I WOULD like to offer some facts to balance the letter from J Harrison of Yeovil (Western Gazette, November 25).

Somerset Count Council (SCC) was a four-star council prior to the last election, including the prudent use of borrowing to invest in the county and people of Somerset. The Government offers extremely advantageous interest rates for borrowing to fund capital projects.

Where has the money gone? Unlike the Government the SCC borrowing was used to fund capital projects which include new, more efficient and cheaper to run schools. Some of your readers will have benefited from new schools at Norton, Ash and Montacute, to name a few. These replaced Victorian outside loos, cold classrooms with a modern teaching environment.

The Government has to repay the borrowing used to pay not for capital but current services – not so SCC

What is the annual repayment? This is four per cent of the budget and includes capital and interest just like a mortgage. How many of your reader have only four per cent of debt

Why pay it off?In times of hardship the advice to householders would not be to pay off your mortgage but to make savings on other outgoings or credit cards. Perhaps the Tories should learn how to run a household not a £800m SCC

How will it be paid off? When money is tight the borrowing can only be paid off by using the money saved by cutting your services,

In the current climate the Lib Dems would have to look at some cuts but why are the Tories cutting further, faster and deeper than the Government and other councils. Why are they making1,500 staff redundant and paying out millions of pounds in redundancy payments when we don't know the level of the Rate Support Grant yet?

Perhaps the Tories have another agenda. They have certainly not made the same cuts in Mendip where the leader and half the cabinet are members.

As Lib Dems we believe our role is to invest in the future of Somerset and its residents and take responsibility to equip the organisation to be fit to move on at the end of the recession – not to oversee its demise.

MANY years ago we decided we would like to buy a golden retriever puppy and saw some advertised in the local paper.

When we arrived we found several, what I can only describe as beer barrels, each containing litters of puppies in different breeds. We thought it rather odd but seeing a litter of adorable golden retriever puppies we could not resist the one which came up to us, and we went home with her.

Although in her outward appearance she seemed quite normal. Two days after returning home she developed runny eyes and nose which was very worrying. We went straight to our local vet immediately only to be told she had distemper which was not good at such a young age.

Hopefully, we had sought treatment in time and she would recover with the help of a good vet and tender loving care. Thankfully she did recover after a time but then after a week had passed one of her back legs started shaking quite badly. So back to the vet only to be told that the distemper had left her with chorea which could get better or could spread to her other legs thus preventing her from walking and ever leading a normal life.

We were referred to a Veterinary College and were given the same diagnosis, also she was very anaemic. To our relief the chorea went the anaemia was treated with tablets. We were able to cope with the vet's bills and did not regret it because at the end of the day she turned out to be a beautiful dog and died of a heart attack at the age of 12 and a half years.

The vet told us she was one of the lucky ones who pulled through but other puppies purchased from the same place were so ill that they had to be put down, which does not seem fair at such a young age, which must have been very traumatic for the owners.

On investigation we found that our golden retriever had come from a puppy farm in Newcastle Emlyn in Wales. She had been sent up from Wales in a crate at barely six weeks old and therefore had not benefited from her mother's milk which had left her very open to infection. A false pedigree was produced which was obviously a copy and was reproduced and sent out with each golden retriever puppy sold which did not matter to us as we wanted her purely as a pet and not show her.

For some time the Dog Trust has been campaigning to have these farms closed down thus preventing this cruel and vile trade to continue. Unfortunately, as these farms are in such isolated places, it is very difficult to witness the conditions under which these puppies are being bred. The poor bitches are just used for breeding and spend all their lives in filthy conditions, never being groomed, exercised or socialised which has an effect on the puppies who cannot cope with the outside world.

Also if a puppy is stillborn it is just left until it rots which must be very distressing to the mother and the remaining puppies.

As soon as the puppies are six weeks old they are collected from the various outlying farms and transported to Caenarvon where other vehicles are waiting to transport them yet again to various pet shops or private holding areas.

I apologise for the length of the letter but I would like anyone who is thinking of purchasing a puppy this Christmas to be aware from where it originated. It is only with the help of the public that this vile trade will stop. It is a shame that there are so many unwanted puppies being bred when the rescue centres are having to cope with an unprecedented number of animals who are part of this disposable society.

I felt I had to relate my awful experience which might prevent potential owners from being very upset at the prospect of having their puppy put down or spending a lot of money at the vets.

WHAT a wonderful story by nature lover and gardener, Dirty Nails, "The fantastic Mrs Fox who formed a bond" (Western Gazette, November 18).

It tells of Tess the orphaned wild fox and how she formed a close bond with her carers. It was fascinating to read how she would allow Elizabeth and Derek to tickle her belly, as trusting as any pet dog.

What a privilege to be trusted by a wild animal, especially one so persecuted by a minority of people who kill these beautiful animals for pleasure. How heartbreaking to see Tess' relatives still running – even though we have a law banning it – from the hounds as the stone-hearted huntsmen urge them on as wild animals flee in terror.

Parliament must not give in to those hunters who hold the highest posts in the land, and those who flout the law. MPs must stand firm against those who wish to ignore the will of the people and make hunting legal. Shame on Lord Donoughue, who seeks to pull the wool over eyes, with his planned Bill, which will attempt to deceive people into thinking that a pack of dogs can be set onto a wild animal and claim that it is not cruel.

Every part of hunting a wild animal with a pack of dogs causes unnecessary suffering. Every part of hunting is cruel. To suggest otherwise is ignorant or wilful nonsense. For the sake of Tess and all hunted wild animals: the Hunting Act must not be repealed, it must be strengthened.

THE Prime Minister's refusal to fight for a ten per cent reduction in Britain's EU Contributions – is indefensible, especially as his Government is to inflict the British people with such punitive taxes to pay for them.

In the financial year 2009, the estimated total cost to Britain of the EU, including the harmful imposition of its numerous policies and regulations, was £118 billion – equal to £1,969 for every man, woman and child. Now, to add to 2010 increases, Mr Cameron frighteningly suggests he has secured a further increase of 2.9 per cent (£435 million) – whereas the EU "Parliament" has already agreed to a six per cent (£900 million) increase from Britain.

Those devastating increases are without counting the cost of diminishing UK engineering, farming, fishing and nuclear industries which have been unable to compete against Government heavily-subsidised EU competitors.

Compare this profligacy with the Draconian measures being forced on British subjects which will deprive them of security, jobs, social benefits, research, etc, and the devastating reduction in our Armed Services, making them a laughing stock – without adequate equipment and subordinate in the EU.

At present, all three main parties – and the BBC presenters – are jeopardising our future and refusing to declare, or discuss, the true effect of their surreptitious abandonment of our inherited democratic birthright, against the overwhelming will of the electorate. Now is the time for a Full Unbiased Debate and a long overdue referendum.

I WRITE to try and alert everyone in the Yeovil area that South Somerset District Council plans to build 3,700 additional homes on the south of Yeovil, extending the town right to the edge of the beautiful hamstone villages either to the south, south west or south east.

Why do we need 3,700 extra homes, which means 10,000 extra people and perhaps 6,000 extra cars. I am told that there is no money for road improvement, so imagine the extra congestion in and out of the town via Hendford Hill or Bunford Hill. It all seems to be because of the previous Government awarding a grant for eco-houses. This is not a good reason. Where will all these additional people come from? I see no evidence of a need for thousands of extra houses.

The planners say that they will not allow the new homes to join up to the villages but their own map shows new houses to within 200 metres of the villages. They also overlook the villages due to the natural slope of the hills and imagine the flooding risk from all of the extra concrete and tarmac. Look what has happened to the lovely hamlet of Alvington – swamped and destroyed by surrounding new housing.

If you object to this unjustified and unwanted expansion of Yeovil then please write expressing your views to : The Spatial Policy Team, The Council Offices, Brympton Way, Yeovil BA20 2HT or e-mail planning.policy@southsomerset.gov.uk before it is too late.

THE article "600 new homes planned for Somerton" (Western Gazette, November 18) was very welcome in that it drew attention to the ongoing consultation on the South Somerset District Council Core Strategy.

But not all residents of Somerton share the "anti-growth" view. The district council's strategy takes into account views the then Somerton town councillors collectively put forward in 2008.

The strategy is for a period to 2026 within which growth may return. There is still a strong unmet demand for affordable homes in the district, particularly from younger people. Rather than have these in Yeovil or scattered over the countryside it was thought preferable to have some in Somerton.

We are lucky even to have the existing shopping and other facilities in Somerton, which represent the result of efforts by a few determined individuals to arrest the decline of the town. They did not happen by accident and require more footfall to survive. This is more likely to happen with a larger immediate town.

Somerton is indeed small to be classed as a market town, but the then council's thinking was to put the town in its context as a close neighbour of Huish and Langport. There is no doubt that put all together there is a "market town" in the north of south Somerset .To suggest anything else is nonsense.

I have been a Somerton town councillor since 2007, have been consistently interested in planning issues and have discussed ideas with many residents and business people for almost four years. These views have diverged greatly and I have encouraged everyone to have their say. Among those are residents who are actively engaged with the real world, running businesses, finding homes for a family, working ,locally or commuting out of town.

Some of this group form a body of opinion which wants Somerton to grow and develop. They may not agree with every detail of the district council strategy but want to see the town at least keep its present facilities and grow as an employment centre.

The final round of consultation is planned for autumn 2011. Everybody is entitled to their view including those in Somerton whose "anti-growth" approach denies the housing needs of others and risks pitching the town into decline again. But the consultation can only be representative if a lot more people take part.

Wherever you live in the district and whatever your views if you have not already done so may I encourage you to make your views known before December 10.