I may be biased but I think Sam Haynes (Letters, Oct 24th) is just a little too quick to condemn.

At the public meeting to which he refers I agreed to feedback on a number of issues - discussions with Chelverton about a future public meeting, discussions with the City Council and Joseph Storeys, discussions with the City Council and LMC re the future of the Co-op and info about Planning Commitee members.

Some of these things take time to arrange and resolve so I havn't written to people while I havn't had a lot to report.

Nothing is spoiling and I expect to be in a position to report within a week or so.

I enjoy public meetings and in fact regard it as my responsibilty to convene such events to draw people together around important issues.

This isn't in order to put myself at the head of anything but to use the strength of the community in a united way.

I use this approach throughout the constituency and I'm pleased that it helped secure the future of Homeless Action, important festivals and the museum at times when all were under threat.

I've spent the past 25 years doing community politics and I'm still learning.

While I would agree with him that the public event on transport last September was a good positive occasion, I'm not so sure that an issue where people's positions are so entrenched is amenable to what in essence is a very broad brush and inclusive approach.

I've lately pursued my work on transport through smaller groups.

I'd be happy to discuss whether we should have more big events with Sam and anyone else with an interest.

It was up to them but I applaud the decision of the Lacaster City Council Labour Group not to enter into a coalition with a Tory Party which brought this city to its knees over decades and a ragbag of Independents who don't have a clue about where it should be going.

Progressive Parties are different and if necessary I would hope that sensible people might give some attention to forming alliances after the next local elections.

The priority for those concerned about the Canal Corridor issues must be to concentrate on what unites rather than divides us.

Finally, I think that Sam might spare his sympathy for the Citizen.

Personally I thoroughly enjoy a good battle and I wished the Editor well when he told me that he was leaving.

However, I don't believe that my occasional forays into criticism of the newspaper in any way match the derogatory and actually quite unpleasant coverage that we often see on these pages.

Hilton Dawson MP