It is good news that the axe is not going to fall on children’s centres in this area as part of Bradford Council’s budget cuts.

But while campaigners against the proposed cuts should rightly feel pleased, they should also be warned that this could be just a stay of execution. The battle may be won, but the war goes on.

It is heartening, though, that Bradford Council’s executive committee has at least listened to those against the closures and promised to explore the alternative plans put forward by objectors, rather than simply pushing through its original suggestions.

And the Schools Forum has ridden to the rescue with a one-off £3m cash injection which will effectively give the children’s centres in Ilkley, Menston and Burley a year-long reprieve.

But Bradford Council still faces stringent budgetary restraints and if the reprieve is to become more long-term than a year, the campaign to save these facilities must be stepped up.

Proper, workable and sensible ideas must be thought up, thought out and presented to the council in a suitable manner so that the value of these schemes can be quanitified and explained.

There is a lot of work to be done over the coming year to ensure that these children’s centres and the good work they do continues to provide an invaluable service beyond next year. But this is definitely a step in the right direction and much-needed breathing space.

A clear message

The strength of feeling about moves to impose hundreds of new homes on Ilkley and the surrounding communities cannot be underestimated.

An impressive turnout of about 200 people at the public meeting called by Ilkley Parish Council last week should send a clear message to the policymakers that the community finds large numbers of new houses being built here unacceptable.

The 800 homes currently proposed for Ilkley may be a significant climbdown from the figure originally put out a couple of years ago – but it is still far from acceptable to many. Such a number would be very likely to make greenbelt development a certainty if set in stone as the target for local housebuilding. And even this number may not be the limit.

It is still possible that policymakers will be talked into changing the figures yet again to give developers the chance to build on more of the prime land the valley has to offer. This is about far more than just buildings swallowing up the landscape, however.

Residents who live here are well aware of the problems likely to be caused by increasing traffic, greater pressure on the packed local schools to provide for yet more families, and further strain on the existing services and infrastructure.

They experience these issues on a day-to-day basis, and as such are well placed to provide expert views on the likely impact of intensive building development. If the meeting last week is followed up by such an enthusiastic effort to take part in the forthcoming consultation over the Core Strategy of Bradford Council’s Local Plan, then the authorities cannot overlook what is being said.