Folly of targeting lollipops
I read with disgust and horror your article on lollipop cash cost cutting proposals (LEP February 20).
I sincerely hope this is an example of an ill conceived and incompetent proposal rather than a politically motivated game of Russian roulette with our children’s lives. It is aimed at the most valuable, most dedicated and yet the least paid employees of the county council.
Headteachers are having to choose between educational needs or child safety. The proposal is flawed anyway, take, for example, where my grandchild is crossed.
Stonebridge roundabout, in Longridge, is the busiest and most dangerous crossing point in Longridge.
It needs two lollipops to control it and crosses children from three primary schools and two secondary schools yet it is not located outside any school. Who will pay for lollipop patrols? They can’t be employed by five schools and it is unlikely one school will pick up the bill.
This proposal, should it be passed, will lead to job cuts and without doubt either serious injury or death of an innocent child. I sincerely hope this proposal is reconsidered before this happens.
County councillors should examine their consciences and take the appropriate action or resign.
J Hughes, Grimsargh
Care standard will be effected
Lancashire County Council has indicated it will protect front line services.
I understand learning disability services are being “off loaded” by the county council to private companies.
People with complex needs will still be cared for by county council staff but people with moderate needs will face changes, as will staff members who do such an essential job.
This will mean people with learning disabilities will lose frontline services, as the carers are their point of contact.
John Pope, Lancaster
Motorists are a courts cash cow
My daughter was recently snapped at 35mph in a 30mph limit on an empty dock road. Fair cop I suppose.
She was made aware of the offence by summons through the post.
A busy mother of schoolkids, when a second court letter subsequently arrived, she assumed it to be confirmation of the statutory speeding fine and it remained unopened for a few days. Big Mistake.
Despite having enough vehicle and personal information to issue a named and addressed summons complete with vehicle details the court then charge her with failing to provide details to the police she has incurred the wrath of the court to the tune of £730 in total for a minor speeding offence and an unseen oversight.
Four other poor souls incurred the same penalty at the same sitting. These cases, no doubt, dispensed with in the hour and a tidy £3,500 to jingle in the court coffers and pay the magistrates expenses for a couple of days.
No recourse to mitigation or personal circumstance.
Some other sentences handed down at the same court sitting were : thieving - fined £70 , thieving – conditional discharge, drink driving – fined £100, assault and criminal damage – conditional discharge etc ,etc.
They were obviously smart enough not to exceed the speed limit when being caught. Maybe I should recommend she does a little shoplifting to pay her court dues – certainly a lot easier on her tight purse.
The law is an ass, the greedy beast being fed by the easily targeted and mainly law abiding motorist.
Disgusted parent, South Ribble
Tax rise but no more bobbies
I see from that council tax is due to rise once again (LEP February 20).
The general electorate have been conned by Police and Crime Commissioner Clive Grimshaw.
At meetings held and phone-ins, the people of Preston were asked by Clive Grimshaw would the people of Preston be willing to pay a little more on their council tax to get more police on the beat.
This morning on Radio Lancashire the outcome of Lancashire County Council’s meeting at County Hall it was made public that council tax would rise under this Labour council backed by the Liberal Democrats.
But having got the approval of the general public to increase the council tax, Clive Grimshaw now says this will not increase the police on the beat.
Mrs M Fazakerley, Preston
He was always a friendly face
My late father and four brothers, all deceased, followed PNE whenever they could and they talked about Sir Tom with great admiration, I’m sure if they were here today, they would be sad at his passing.
My late husband and I used to have a ride out on a Saturday and ended up at Seniors chip shop at Normoss for our tea, a couple of times we had the table next to Sir Tom and family.
He chatted to us as if he lived next door, he was very friendly, down to earth, this was 11 to 12 years ago.
To his family I extend my very deepest sympathy. Rest in Peace, Sir Tom.
Mrs Coomber, Bamber Bridge
Football pay is beyond the pale
I was sitting at home writing a eulogy of Sir Tom for future publication in a regional magazine and had just completed my latest paragraph with the following: “ he captivated fans in the days when players wore baggy shorts and earned £14 a week and to them he was simply a soccer god,” when at that very moment on the radio in the background I heard that a certain Manchester United footballer had just signed a five-and-a-half year contract equating to £300,000 a week.
How obscene. What an upside down world we live in.
S L Grimsargh