The following letter is from a resident of northern Ryedale. Our policy is not to publish a letter without the writer's name. But in this case we make an exception because the writer, who is known to us, could be compromised in the position he holds because of the publication of these views.

ON October 23, along with 30-40 others,I attended a Yorkshire Forward-sponsored event on 'Renaissance Market Towns' focused on Pickering, Helmsley and Kirkbymoorside. I understood from the briefing the proposal would provide 'expert' help in achieving community-set goals and objectives over the long term, probably 10-15 years in the northern Ryedale market towns. A laudable and commendable proposal.

I sincerely wish the project well if it is what the communities of our northern market towns really want, or indeed need. It is, however, this precise issue that causes me some concern.

Who actually determined this is what these three communities need? Is there evidence to confirm this? And where can it be seen?

You would be incorrect to assume that by asking these three questions I am against any such scheme. I am a Ryedale resident and taxpayer and I seek only to ensure that my and your money is spent well in the unique area in which we live.

If there is no research evidence this is what the people of northern Ryedale seek, could it not be argued that this might possibly be, at the very least, an imprudent and rash use of public funds and, at worst, a non-accountable Government quango with no democratic responsibilities, and apparently capacious pockets, seeking to tell Ryedale residents: "We know what's best for you!"

I also have concerns about duplication of effort. Will the research carried out by Yorkshire Forward's consultants in setting down on paper the three communities' aspirations take into account work done to date by: local authorities, strategic partnerships and area committees encompassing such things as cultural strategies, including the excellent 'Imagine Ryedale' corporate plans, village/town plans and design statements, community investment prospectuses and a raft of other 'community' policies? If it does, might it not be argued that a democratically-elected body could, with the same level of funding, perform this task (if it is needed) to a more informed 'local' standard? I think possibly it could.

Finally, as I have mentioned, I am not suggesting this proposal is not required. It may well be; goodness knows we have had enough to cope with in rural areas recently. I do think, however, that any 'government' organisation which purports to know what's best for me, without any tangible evidence, and denies me the ability to vote them out of office, is a flagrant misuse of my, and dare I say your, money and a breach of my democratic rights.

Updated: 12:40 Wednesday, November 19, 2003