Sir, - I feel that it would be useful to your readers in Middleton St George to explain clearly the objections to the proposed alterations to the playing field. Alas, Sheila Todd's reportage has done little to clarify a quite simple situation.

The proposed new community centre would need to generate income in the region of £100 per day, every single day of the year, to cover the running costs, salary of cleaners etc. Presently, the income is about £18 per day, of which about £11 per day is a grant (by no means certain to continue) from the borough council for the youth club.

None of the promoters of the scheme have given even the outline of a plan as to how the balance is to be generated, beyond nebulous hints of grants can be applied for. It is therefore likely that the building would become more of a drain on the parish resources than the total of their present income. This is a business plan on the Marconi model.

Since almost all the village groups who might use the new facilities are either defunct or have their own premises, it is difficult to see who might want to hire the new centre; they didn't want to use the existing one even when it was new.

Recent years have seen a huge number of new houses - many built on green field sites. Considerable pressure has been put on village school and medical facilities. The parish councils have been unable to do anything about this expansion other than to express disapproval. In this case, because the councils actually own the land, they have the power to prevent further development. They cannot whinge about other developments while agreeing with this one just because they will get a lot of money for it!

Finally, it is the view of many people that the councils are stewards, not owners, of the field. It is not only for the use of our children but their children too. Once sold, it is gone. There is no pressing need to sell the field - a few thousand pounds which should be fairly easy to raise, will repair the existing facilities. Indeed, the builders who make so much profit could make a small amount of that profit available to improve the general village facilities. These are the reasons why Low Dinsdale Parish Council has decided not to waste further time on considering this flawed project.

In that decision, its members have the support of the vast majority of villagers from both parishes.

MIKE LATTER

Pounteys Close,

Middleton St George.

Are you happy?

Sir, - For some time now, if local charities or good causes wished to raise money, raffle tickets would be sold outside the Golden Fleece in Thirsk, usually on a Saturday morning.

No-one has ever complained or questioned the legality of it and it gave local people the chance to support the school, the skateboard appeal etc. Here in Bagby our church - St Mary's - has been badly hit by the foot-and-mouth situation. Our lunch in May, which usually raises more than £300, had to be cancelled, so was our open gardens, our open church and cream teas and other events involving people coming into the village. So we thought the only thing left to us was to sell raffle tickets for our big draw at the harvest supper in October.

But some "do-gooder" has made a complaint to the council so if you sell raffle tickets you will be prosecuted! It is actually against the law to do so but as it was always for local causes, no-one bothered about it, until now.

So Mr or Mrs Do-Gooder, you have deprived us of our last chance to raise much-needed funds. Our church is struggling to make ends meet, there is a good chance it could close forever and there would go a piece of history dating back to 1868.

Not only are we affected. The Thirsk minibus which will have a stall selling and taking orders for Christmas puddings, also had a tombola last year. It can't this year because a tombola is also illegal.

One small pebble in the pool goes a long, long way - hope you are pleased with yourself Mr or Mrs X.

ANN TAYLOR

Bagby,

Thirsk.

Churchillian

Sir, - Your correspondent, Arthur Barbour, writing under the heading "National disgrace", fulminates about the consequences which follow from the government's adoption of European human rights legislation.

He would do well to check his facts before he refers to the "European Union Human Rights Legislation". The European Court of Human Rights has nothing to do with the European Union. It pre-dates the EU and was initiated in the immediate post-war period, much at the instigation of Winston Churchill, as a means of preventing a repeat of the excesses of the Nazi regime.

K HOLMES

Manor Farm Cottage,

Lower Dunsforth, York.