NO-ONE wishes to see 100 people put out of work, but it is strange indeed that, among all the breast-beating by councillors and our MP, none has seen fit to explain exactly why it is that Castle is having to shut down kilns five and six.

Quite simply, the EC required Castle to bring kilns five and six up to EC standards by 1996 (now 2000), but Castle declined, apart from fitting the useless cone to the tall chimney. If, therefore, the kilns are below standard, there can be no question, I imagine, of them being 'brought out of mothballs' if demand increases, as Castle suggest.

Since county councillors were well aware of the EC implications when they were considering the Bellman quarry application, it is difficult to see what logic they employed, knowing the likely job losses, when approving an application which promised to SECURE jobs. Small wonder Councillor Burns has called for the papers.

The vital importance to Castle of Bellman can perhaps be gauged from the fact that the land has now been let for grazing.

The next decision facing county councillors will be the application for Castle to burn 'Cemfuel,' carpets, paper, tyres and who-knows-what in kiln seven. As happened in 1992, will we once more see the people of the Ribble Valley used as guinea pigs for the 'proving' of new technology (the scrubber), or will councillors and medical practitioners insist on the implementation of the Commons Select Committee's demand for a full health survey, AND the full Risk Assessment which should have been made before Bellman was given the go-ahead?

J D MORTIMER, Green Drive, Clitheroe.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.