I WISH to reply to a letter, which I read with interest, headed “So many facts in favour of the new shopping centre,” from Councillor Keith Hutson (December 24). In it he gave comments and his opinions. Some of which were demeaning, to the pressure group who wish the Central Library to remain where it is.
First, I can assure him, the campaign group have some very honest, knowledgable and highly respected people who have given up their time for this cause. Plus the fact we have thousands and thousands of Calderdale people backing us.
I wish to challenge Councillor Hutson’s remark, he thinks the access issue to the Library is bogus. I bet to differ, the access could not be better.
Location is everything. It’s convenient to drop in, whether it’s in one’s lunch hour or for people who have a limited time to spare. It is a fact we have an ageing society, unfortunately for some like myself walking problems occur. Both going downhill and coming up can be difficult, so if the library is moved to the lower part of town it would deprive myself and many others from using the library. In fact, that is taking away one’s independence. This is so wrong! No council should take the quality of life away from those who are finding life difficult to cope. Deliberately.
Councillor Hutson declares the library is not iconic. The answer to that is - it’s what’s inside that matters. They were meant to preserve the written word, to give pleasure, to give knowledge, etc. The archives have been left to treasure. It’s our duty to do so.
A few years ago, a campaign to save the Smith Art Gallery/Library went on for years. However it had a happy ending, when the council realised how important it was. Councillor Colin Stout (Ind) supported our cause. We need more views from councillors. Councillor Hutson was willing to stand up and be counted. This gives one a better understanding of the person they vote for.
Councillors should examine their own conscience, and to change one’s mind is not a weakness, but a sign of strength!
lThis letter appeared in the Courier last week with an omission which wrongly changed one of the points made.