21/10/05

Once again, I now have to endure four to five weeks of comforting my dogs as they run around the house and shake in fear at the bangs and whistles night after night.

I'm not against fireworks at all, but I would love to see even tighter controls on their sale. Is it necessary to sell them weeks in advance of November 5?

Would it not be better to have them on sale for no more than seven days before the event? Surely that is time enough for people having their own displays to be able to purchase them. And why do I still see children and teenagers letting fireworks off in the street? Walking round on an evening, they do not think of the fright it can cause, how it wakes up people, frightens pets, scares dogs on a night-time walk or a cat let out half to death.

Pet owners prepare themselves for November 5, stay in, turn up the TV loudly and sit with their pets, so that they are comforted, not go on a late dog walk that day in case anyone is letting off fireworks. But is it fair that this becomes, not just one day in a year but weeks of staying in to comfort frightened pets.

Please leave fireworks for November 5. One day for them is great, a spectacular event, but week after week of irresponsible behaviour with them can cause not only accidents with the fireworks themselves, but weeks of misery for pet owners. - Ellen Carlin, Durham.

SMOKING BAN

FOLLOWING on from the suggested U-turn to alter the proposed smoking ban legislation in pubs scheduled for November, I feel that further illogical comment is due for an airing.

My proposal is that the sale of any alcohol in our pubs should also be banned due to the risk and danger of contracting liver or kidney disease, plus the possibility of alcohol addiction.

Added to the smoking ban, such a move would free pubs not only from pollution but ensure that drunken behaviour or frivolity would be a thing of the past.

Furthermore, pub menus should be subject to government approval to ensure that only healthy food is served.

So what are we left with in the pubs that may survive closure? Snacks such as crisps, nuts and pork scratchings should surely also be under scrutiny as they have a far too high salt content. Soft drinks containing sugar should be replaced with suitably approved diet varieties.

Our traditional English pub, the meeting place for friends to gather for enjoyment, will disappear - unless we prefer drinking tea, coffee or a Diet Coke.

Bearing in mind the excessive and unfair duty collected by our Government from tobacco and alcohol products, will the public really have to drink and smoke in their own homes and resort to private parties? That's precisely what will happen if Big Brother gets its way by removing the word choice from our vocabulary. - Name and address supplied.

CONGESTION CHARGES

I DO hope that Durham is not taking a lead from Edinburgh in attempting to address the problem of traffic congestion (Echo, Oct 11).

It is obvious that measures need to be taken to ease congestion, however these should be reasonable and offer realistic alternatives to car usage.

Although the introduction of a congestion charge was rejected by the residents of Edinburgh, the city council has since adopted many measures such as bus lanes that are deserted for most of the day, 'traffic management schemes' so complicated that the police refuse to enforce them all, and a 33 per cent increase in parking charges.

The pleas of traders in the city centre that these measures would adversely affect them and the whole ethos of the city centre were ignored by the council.

It may be that the council will now take notice as their income from parking charges is now being affected with a loss of revenue in the order of £800,000.

Durham may take note of this: it is no use managing traffic if the end result is that the city is abandoned by traffic, shoppers and businesses. - Bernard Mahan, Edinburgh.

SOUTH DURHAM HUNT

AS a falconer and a supporter of country pursuits for many years I feel I must speak out about the proposed use of an eagle owl to hunt foxes (Echo, Oct 17).

While the eagle owl is a large and powerful bird of prey and quite capable of pursuing and killing such prey as rabbits and something as big as a hare, I would not even attempt to fly one to a fox which can and will bite back.

The hounds in pursuit could not be called off in time to allow the falconer to retrieve his bird and despatch the quarry in an humane manner as soon as possible.

A bird of prey is honed to perfection in its pursuit of quarry and only something in the class of an eagle could be used for such prey.

I understand and sympathise with many hunts that must diversify to keep their hounds and huntsmen active but I feel that to attempt to use birds of prey in this manner is not the way forward. - Ray Vincent, Darlington.

ID CARDS

RE the Identity Cards Bill. As a ballpark figure, this will cost the UK over £10bn for a scheme based on suspect technology.

It will inconvenience law-abiding people, fail to stop criminals and even make identity fraud easier.

The glowing predictions of economic growth before the General Election have been slashed, putting pressure on funding essential public services. That the Bill is a manifesto commitment is no defence, as the Government showed little commitment to their manifesto over tuition fees and, more recently, on the promised EU constitution referendum.

There is also increasing concern amongst parents about the dangers to our children from the proposed national database, which will be a compulsory listing of everyone's personal details, on a vast government computer. The compulsory ID card number will tie us into this system. No computer is completely safe from hackers.

Also, thousands of people will be needed to run this system and, statisically, some of them will be paedophiles, who will then be able to find out everything about our children, including home addresses, digitised photographs, mobile phone numbers, school attended, transport to school, family car registration number - the list is potentially endless, and terrifying. - Andi Bowsher, Durham.