THE question of the potash mine is not one of jobs or conservation (The Press, July 2).

The idea that ecology can be separated from economy is a dangerous one. They both have the same Greek root, oikos, meaning house.

Economics (house-management) is a sub-division of ecology (study of the house), which deals with the complexities of inter-related systems we are just beginning to comprehend.

The apparent free lunch gained by exploiting finite natural resources only works when we ignore the ecological implications.

Aside from the worrying precedent set by development on a National Park, we should be using far more simple and low-tech methods of growing crops than destroying our soil structure with artificial fertiliser (the main use for potash).

Industrial development is considered extremely narrowly, as a knee-jerk jobs rather than a devastating attack on the natural world for short-term economic gain.

Since the loss of imported oil from the USSR in the early 90s, Cuba had to do without the fertiliser she had been using to run state farms.

Small co-operatives, organic methods and a return to draught animals increased production with a far lower cost in fuel, parts and chemicals.

Far more jobs could be created across the area by a broader, ecological economics approach that understands the stewardship of nature can be harmonised with human needs.

Joshua Taylor, Portland Street, York 

 

FURTHER to Mr Massey’s letter on the EU (July 3), the contention that the vote in the 1973 referendum was merely for the UK to join an economic community is quite simply wrong.

I was active in that referendum campaign.

The UK was at that time a member of the European Free Trade Association, and it was known that whatever the outcome of the referendum, negotiations were already under way to establish a free trade agreement between the EU and the member countries of EFTA, without the latter having to become EU members.

The aims of the EU, which motivated the UK proposal to become a member, had been long known and clearly stated.

They were “to achieve greater unity between member states in order to safeguard the European heritage, and to facilitate their social and economic progress through discussion and common action on economic, social, cultural, educational, scientific, legal and administrative matters, and to work for the maintenance and furtherance of human rights and fundamental freedoms”.

Laudable aims of co-operation between states that the existing 23 members had been working to implement since each joined – starting in 1949 – and had established a machinery to do so.

It is no good saying after a referendum that you did not know what you were voting for.

Maurice Vassie, Deighton, York

 

WHAT an excellent letter from Judith Morris (Letters, June 30) re the situation over the parked cars in Heslington Lane, near the golf club – using that road regularly I have witnessed many ‘near misses’.

I fail to understand why, when the planning permission for the extension to the university was agreed that the council/county council did not stipulate that adequate parking areas were built on the huge amount of land they now have.

To see the vast expensive-to-maintain landscaping areas is amazing.

The university authority obviously feels that this is more important than making free adequate parking facilities for their staff and students.

They seem totally oblivious to the ill-feeling they have generated between themselves and, firstly, the Badger Hill residents over the on-street parking there and now spreading into Broadway and the Fulford community.

Where is the community spirit from the university?

J Todd, Broadway, York

 

REFERENCE Mr Tiney’s assertions about Network Rail (NR) and HS2 (Letters, July 2).

Publicly-owned NR has a desperately poor record of project management.

The June ORR report quotes overhead line renewals 77 per cent behind schedule, signalling renewals 63 per cent and 39 per cent of missed project completion outputs.

Apart from budget overspends, other milestones have been missed for the electrification of the line, including the Liverpool/Manchester precursor to the Trans-Pennine electrification. Delays to the TP scheme are still uncertain.

Far from being “told to slow down”, the whole future of NR is under consideration with its board being abolished, a new chairman appointed and the very future of the company and its regulation re-assessed.

The former Labour Rail Minister, Lord Adonis, outlined the need for HS2. The West Coast mainline had received a budget of £13 billion to update its Victorian layout, 50-year-old signalling system and increase capacity.

While it was also the busiest freight line in Europe, exporters and freight companies continuously complained about delays.

After nearly £10 billion had been spent with only Preston to Rugeley updated, the programme was stopped and the HS2 approach developed.

HS2 is to provide a modern express service North to South for passenger and freight, enabling the West Coast and East Coast lines to be upgraded for intermediate traffic.

When the East Coast line is being upgraded, the present London service is forecast to take up to four hours from Leeds/York.

That’s what HS2 is about.

John Barrett, Strensall, York