DEFENCE SYSTEMS: THE United States has now asked formally for their Missile Defence System to be based on the North Yorks Moors at Fylingdales.

We must surely urge our MPs to do all they can to urge the Government not to take the UK down this path. Certainly, many MPs have already declared their resistance to the idea.

The system will do nothing for the UK. It is solely to protect the US, or probably more accurately, the US arms industry. Despite this, it will cost the UK taxpayers some £10bn.

Even if use of Fylingdales was intended to provide defence value for the UK, it is widely acknowledged by British and US defence experts that the system cannot work. It's the equivalent of intercepting a speeding bullet with another speeding bullet - the unreality of which has already been demonstrated in various failed US trials of the system.

Even if MDS could work, there are no other nations - "evil axis" or otherwise - capable of producing missiles powerful enough to reach the US. Hence the US has no need to intercept them.

Even if some nation did have such potential, it would be so aware of the massive retaliation it would suffer from the US that it would not be so foolish as to try.

And even if such an attacker did exist, the North York Moors, as an MDS base, would make the area itself a target for attack.

In view of all this, one cannot imagine the reason for Mr Blair's eagerness to please the US at this country's expense.

I am aware of this Government's many real achievements. But policies like handing over more chunks of the North Yorks National Park for crazy MDS use, plus the despicably cynical, even suicidal, support of the US in its determination to wage war on Iraq, are bringing me very close indeed to handing in my resignation from the Labour Party. - Stan Walinets, Mickleton.

EUROPE

AT last week's summit the EU's 25 leaders declared their full support for the continuous, inclusive and irreversible enlargement process.

This statement of irreversibility, if agreed by Tony Blair, is a clear breach of Britain's constitutional principle that "no Parliament may bind its successors, and the democratic right of future generations to correct our mistakes."

The words 'forever' and 'irreversible' have no place in a democracy. On what authority does Mr Blair, whose mandate expires in June 2006 at the latest, now claim that what has been done is irreversible?

This is a huge constitutional problem for the UK and has been known and foreseen for close on 40 years, but successive governments have deliberately ignored it in the hope that the electorate will not "clock" the fraud.

Tony Blair has stated that there will be no referendum in the UK on the proposed new constitution for the EU due in 2004, which will require all members of the EU to adopt the euro or leave the EU. We are heading for an absurd and untenable position if both the euro and the constitution issues are not put to the electorate.

Our sovereignty is protected by our constitution, and no transient politician can surrender that, as Parliament just does not have the power to do so.

The strength of that constitution is that it slowly develops laws which, if wrong, can be subsequently corrected by our heirs. Nothing is "irreversible" - take note Mr Blair!

When everyone wakes up to this deceit and duplicity by their own elected representatives there will be a massive backlash. - Neil Herron, Sunderland.

I AM sure that most of your correspondents would never admit to being unsure about an issue. I am afraid that I am unsure about how deep Britain should get involved in Europe.

I feel as I was made to feel one day at Speakers' Corner in Hyde Park when I was asked my opinion about a current issue. I replied but my reply was one that showed that I could see merit in both sides of the argument. By this time a crowd had assembled, and I was criticised by both sides. I was seen to be ambivalent, inconsistent, and indecisive.

I am not alone. Many people voted for Europe at the time of the referendum, but it was a vote based on what they then expected Europe to be. But it has moved on.

It is like a marriage partner you loved at the time of the wedding, but you have changed and so has she. It is awkward. - Geoffrey Bulmer, Billingham.

ROBIN Ashby (HAS, Dec 6) believes Britain is suffering from being outside the euro. The figures tell a different story.

Nearly £1.5bn of new business investment has been secured in the last year, the vast majority to support the manufacturing sector.

The UK Government, Scottish Executive and Welsh Assembly committed to over 500 Regional Selective Assistance Grants, totalling £250.8m which is expected to bring in £1.48bn of private sector investment and is expected to create over 24,000 jobs and safeguard around 15,000 more.

In the North-East, international companies such as Magna Kansei and NSK Bearings have benefited, with many jobs created and secured. Britain is a good place to do business, with lower taxes and less business regulation than the eurozone. France and Germany certainly are not protected from the global downturn by their membership of the euro.

For the last decade, since plans for the euro began, unemployment has been very high in the euro countries. They used to have low unemployment but in the process of building the euro, millions of jobs were lost as their governments cut public spending and raised interest rates.

Britain has economic stability outside the euro. Britain is doing well outside the euro. Britain is a good place to do business. The quickest way to bring this to an end would be by joining the euro and returning to boom and bust.- S Maughan, Business Council Member, the "No" campaign North-East.