SIR - Could Bradford Council explain why, when there are many able-bodied men in Bradford unemployed, they have to put a woman toilet attendant in the men's toilet at John Street Market?

This is the age of equality of the sexes, and a man going in and out of the ladies' toilet at all times to clean would soon cause a public outcry.

So why do men have to be humiliated by having a woman around when they are standing at the urinals?

I am sure it comes under the employment exemption act and is possibly illegal.

P Truebridge, Birth Lane, Bradford 5.

l Richard Ambler, the Council's Senior Markets Superintendent, said: "While I appreciate Mr Truebridge's concerns, it is necessary, on certain occasions, to have the male toilets cleaned by female cleaners.

"John Street Market is currently undergoing refurbishment and as part of new arrangements for cleaning the site, including the toilets, I have changed the system so that male toilets will now have a male cleaner."

SIR - Some courageous person has sent me anonymously cuttings of letters from the T&A about my earlier letters.

One asks "What is Mr Bird twittering on about?"

If he or she read my letters intelligently, one would know. And incidentally I did not support the Conservatives at the last election and I would certainly not support the present lot.

If you allow me, I shall continue to live up to my name and twitter.

I did not complain about the "poll tax" because if it had been introduced correctly it would have been the most just way to raise money for services.

Far better than the previous rates system and the current Council tax that rises year in year out way above inflation.

As for getting out more, how does my critic know if I am able to get out and about?

I wish these people would have the courage to append their names to their criticisms. They are the type who would give me a fair trial and hang me the following day!

P E Bird, Nab Wood Terrace, Shipley.

SIR - Regarding the comments made by Councillor Hopkins about council tenants living in the "real world".

Yes we do. After years of neglect, Bradford Council wants to sell off Council houses because they can't do the repairs. What bull!

The Rawson Market tenants were sold down the river. Well, we are not going the same way.

As for the real world, we are in it. Where is it that Councillor Hopkins comes from?

R D Simpson, Chain Street, Bradford 1.

SIR - The Riseboroughs of the Broad left Against Blairism and Tory Councillor Andrew Smith, strange bedfellows indeed, both imply that legislation demands the transfer of all council housing stock (April 19).

For the record, stock transfer is just one part of the Government housing strategy. Legislation allows transfer where this is the preferred choice of tenants. It does not decree that transfer has to happen.

Other options including retaining Council control are open to local authorities, but the Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition has not bothered to explore alternatives in any depth.

Transfer is only possible if most tenants vote for it. Locally Labour has been listening to tenants' concerns and has observed indications that most want to remain Council tenants.

Labour has also opposed the way that transfer has been presented as the only choice and is the only option to be given detailed appraisal.

For these reasons, Labour opposes current transfer plans in this district.

The Riseboroughs also dismiss Labour policies delivering the minimum wage, Social Chapter rights, the alleviation of child poverty, and the lowest unemployment in years as being irrelevant to traditional Labour voters.

In doing so they demonstrate their remoteness from the basic concerns and aspirations of ordinary people.

Councillor Barry Thorne, Deputy Leader of the Labour Group, City Hall, Bradford.

SIR - I have been staying with friends in Queensbury and have noticed how fast and frequent is the traffic by the Co-op. I have seen disabled and children and old persons trying to cross the road, sometimes waiting for ten or more minutes to get over to the Co-op.

I would strongly suggest a pelican crossing or some such before someone is seriously injured or killed!

Jean de Marchand, Queensbury.

SIR - You have some very rude correspondents. Mr Williams-Berry (T&A, April 19) writes of "ram it down your throat militant veggies" and "insipid do-gooders" as if the foot and mouth farce is something to do with the 15 per cent of people in this country who DON'T eat meat.

It is unrealistic to blame us and to vindicate farmers for their part in the horror. If it weren't for diabolical farming methods which feed the dead animals back into the food chain, BSE, swine fever and F&M would never have occurred at all.

While the innocent public is held captive on the tarmac, farmers are still spreading effluent on the roads, sheep which graze on the moors and fells are at liberty to walk on the roads, and milk bowsers are still making their daily visits.

It is important to know that meat does not contribute at all to a healthy diet. It is also important to know that 20 times as much vegetable protein could be produced on the same land. Most farmers produce meat because the profits are higher.

I resent being referred to as an insipid do-gooder simply because I take an interest in what I eat and would be happy to pit myself against Mr Williams-Berry in terms of strength, speed, suppleness and stamina anytime he cares to test himself against someone who eats a decent diet.

Ray Sherwin, Hermitage Oils, East Morton.

SIR - As the Government wobbles yet again on the question of vaccination against foot and mouth, many consumers are expressing concerns about possible human health risks from eating vaccinated animals.

Most people are not aware that virtually all farmed animals in the UK are already subjected to a vast array of powerful pharmaceutical products.

As well as vaccines, they include anti-inflammatories, antibiotics, reproductive hormones, wormers, insecticides and growth promoters.

The purpose of these drug products? To increase animal "productivity" and suppress symptoms of diseases that are a natural consequence of the oppressive systems in which farmed animals are bred, fattened, transported and slaughtered.

The public is being asked to take on trust assurances from farming industry scientists that the high-volume use of such potentially-toxic substances presents no risk to the health of consumers. Given the assurances offered over the safety of beef, the public are quite rightly sceptical.

Foot and mouth is one more catastrophe coming in the wake of bovine TB, E coli, campylobacter, salmonella, BSE and swine fever.

Animal Aid's message to the public over foot and mouth is: don't be part of the problem. Go Veggie! Contact our office or see our website (www.animalaid.org.uk) for recipes, background and guidance.

Andrew Tyler, director, Animal Aid, Bradford Street, Tonbridge, Kent.