court. How sad, I thought, that these could soon be decimated to make way for one man's distorted vision.

Of course, as one of your correspondents has already pointed out, if the ordinary public of Bradford were represented on the working party, common sense may yet prevail.

Eddie Bennett, Duchy Drive, Heaton.

Baby `prescription'

SIR - I have just heard a news item suggesting that couples who are having difficulty conceiving should change their diets.

They should stop eating pulses, ie peas, beans etc, and also not eat soya products as all these can affect the sperm, making them less vigorous. The obvious solution would appear to be to discard the above "healthy" eating habits and adopt eating habits which would have to include burgers, chips, pasties, etc.

However, this alternative diet must be eaten `on the hoof', ie while walking around town.

Another helpful item would be a mobile phone attached to the ear, and a fair number of body piercings.

There are many examples of fertile, young couples eschewing this lifestyle in any town centre.

Surely an inspiration for all couples wanting to adopt a change of lifestyle in the hope of successfully conceiving the longed-for baby.

Sheila Walker, Beacon Road, Bradford.

Smoking ignorance

SIR - In response to Alan Holdsworth's letter (T&A, June 23), I was appalled by the ignorance and lack of understanding of the dangers of smoking.

Mr Holdsworth asks why there is currently an increase in cancer when only 30 per cent of the population smoke.

This is because there is a time lag between starting smoking and the onset of lung cancer. The lung cancer cases we are seeing now are in those who started smoking in the Sixties and Seventies.

He also states Olympic gold medallists have died from lung cancer (I assume he is not referring to Jesse Owens who was smoking close to 100 cigarettes a day before his death from lung cancer, long after his athletics career ended).

Smoking, while being the major cause of lung cancer, is not the only cause. Exposure to radon gas and hazards such as asbestos can cause lung cancer, but that does not diminish the role smoking plays.

And to claim the Chief Medical Officer is neurotic really says it all about those people who still insist that smoking is not harmful.

The sooner it is banned from all public places, the better.

G Stevens, White Abbey Road, Bradford

A sad argument

SIR - Holocaust deniers argue that Hitler did not slaughter six million Jews. It was all a Zionist lie. Smoker Alan Holdsworth uses much the same tactic in his letter of June 23. Smoking is not the most common cause of preventable death on earth, he argues. It is a scare story dreamed up by some kind of medical mafia.

I find this proposition so utterly ridiculous that I will not even dignify it with a reply! Mr Holdsworth then trots out the old chestnut of equating exhaust emissions with tobacco smoke, blithely ignoring the fact that without vehicles, our civilisation would collapse. I foresee no such apocalyptic outcome in a world bereft of fags!

Further, we all inhale vehicle emissions, smokers and non-smokers alike. So perhaps Mr Holdsworth could explain why smokers are still ten times more likely to die of cardio-thoracic diseases than non-smokers.

I read his letter with a mixture of anger and sadness, in that he should seek to justify, even encourage, an addiction to the most lethal drug on earth.

Peter Wilson, Thornhill Grove, Calverley.

Archive Home