AS A parent of small children I was outraged to hear of the proposals to close play parks.

What Lancaster needs is better equipped play areas, not their wholesale removal..

This city must be unique in its appalling lack of outdoor children's facilities - take your children to any other city in the country and see what I mean.

Of course existing play parks are under-used. What little play equipment there is across the area is in a terribly neglected condition and the city council is right to be embarrassed by it. But to use that as an excuse to remove it is both unfair and devious.

Like a great many people in Lancaster I do not have a garden, so where does the city council expect me to take my children to play...?

Pack them into a car and clog up the one-way system to get to the excellent park at Fairfield, perhaps - noting that it was funded not by the city council but by Lottery money and a lot of hard work by local people.

Or I I could take them to a child-oriented pub and spend money on drinks and not-so-healthy foods just so they could use an indoor playground.

Williamson Park is not an option because its play equipment has already been removed, though again local people are trying to replace it through fund-raising. Imagine, Lancaster's premier park, featuring heavily in council publicity material, and yet it won't even provide a swing for a baby. It wouldn't happen elsewhere.

My local park? I challenge anyone to find a more dismal play area than in Greaves Park.

Nurseries, play parks, what next? Let's just ban the little creatures - it will save the council having to spend any money at all on them.

Russell Benson, Lancaster