Readers' letters - November 9

Our MPs represent their parties, not us

Friday, 10th November 2017, 2:02 pm
Updated Tuesday, 12th December 2017, 11:40 am

Recent accusations of inappropriate behaviour opens yet another window on life as an MP.

They seem to exist in a Westminster bubble far removed from the realities of life in our austere world in Lancashire.

So, what are our expectations?

Sign up to our daily newsletter

The i newsletter cut through the noise

I believe we deserve representatives who show respect to all individuals, no matter what gender, race, religion or political persuasion.

To my mind they need to have experience of the issues we face every day, not be products of the Westminster/political party training academy.

Some of their behaviour appears to demonstrate a belief that they are superior to the rest of us mere mortals.

The sexual harassment seems to result from a view of superiority, and previous issues on expenses also suggest they feel MPs are answerable to no-one.

However, the worst problem which needs urgent resolution is that, although we all vote and elect MPs, they don’t represent us. Once they get to Westminster, they seem only to represent their political parties and consequently the furtherance of the imbalance of infrastructure investment towards London and the South East.




No such thing as clean energy

Opponents of shale gas extraction in Lancashire argue that we should be investing in ‘clean’ energy forms such as wind, wave and solar instead.

But the reality is there’s no such thing as clean when it comes to producing large amounts of energy, reliably, for a population of our size and with an advanced industrial economy.

For example, making solar panels requires the mining of silica sand which is then chemically processed at high temperatures to produce the silicone wafers that are needed to convert the sun’s energy into electricity.

Cleaning the reactor vessels in between batches uses sulphur hexafluoride – the most potent of all greenhouse gases, and 25,000 times more climate-damaging than CO2.

Chinese rivers and fields have been polluted with manufacturing waste, including the highly toxic silicon tetrachloride and hydrofluoric acid after inadequate treatment.

According to Greenpeace and the Chinese Renewable Energy Industries Association, some two-thirds of the country’s solar-manufacturing firms were failing to meet national standards for environmental protection and energy consumption in 2014.

That’s just solar. Wind has similar issues, including the use of magnets made from rare earth metals; large-scale hydroelectric dams releasing methane into the atmosphere; anaerobic digestion plants that produce biogas having to be constantly fed with food and farm waste which necessitates the creation of lots of HGV journeys; and wood-burning biomass plants producing harmful particulates just like coal.

I’m not suggesting for a minute that we should abandon our pursuit of these and other energy technologies – I believe they have an important role to play – but we do need to be more honest about their unwanted side-effects, including those we don’t see in this country but that are absolutely occurring elsewhere in the world.

All energy is dirty, destructive and disruptive to someone, somewhere. Regrettably, that includes renewables.

At least with Lancashire shale gas, it’s happening in a country with high standards of environmental protection and workplace safety.

Lee Petts

Managing Director



Right decision

A very wise and sensible decision made by Judge Jeff Brailsford in finding the anti- fracking protesters at Little Plumpton not guilty of obstructing traffic on the A583 at Cuadrilla’s fracking site.

In view of the judge’s summing up, it would appear there was not just cause to arrest and prosecute these very decent people who were simply exercising their democratic right to protest.

The effects of fracking (which is banned in many countries and regions including Scotland) is a serious issue that will affect all of us in the Fylde.

We should respect and support those who lawfully make a stand against it.

Diane Silva



‘BBC gets cash from the EU’

So now we know why the BBC has so few Brexiteers on its news programmes. It receives £2.7m from the EU to sport Brussels propaganda and who will have provided the bulk of this money?

The British working class taxpayer, the very people who voted leave in such large numbers. The Liberal establishment knows no shame.

Long Live free Britain.

P Ward



Old bus was a Leyland Lion T2

Re: Bamber Bridge Motor Services picture (LP Looking Back, November 1). Research leads me to suggest that this is a Leyland Lion LT2, which was built between 1926 and 1940. Its registration was most likely to be TF 2693. Ribble Motors had similar buses but, unlike the BBMS bus, these had recessed front passenger doors, rather than the flush doors that you can see in the photograph.

Many is the time that I have ridden on a BBMS bus, but even I am not old enough to have remembered riding on this type!

Neil Swindlehurst

Walmer Bridge