Readers' letters - August 29

I live in Buckshaw Village and am concerned about changes to the 109a route that serves the centre of the village.

I can accept that this bus will run only once an hour instead of every 30 minutes, but am very concerned that it will no longer travel directly past the railway station and the two supermarkets.

The 109a is being rerouted to skirt the main part of the village by using Buckshaw Avenue.

It simply does not make sense to run a bus past a group of warehouses towards the Sea View pub (already an area known as a traffic bottleneck during rush hours) and ignore the current route, which goes through the heart of the village, past homes, shops, a school, a railway station and a medical centre rather than a bunch of warehouses.

I believe the route is subsidised by LCC and I believe the bus company should provide a service that runs as close as possible to areas where people live and want to travel. It will also run only as far as Leyland, which means that the whole of Buckshaw Village, which is served by the 109 and the 109a, will now have just one bus to Preston every 30 minutes, unless they are prepared to change at Leyland using the 109a.

People living in the centre of Buckshaw face a long walk to the main road to catch the 109, while the 108a will travel up Buckshaw Avenue, which is a warehouse area.

A long walk from the majority of housing!

Bridget Murphy

via email

brexit

Theresa May’s Flying Circus

The Government’s approach to the Brexit negotiations are increasingly becoming akin to a surreal Monty Python sketch.

Initially, Cameron only offered the country a referendum vote under the conceited assumption that he couldn’t lose.

Consequently, there was

no plan B and after all this time, the Government still doesn’t seem to have a viable plan or realistic vision for Brexit.

The signals coming out of Number 10 still largely amount to a confused and contradictory wish list, containing simplistic notions of ‘cherry-picking’ the bits the Government knows are vital to sustaining Britain’s economy, while ditching the bits that the general public (and many Tory supporters) are vocally opposed to.

While it absolutely right that the Government tries to get the best exit deal possible for Britain, and this indeed can only be done by negotiation, there seems little more to current Government strategy except short-sightedness.

From day one, the EU completely dismissed the notion that Britain could be offered a special, bespoke deal that works better than the agreements currently offered to both EU and EEA paying members.

No matter how

‘desperate’ the French or Germans are to sell their cars here in the UK, it would be nonsense to suggest that the EU would even consider tearing itself apart in this way.

The referendum vote

was simply one of IN or

OUT.

You can be sure that the EU will also be working from this perspective.

Rather than wishful thinking, the Government therefore needs to be working seriously on the plan B that David Cameron thought was totally unnecessary for European Exit.

Paul Dodenhoff

via email

Brexit

Let’s get on with leaving

I like the letter from Richard Ainley about Brexit (LP Letters, August 21).

Why drag our feet? Hasn’t the UK paid for most of the building in Brussels? So let’s get out – the UK will be fine when we leave. We will get trade and do great.

I will never vote Labour again until they get rid of the leader, he needs to go. If we get someone with backbone then I might change my mind. Please get on with it Brexit.

Linda Hassouna

Fulwood

driving

Assessments for over 70s

Re: the letter Pensioners are Better Drivers, from Ken Fleming (LP Letters, August 17). I have to agree with some of Ken’s comments but disagree with some others.

As a 70 year old, I agree that I am not past my best. However, I see many older (or even younger) drivers who should not be allowed anywhere near the driving seat.

I do agree that, to renew your licence at 70, you should have to take some sort of assessment, but not the full-blown driving test. I would have been more than happy for a qualified tester to sit with me for an hour or so while I drove him/her around.

On the subject of using mobile phones while driving, many older drivers are either not tech-savvy or they are not addicted to the phone. I am tech-savvy, having worked in a technical occupation all my working life, so I use Bluetooth when driving but do not engage in protracted conversation or send text.

On the subject of using indicators, I was taught to drive by, at the time, the senior advanced driving instructor of the Lancashire Fire Brigade.

When I passed my test, he said, “Right Mick, I’ve taught you to pass your test. Now I’m going to give you an hour for free and I’ll teach you how to drive. If anyone may benefit from a signal, then signal. If not, don’t signal. It’s a waste of time.”

Finally, something I’ve always though to be pointless is the question, “What is the stopping distance from x mph?”

For instance, the stopping distance from 30mph is quoted as 23 metres (75 feet). How many, if asked, could say how far away is 23 metres and would be able to point out how far that was?

Mick Muncaster

Clayton-le-Woods