MADAM,

May I say I congratulate your previous correspondent, Angela Hoyle, (‘A sensible solution is needed’ 11th July) for her concise and eloquent exercise in lip service, line towing, bandwagon jumping and condescending toadyism. May I also suggest that you publish it again, for anyone who has missed it?

Are we seriously to believe that this licence fee scheme has been introduced, for the sole purpose of recouping the cost of administering it?

I can only hope that she has received the medical attention, she so obviously needs, for so publicly shooting herself in the foot!

Are we also to presume that the public benches, floral tubs, bollards and even post boxes; which would seem to be a very obvious static hazard, are to be removed or licensed, in future?

Can she explain, how it is, that the aged and disabled of our town; on whom she seems to rely upon so heavily as justification for this ludicrous scheme, are perfectly capable of avoiding these hazards; an ability that we are supposed to believe eludes them, upon entering Church Street?

I suggest that the cobbled surface and central gutter are much more obvious hazards than any of the colourful street displays that enhance this little pedestrianised precinct.

May I also suggest that irresponsible, thoughtless young mothers, who push baby buggies, two abreast and dog owners, who should not allow their dogs on anything but the shortest of leads in Monnow Street, should also have some sort of levy applied to them? In my experience, these two form much more of an obstacle course than any street furniture in Church Street.

Christopher Stowe

(Monmouth)