THANKS to D Goodwin (Letters, July 25) for giving me the opportunity again to voice opposition to the C-FAR rehab centre for criminals being set up here in our hamlet of Odham.
He has the choice of working in the environment he describes in his letter, doing what he believes is right, as do the C-FAR people. We have no choice in the matter. We, in Odham, are forced to co-exist with the C-FAR organisation as our neighbour.
We have been subjected to many people's views from outside the community, some living many miles away, serving to harden attitudes. We have been ignored by West Devon Borough Council to the extent that at the public planning committee meeting last October, the councillors did not even know that Odham existed until my wife called out that 20 people lived here.
The West Devon Borough Council map did not show that there are indeed eight households who have no choice in the matter of co-existing with C-FAR at the end of Burdon Lane, much closer than Highampton.
C-FAR people and D Goodwin have a choice in the way they conduct their lives with persistent offenders and others. I and my neighbours do not have that choice; and I, for one, will not accept being bullied or badgered by outsiders into being forced to accept matters on their terms. They have their beliefs, to which they are perfectly entitled. But because I feel that those beliefs are misguided, I reserve the right to protest at having them forced upon me.
I believe that longer sentences should be handed out by the courts, because the longer a criminal is in prison the less crime he can commit. It's as simple as that.
D Goodwin's assertion that 'C-FAR works' cannot be substantiated when one looks at the results. If the dropout rate figures are added to the re-offending figures he cannot call the results a success. Also, the business has not been operating long enough to be able to show a meaningful track record for long-term re-offending rates. These two points, I say, cannot justify C-FAR receiving large sums of public money for their business. If they were to operate on private funds only for their experiment, that would be a different matter.
Regarding D Goodwin's gibe about 'champagne and canapes' 'reactionaries' - well, yes, I now do fervently oppose the sort of change that rewards and pampers persistent offenders instead of punishment. However, I would support some scheme for full compensation to the victims of these criminals if C-FAR advocated it.
The notion that I will only find people with similar views amongst some sort of champagne crowd is fatuous. I have received support from numerous ordinary people of various political persuasions, with not a Bollinger or canape in sight.
Anyway, I would much prefer a pint of beer, preferably draught.
D G Richards
Lower Odham
Highampton