YOUR leader column and report "MPs allege secret deal to drop river pollution case" (LET, February 1) does much to mislead your readers.
There has been no "collusion" over North West Water's decision to offer no evidence in the case against Nipa Laboratories.
You have wrongly assumed that a simple refusal to make additional comment to what was said in court amounts to a conspiracy between the two parties.
This is not the case.
North West Water has acted entirely appropriately throughout the prosecution and its decision to offer no evidence in court was agreed as the proper course of action by the presiding stipendiary magistrate.
For the record, the facts are:
North West Water dropped its prosecution on the grounds that it would not serve the public interest. This was because it had been overtaken by another case, brought by the Environment Agency in a higher court, arising out of the same circumstances - see below. The presiding magistrate approved this decision.
A statement explaining exactly how this decision had been reached was to be read in open court but the magistrate interrupted North West Water counsel to say it was not necessary.
Nipa Laboratories was facing charged of exceeding its consent to discharge to a sewer, not for polluting the Calder as your report suggests.
In May 1999, Nipa Laboratories pleaded guilty before Preston Crown Court to a charge of polluting the River Calder in a prosecution brought by the Environment Agency, which is the body responsible for water courses.
SUE WRIGHT, Media Relations Manager, North West Water Limited, Dawson House, Great Sankey, Warrington.
FOOTNOTE: We reported an early day motion tabled in the House of Commons by Peter Pike MP and supported by Greg Pope. The crux of that motion was the demand for an explanation of an agreement drawn up before the court hearing, that allegedly involved payment by Nipa to North West Water of £100,000 costs.
We did not use the word 'conspiracy' but we, like the MPs, ARE still waiting to hear if this payment has been made and if so why. This is surely not a matter that should be kept secret. - Editor
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article