I guess that, on the whole, the local residents are in agreement.
But, in order to help pay for the development work, the track are planning "enabling development", an estate of some 200 new houses on the edge of the village on land owned by the track. This represents a significant increase in the size of the village.
The village has suffered considerable expansion, certainly since we first came here about 30 years ago. At a guess I would say it is now twice the size. But the only new amenity that has been added is the building of a surgery, and that is now stretched to busting; so much so that the doctors are threatening to pull out. There have been no new schools, sewers, shops, etc. We have lost one pub (allegedly to provide access to the proposed new development) and two shops.
The new development makes no provision for relieving the pressure on the village facilities. We are all going to have to "budge up" to allow all the new residents to share what is already stretched to breaking point.
So we, the villagers, are going to have to pay for the track development, not with cash, but with an erosion of the value of this community we choose to live in.
Would it be too much to ask all these aforementioned VIPs to put their money where their mouth is, and stump up a contribution?
John and Moira Firth
High Street
Silverstone.

Musical chairs for free parking
We are a business in this area so are absolutely incensed at the proposed business permit change of £350p.a. We have always purchased the maximum of two, so we will be paying £700p.a., as opposed to the proposed £40p.a. for each residents' permit – for exactly the same parking spot! This is both unfair and ludicrous.
Unfortunately there are flaws in these schemes which allow individuals to get round purchasing permits at all, but with a bit of manipulating, still enjoy free parking 24/7!
The main problem is, all residents (not businesses) are given a free visitors' permit which they either use themselves, or pass on to others to park free.
Then they play "musical chairs" outside the permit's time limits by moving their cars to free parking spots within the area. Hey presto, no need to buy permits.
I see the council is proposing to try and eliminate this known problem by withdrawing free visitors' permits and replacing with a £10 book of 50 vouchers. This will not deter the permit evaders who will be only too glad to park for £10 rather than £40! There is always the argument, of course, why should anyone have to pay at all? What I feel should be done is to make all 'free parking bays' one or two hour parking only.
This would stop all those in the area from parking indefinitely in these valuable spots and would encourage them (maybe) to purchase a permit proper. It would also stop those people who work in the town centre who are not resident in the area but take over free parking bays all day, every day!
Who is this person on the council who says: "Oh blimey we've mis-spent our taxpayers' hard-earned money again. How can we pull back an easy £50,000 or so p.a? Oh, I know, easy prey, let's hit the parking permits!" Can I say to that person: "Look no further than your own doorstep dear." Don't keep knocking on our doors, go away!
Angela Hemmings
Address supplied but withheld by request.

Council built its castles on sand
I write in response to your article 'Schools plan short of cash' (Chronicle & Echo, April 11). Councillor Kirkbride is quite correct in that surplus school sites may be sold to fund future development; the crux of the matter is that the playing fields at Parklands are not surplus.
Despite the emotive rhetoric, the county council really has nobody to blame but itself. This is what happens when you build your castles on the sand. It is no use throwing a tantrum after the event; the hawks at County Hall should have done their homework properly in the first place.
Were you or I to base our financial security on a source of income that is entirely dependant on permission from the Government to sell, planning permission being granted and a village green application being defeated, I have no doubt that any reasonable person would describe us as being deranged or negligent, or perhaps even both.
You could not expect to rely on such an arrangement unless you were utterly convinced that the whole system is corrupt in your favour. Thankfully, Ed Balls has proven emphatically that this is not the case.
I also feel it quite rich of Councillor Binley to speak of U-turns, when only two weeks ago he stated: "I think it is absolutely imperative to fight for the green space we have. I will support your application to make the playing fields (at St Luke's) into a village green and I
think you are totally on the right lines with it." I would remind him the playing fields at St Luke's are part of the PFI contract commitment and no man can serve two masters.
H J Croft
Coppice Drive
Parklands
Northampton.

Struggling with influx of people
The House of Lords cross party report on immigration questioned the benefits to this country from the continuing influx of people. Some parts of the media promote the beneficial aspects of immigration, but it does not take a rocket scientist to know that if we have mass uncontrolled immigration, it will affect everyone in the long run.
Interpreters and the number of various languages required for information leaflets etc has cost millions of pounds across the country. Schools are struggling to cope with the individual needs of children with such variations in language and culture. Some schools have to deal with the fact English is the second language for their pupils. All public services are stretched to the limits. The NHS is not and should not be seen as an international service treating anyone and everyone. Despite investment into this service, it is struggling to cope. Is it time for all immigrants to undergo a medical check before being allowed to stay?
Affordable housing was in short supply before the massive influx of people. Now it is almost impossible for young people to enter the rental or sales market. With the vast expansion of housing planned, can our sewerage and water supply systems cope?
Gordon Brown and his predecessor, Tony Blair, have said people who come to Britain should embrace our culture but there is not much evidence of this happening. It is not the fault of people coming to live here as, like the Brits who live elsewhere, they want to live in their own communities.
It would appear some people in government are determined to get rid of our heritage and sovereignty to be a part of the Federal States of Europe. We are approaching St George's Day and if Mr Brown is as patriotic as he says he is, will he insist that all local authority and Government offices fly the flag of St George?
Peter Minney
Irondale Close
Northampton