"40,000 support our stance"

The traders do have massive support for their stance on the future of the market, though the occupation of a councillor, or election candidate, is irrelevant to their ability to participate and enrich policy-making. Council members have a diverse variety of occupations. One particular letter suggested that a greengrocer would be an unfit person to lead a council. Yet, as I recall, Margaret Thatcher was brought up by a grocer!

Market traders are mainly self-employed people who have many business skills: accountancy, monetary control, stock purchases, human resources and customer services. Perhaps this is exactly the calibre of individual who would fully understand the workings of a council.

The market traders seeking election have produced a manifesto, a major part of which opposes any market relocation, opposition shared with the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. Our manifesto does raise points about waste collection, car parking and other important issues.

One particular issue of great interest to me is integration with minorities. Bury Market, as a working community, is rich in its diversity and in its racial integration. It works well, and lessons can be learned from its success. I truly believe the independent market trader candidates have a lot to offer any council and would be a valuable asset.

I feel that this present Labour authority has lost its true democratic identity. It seems to be the same old faces and ideas, year in and year out.

There is no question that the overwhelming majority of market traders are against any market relocation, but remain forward-thinking about redevelopment in Bury. There is no reason why we cannot have a cinema, department store and more shops without relocating the market; it is only Westfield who say that wouldn't satisfy their aspirations.

This is not about personal issues, but the future of Bury as a main retail player for years to come. Destroy the market concept and you destroy Bury's retail future. To suggest that only seven market jobs are at stake is naive in the extreme; the knock-on effect is to thousands of jobs and the destruction of small local businesses, simply so that a development company can maximise profits. Meanwhile, the construction jobs created by this development will not be permanent and, usually, would not involve the local workforce.

The council has succumbed to the Westfield millions, but shouldn't we be seeing what other investors might have to offer? Westfield have presented the people of Bury with just one option and remain inflexible on key aspects of it.

To clear up some of the misinformation contained in last week's letter, Westfield does not own the land on which Bury Market stands. It is owned by the council, so it is correspondent Mr France who has "got hold of the wrong end of the stick".

To Mr Hargreaves I say that we do take our candidacy very seriously and are not just concerned with a single issue. This redevelopment and market relocation would have a significant effect on my personal future, but so would it also affect the majority of people in Bury.

Mr Taylor is correct that the independent traders are standing in Labour-held seats. That is because we agree with the Tories and Lib Dems on this issue and so would not oppose them.

Bury Market's success is the envy of other towns, pulling in 250,000 visitors a week, and in doing so secures many jobs and much prosperity for the borough. It is a resource that should be nurtured and, with the support of 40,000 signatures, we will do everything in our power to ensure its future and the prosperity of this town.

ANTHONY HILL,

Independent Bury East candidate.