Get in touch: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting YORK to 80360 or send an email»
You can e-mail your letters to letters@thepress.co.uk
We welcome letters on all topics but please keep them to 200 words at most; shorter letters are most likely to be included. The editor reserves the right to edit letters.
If you wish the letter to appear in The Press you must include your full postal address and a daytime telephone number.
10:58am Saturday 13th February 2010 in
York has so many great stories to tell, not all of them obvious. One of York’s hidden stories is about the influence on this city, and on the wider world, of members of the Rowntree family. So it’s good news that the BBC is preparing a film about Seebohm Rowntree’s seminal work on unemployment in York, and its contemporary relevance (What happened to them?, The Press, February 3). York’s Rowntree Society has been helping them with this, much as we did with Andrew Marr’s recent series, which included a segment about Seebohm.
We urge Press readers to do whatever they can to help to track down the descendants of the families studied by Seebohm in 1910 – let’s help the BBC tell another great story from York.
Steven Burkeman, Chair, The Rowntree Society, Whitby Avenue, York.
Unknown factors With the General Election fast approaching, the Lib-Dem propaganda machine appears to have gone into overdrive, judging by the number of leaflets finding their way through letterboxes in York Outer.
One theme that Lib-Dem candidate Madeleine Kirk continually refers to is the Conservative candidate Julian Sturdy being “shipped in” from Harrogate and that he is an “unknown farmer”.
In the interests of balance and fairness, I would like to refer to some unknowns – both “known” and “unknown” – that the Lib Dems prefer to remain unknown.
While it is known that Coun Kirk has stood unsuccessfully for election many times in the past, it is unknown to many that she stood as a “shipped-in, unknown candidate” in Leeds East (1997) and Elmet (2001 and 2005), and sandwiched in between was an equally unsuccessful try for election as a Yorkshire and Humber MEP (1999).
Such hypocrisy levelled by Coun Kirk at her political opponents is so unwise when her York council colleague Coun Tom Holvey is standing in Selby as a “shipped-in, unknown” candidate and unknown to many, ex-York Lib-Dem councillor Cuthbertson is standing even further afield as an “unknown” candidate in Barnsley South.
Of course, these are all “known – unknowns”. The one ‘unknown – unknown’ is of course the General Election result.
However, Coun Kirk attempts to portray the York Outer campaign as a “known – unknown” by stating that Labour can not win the seat.
This again is unwise, because it is a “known – known” that after the General Election the Liberal Democrats will not be forming the next Government, not this year, next year or anytime ever.
With thanks to Donald Rumsfeld for the inspiration behind this letter.
Mark Warters, Yew Tree Mews, Osbaldwick, York.
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Looking for a new career? Find a job in York and all around North Yorkshire
Search Now »
Love and friendship - find your perfect match.
Search Now »
Find properties for sale and rent in and around York.
Search Now »
Find used vehicles for sale all over Yorkshire and the North.
Search Now »
GailForSwins says...
11:44pm Tue 16 Feb 10
The same goes for lots of Labour paper candidate seats - just look at Mr Alexander the Labour candidate in York Outer - just making up numbers by any stretch of the imagination. If Labour had any chance of winning they would have chosen a candidate of far more gravitas than Mr Alexander.
Regarding York Outer - that Mrs Kirk is a local candidate is a fact - that Mr Sturdy is not a local candidate is also a fact - something that seems to have hit a nerve. All the Lib Dems are doing, probably a bit more forcefully than to your liking is reinforcing both of those facts.
Given that Labour & the Tories are both cosying up to Mr Clegg and the Lib Dems in the knowledge that a hung parliament is a distinct probability - your last assertion is also wide of the mark.
No-one reading your letter thinks you have an objective view on proceedings anyway - and that is also a fact !!!