I'M struggling with the environmental policy of the Liberals and Greens.

I read a quote of Liberal Cllr Quinton, in support of continuing the Lune Valley illuminated cycleway. It said: "A lot of people in the country are happy to take cars into town and pollute the town, but they don't like people doing things to the country".

So is it Liberal policy that there must be some sort of environmental damage contest between town and country?

A bit like football, with the cycleway a 'goal' for the town dwellers?

Then you reported a number of green agencies against any by-pass road. Presumably, with the Irish Sea traffic forever going through Lancaster, this would be one in the net for country dwellers.

Back on the cycleway, Emily Heath for the Greens states that "for safety reasons the path needs some sort of lighting". This certainly is a surprise tackle.

Lighting uses energy, which is only cheap at night because it comes from nuclear power stations using fuel processed at Sellafield. Even the acres of Tarmac required tons of fuel oil to be burnt. Surely, this is so far from a 'sustainable transport' policy, that the Greens' manager would fine the player for foul play, even if the referee didn't spot it.

Michael Jackson

Hest Bankvia e-mail