Hear all sides

IT IS pleasing that your editorial (Echo, Aug 17) had some balance, but there are points that need clarification.

Your readers should be aware that the "revelation" that the force hired barristers to assist with disciplinary cases (Echo, Aug 16) is very much old news that has been in the public domain for months.

The Chief Constable outlined the work they were doing during an interview on Radio Cleveland in February. Newspapers, including your own, carried reports from that broadcast. Members of the Police Authority were also aware.

Independent counsel were brought in to ensure there was a full and impartial review undertaken, in conjunction with that of the Police Complaints Authority, for all disciplinary charges arising out of Lancet.

The complexity of the investigation was such it generated a mass of documentation and raised wide-ranging legal issues, not only from the evidence of Lancet but matters relating to disciplinary charges against all officers. Their appointment in dealing with all disciplinary cases was, and is, essential. The normal legal work of the force meanwhile goes on.

Throughout this inquiry, the force has ensured everyone involved has been treated fairly and the work of counsel will compliment that.

Finally, your assumption that the force is "discredited" is a slur on the officers and support staff that must be refuted. The work, successes and morale of Cleveland Police in fighting crime have not been affected by Lancet and our drive to improve life for all communities in the area will continue unabated. - CA Westbery, Media Service Manager, Cleveland Police.

COUNTRYSIDE

I SEE Harry Mead is still whingeing about shooters being allowed to go where walkers cannot (Echo, Aug 17). Unfortunately, he has managed to capsize the facts.

At the time of writing, 90 per cent of England's footpaths are open. There are still some closures in the vicinity of infected premises and other high risk areas, but the blanket bans in wider, so-called "infected areas" have

generally been lifted. In most cases, ramblers can once again enjoy their freedom to walk across other people's land - indeed, taxpayers' money is being spent to encourage them to do so. Good luck to them, I say.

In stark contrast, game shooting over much of the very same ground is subject to a bureaucratic licensing system administered (and I use the word in jest) by Defra. Thus people who actually own their land, or pay for the shooting rights, have to apply for permission to shoot and are subject to a host of constraints.

Just imagine the outcry if the same restrictions were imposed on visiting walkers! - Alasdair Mitchell, Stocksfield.

JUST who do John Haigh and the Countryside Alliance think they are to talk as if they represent all country people (HAS, Aug 11)?

They are an influential minority, some with property in the countryside, all with an avid enjoyment of animal suffering.

That's what they are all about, and "the blood sports lobby" is what they would call themselves if they were honest enough. As for the countryside, they don't care tuppence about it. People who genuinely care about the countryside care about its wildlife; the two are inseparable. - Tony Kelly, Crook.

FOXHUNTERS may be given an unlikely lifeline because the Government is considering offering handouts to prop up the cash-strapped sport (Echo, Aug 13) due to foot-and-mouth.

It is amazing that in the Labour movement of the 21st Century, rural sentimentality still exists.

Foxhunting dumbfounds me. Why anyone would want to watch a beautiful vixen being torn to pieces by savage hounds? If you believe that hunting with dogs should be outlawed, you are accused of being a fascist; if you don't, you are still accused of being one.

Pity God had to create the fox and crazy Noah rescue it. Foxes are very brave species who have been treated abominably. - Aled Jones, Bridlington.

MINEWATER

I WAS appalled by the report (Echo, Aug 11) that Durham County Council is going to stop pumping contaminated water from old pit workings in west Durham and let it flow into the river at Page Bank near Spennymoor.

The report said that the water is reasonably clean. Who says? And how clean is reasonably?

The water will almost certainly be contaminated with heavy metals which are released from the rocks during the mining process.

Our rivers are quite polluted enough without the council making it worse. I can't believe that it is doing this just to save money, because at the end of the day the amount of money used to keep the pumps working will be puny compared to the amount of money it will take to clean up any resulting pollution. - Martin Jones, Environment Spokesman, Spennymoor Branch Liberal Democrats.