GALA THEATRE: IN the same way that Brian Sewell's ill-judged remarks have focused attention on the Baltic, I suppose we must appreciate the reader or two who consistently seeks to berate the Gala Theatre, and the city council's management and ownership of it.

The sad difference is that Brian Sewell's lack of knowledge comes from his London-centred viewpoint, and that cannot be used as an excuse with the two Northern Echo readers.

Gala Theatre was created by and for local people. It is unique, and has quickly built a large, loyal following of Durham residents who enjoy having a wonderful theatre, large screen cinema, restaurant, caf and meeting place in the city centre.

It has created a new landmark for the city and brought new life to the area around it, with many newly-refurbished shops in Claypath reflecting the increasing footfall.

We celebrated Gala's first birthday last week with a fantastic full house - one of many we have enjoyed during recent months.

Like every theatre in the country, the Gala will need some degree of subsidy to continue to offer the range of events that keep it an exciting, attractive venue. For the thousands of local people who enjoy Gala's entertainment, meals, music and surroundings, it will be a relevant contribution to a venue which brings so much to the city and the region. Thankfully, Brian Sewell's opinion that the North-East is inhabited by too many philistines who do not deserve first-class entertainment and culture on their doorstep is not one shared by people in the region - apart from the odd one or two. - Colin Shearsmith, Chef Executive, Durham City Council.

WAR ON IRAQ

THE Gulf War ended about 12 years ago. For the last 11 years or so Saddam Hussein has kept the weapons inspectors of the UN out of Iraq. They are now back in Iraq only because of the uncompromising approach of the US, and to a lesser extent of the UK.

It is now being widely argued in these columns and elsewhere that war against Iraq should not proceed without the sanction of the UN. Sounds reasonable, but are we now to wait for another 11 years before any sort of decision is made? - Alan Benn, Bedale.

IT appears that George Bush and Tony Blair are about to launch round one of World War Three, simply because they don't like Saddam Hussein.

Nether do I and millions like me, but I hardly think the situation can be improved by the slaughter of the innocent.

It appears that the job of Hans Blix is not to find WMD, but to ensure that Saddam cannot effectively resist invasion by American and British forces when it happens.

When President Bush and Mr Blair have finished with Iraq will they turn their attention to a country in the area that has got WMD - I refer to Israel, that client state of the US.

There will be no peace in the Middle East until the running sore that is the Israeli-Palestine conflict is resolved. But of course Israel and Palestine have no oil. - W Collinson, Durham City.

ON my wall at home I have an old print of a National Union of Mineworkers banner from Ramshaw Colliery, near Evenwood.

At the bottom of the banner is the marvellous slogan of the Labour Movement: "Workers of all lands unite. You have nothing to lose but your chains. You have a world to win."

The banner also calls for the Emancipation of Labour and a Co-operative Commonwealth.

Call me a dreamer, but I think most people would like such a society and eventually it will be won, but not by the Labour Party whose leadership is rotten to the core.

It seems as if Tony Blair has replaced the old slogans of yesteryear with a new one: "Workers of the Iraqi lands prepare to suffer. You have nothing to lose but your babies and children. We have a world to win for the oil companies and arms manufacturers." - John Gilmore, Bishop Auckland.

I ASK two questions on the situation with Iraq.

Firstly, a few months ago the phrase "Regime Change" was on the lips of George Bush and Tony Blair. We don't seem to hear it these days. The current phrase seems to be "Saddam must disarm". Does this mean that if Saddam were to disarm tomorrow the fighting machines of the US and Britain would be stood down and Saddam allowed to stay in power?

Mr Blair has said that although there is no direct evidence of a connection between Iraq and al Qaida there are individuals in Iraq who are connected to them.

Mr Blair, there are people like that in this country. Are we going to bomb ourselves? - Name and address supplied.

WE are frequently reminded that Saddam has used chemical weapons against his neighbours and his own people, with specific reference to the massacre at Halabja in 1988.

This was a dreadful war crime, but not merely a wanton act of mass-murder. The objective was to take out the occupying Iranian troops, though it was also intended to kill their Kurdish collaborators and their families. However, unknown to the Iraqis, the Iranians had already left.

The US and their allies were up to their necks in this. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, backed by the US, had encouraged Iraq to invade Iran, raising their oil outputs and contributing the revenues to Saddam's war chest; while America, Britain and other European countries supplied arms, including chemical weapons precursors.

Saddam, therefore, presumed he could get away with it. After all, he had often used chemical weapons against the Iranians before, without objections from his Western backers.

This exposes the breathtaking hypocrisy of the present US/British stance. It will be crystal clear to Saddam that, having lost the support of the US, any attempt to repeat such an atrocity would be suicidal. - Pete Winstanley, Durham.