RECENTLY, in both national and local media, there has been a lot of coverage about police stop and search figures appearing to show that it is mainly ethnic minorities that are being targeted.
I question whether the figures take into account the actual ethnicity of the local population within the area where the stop and search has taken place.
In Nottingham, for example, there are areas which are favoured by residents of a particular ethnic origin, therefore it is reasonable to assume that the figures will reflect this.
Others that are mixed should show a balance or at the least reflect that mix.
The power to stop and search is often enforced in places where crime/incidents are prevalent and not just on a whim.
Would it not be reasonable to publish the place, the make up of the residents and the reason for the enforcement as well as the figures.
This would afford a better overview of the whole picture, rather than one which lends itself to further undeserved criticism of the police and focuses on a problem that may not really exist (but could and should be avoided).
It would also prevent the figures being used to others' own ends.
DENNIS ASHCROFT
Piccadilly
Highbury Vale
AFTER the mauling given to Rushcliffe Borough Council's housing plans by the Government Inspector, why doesn't it do the decent thing by withdrawing its plans and changing the management of its planning department?
After all they got the council into this embarrassing mess and the local community has surely lost faith in them.
The council could then return to its pre-election pledge to challenge the unrealistically high number of houses proposed in the plans of Nottingham City Council and other neighbouring Labour-held local authorities.
It could also focus more on lobbying the Prime Minister to deliver his promise to scrap the regional strategies prepared under the last Government which are still giving legal force to the housing proposals made by the City Council and others.
COLIN RAYNOR
Tomlinson Avenue
Gotham
SP Jackson's attempt to "admonish" me must come across as an attempt to stifle honest criticism to the fair-minded (Opinion, December 3).
But, of course, that has always been a tradition of the churches.
Fortunately for me I cannot be burned as a heretic today.
Mr Jackson puts faith before reason which, as all religions are split and split again, is a dubious practice.
All faiths may be wrong but they cannot all be right.
He dismisses my comparison with how women have been treated with how they are treated in some Islamic societies but fails to explain why the Married Women's Property Act was necessary.
Until that Act married women owned nothing and had few rights.
Even her earnings belonged to her husband.
He justifies not having women bishops by saying there were no women amongst the disciples.
The Bible he takes this information from was assembled on the behalf of a Roman Emperor at least in part for political reasons.
All other versions were destroyed. Who can say what was said about women's roles in them? And women did accompany the disciples.
He distorts my statement about the way women tend to behave. I never claimed that women were pacifists.
The behaviour of men and women tends to overlap, with men likely to be confrontational and women to negotiate.
Of course there are exceptions, especially in a man's world.
Would Margaret Thatcher have gotten to be the leader of her party if she had been anything but what she was?
Another indication of difference between the sexes is shown by recent statistics showing that more women are abused by men than men by women.
If Mr Jackson does not want women bishops in his church one wonders what his attitude is to women having any elevated position in our society.
RL COOPER
Harlequin Close
Radcliffe-on-Trent
ON behalf of the Carers Federation's Action for Young Carers campaign, I would like to thank businesses for very generous donations and other support throughout this year.
This has enabled young carers and their families in the city to enjoy many activities that others may take for granted, and a break from their caring responsibilities.
A big "thank you" goes to:
Sainsbury's in Arnold and the Castle Marina store, which provided 30 cinema tickets for young carers and their families to see Nativity 2 in December.
Sainsbury's in Arnold also provided Action for Young Carers (AYC) Nottingham City with a once in a lifetime opportunity in June. As part of a Woodland Trust event and the Jubilee Celebrations, Sainsbury's offered AYC four places to see The Princess Royal on a day trip.
In December, Sainsbury's also provided eight tickets to see Nottingham Panthers take on Edinburgh Capitals.
Sainsbury's in Perry Road helped AYC Nottingham City by allowing us two fundraising sessions in their store – £250 was raised through donations and shoppers donated gifts, while Sainsbury's also donated selection boxes, other presents and decorations.
The Co-operative organised a beach day in Skegness, providing food, entertainment and coach travel for 40 young carers and their families. In addition, the store gave a donation to provide Christmas presents to young carers at the AYC Nottingham City Christmas party at our offices in Sherwood.
Action for Young Carers Nottingham City and the young people we work with would like to extend our sincerest thanks to each of these stores, and others who took part in the activities – they all helped create several special occasions in 2012 for young carers who truly deserve our support.
ROSALEEN LYNCH
Project manager
Action For Young Carers, Nottingham City
Christopher Cargill House
21-23 Pelham Road