ON Tuesday night I was a panelist at an Any Questions evening hosted by the Durham Agricultural Discussion Society. Farmers from Tow Law, Wearhead and Dalton Piercy had waded through snowdrifts to reach Durham City and discuss the issues of the day.

Naturally, law and order was a major talking point. They, like me, were convinced we have given too much ground in the fight against crime and anti-social behaviour. They, like me, believe we have to start a fight-back - and that was the basis of my "here and now" policy when I was a serving policeman. We have to tackle the roots of it, to raise basic standards of behaviour. Once we have taught everyone to put litter in bin, not to scratch cars when drunk, not to eff and blind in public, we will have introduced a bit of respect back into society. That will filter upwards to the more serious crimes like burglary which plague so many people's lives.

However, I was just as interested in where the discussion ranged from there. We took in the Alder Hey organs transplant scandal - the root cause of which may again be a lack of respect by a doctor who was too arrogant to see the damage he was doing - and genetically-modified crops, before arriving at Sex: The Annabel Chong Story.

One farmer admitted he had watched the programme on Saturday night on Channel 4 - "purely on the grounds of research". He regarded it as another example of the media nibbling away at the borders of decency. He was horrified by it. So was the rest of the group when told it was about a porn star having sex with 251 men in ten hours.

So I asked was the person who had watched it writing to - his MP, his newspaper (he was a loyal reader of The Northern Echo), Channel 4, the broadcasting standards people?

No, he wasn't doing anything about it, except bemoaning the standards of the media.

If Channel 4 gets no complaints about its tacky programmes, it will carry on screening them in the belief that nothing is wrong. If the kids you see in the street throwing down litter, banging on the bus shelter or swinging off newly-planted trees aren't told that their behaviour is wrong, they will carry on doing it.

I'm not calling for vigilante action or for little old ladies to confront knife-wielding gangs of drunken yobs; I'm just asking for everyone to make a difference wherever they feel they safely can.

I was impressed by the attitude of the Durham Agricultural Discussion Society. It confirmed what I've always believed - that there is a good, honest majority out there which really does care. But it has been silent too long, sitting quietly lamenting the downfall of society's standards.

Don't just talk it through and then walk on by. Be active citizens. If we all play our own small part, together we can make a difference.

I ADMIT that I was thrown completely by one question about the right to roam. I am something of a townie, but I like my countryside. I go there, do a walk and come home again.

But as farmers are going to be obliged to open up their land to the rambling public, shouldn't they be compensated?

I had never considered it. Indeed, I was under the impression that the car parking fee I usually pay went towards the up-keep of the footpaths I was tramping along. I heard from enough farmers on Tuesday to be convinced that the new legislation will cost them in terms of footpaths and accidental damage to crops and sheep.

We pay for practically everything else we use in life. To get a car on the road, for example, we pay a Road Fund Licence. I suspect a Ramblers' Fund Licence is a silly idea, but I am surprised that legislation has overlooked this matter.

www.thisisthenortheast.co.uk/news/ mallon.htm