Letters to the Editor

Press, 12 April 1978, Page 16

Letters to the Editor

(1) Letters submitted for printing in this column must not exceed 150 words. They should oe written in ink or preferably typed on one side of the paper. Ample space must be .eft tn the margins and between lines for subediting marks. <2) Letters written over' pen names or initials will not ordinarily be considered for publication A legible signature and a full postal address —not a P.O Box numberare essential. <3l The correspondent must say whether the letter has been or is to be submitted elsewhere. The Editor does not undertake to acknowledge, hold, return or enter into correspondence on any letter n,ot accepted for publication T.S.F. — Thank you; see rules above. M.S.—Not really a helpful beginning for debate. T.O. —The present stock is to pro. vide a requested service; it has nothing to do with the economics of exporting. V.H.A.—lnteresting proposition; but too speculative at this distance from essential information. R.H.F.—The direction of thought may well be correct, but railways cannot be laid everywhere or to the door of every house and factory. M.S. —Thank you; credit seems to have been given fairly widely. Perhaps a letter over your own name to the proprietor would be appreciated. B.A.R. —Too long: but (1) prices are controlled by regulations; (2) the need for production may nevertheless be the same; (3) these are not alternatives to provide immediate solutions, but production must be sustained to enable long term plans to be executed. H.J.H. —Surely the regard for quality by way of tests and price premiums is evidence that the consumer is among the “relevant considerations” of a board that includes representatives of consumers, not to mention the function of the board to “promote” the growing and milling sides of the industry.