AS was to be expected, the announcement of the Okehampton/Waitrose profit-sharing scheme has encouraged some thoughts well expressed in your letters page.

Firstly, it is important to realise the money is not what is described as a ?windfall?. It is a sum due on a contractual agreement which probably has a limited number of years to run. It should not by any means be regarded as an annual fillip.

Julia Kuhn suggests traffic relief ? the sum of money involved in this is so immense we can forget that idea.

Barrie Duke suggests a form of community centre at the former district hospital. Again, this must by necessity be an expensive project, incurring ongoing annual support expenses. A factor easily overlooked, but can cause well meaning schemes to prove a long-term liability.

Derek Ellis suggests a CCT anti-crime initiative. This could be worth serious consideration.

I am rather concerned by the tone in Derek Godfrey Brown?s letter in which he seems to feel the Okehampton Hamlets are not liable to receive the benefit he feels they deserve.

This might, of course, be true and this presents an opportunity for the start of a coming together between Okehampton Town Council and the Hamlets? elected members. Neither has any future unless they work together for the committees they represent.

Finally, I am more concerned at the apparent readiness of West Devon Borough Council to dedicate their share of the Waitrose payment in support of the new Okehampton Sports Centre.

Is this an attempt to soften the blow (when it finally arrives) revealing a significant overspend on a project which reflects little obvious credit to those concerned.

The yardsticks for any contract being: ? delivered on time and within budget.

Ted Cann

11 Exeter Road

Okehampton