As Mr Kaye ('Not an imposition', Times Letters, November 1) lives outside the proposed eruv area, it is easy for him to say that the eruv would not inflict hardship on eruv non-believers.
He seems unaware that some people living on the eruv boundary would have to suffer a pole directly outside their window, while many others would have to live with the knowledge that their homes have been 'hijacked' for the boundary, without their consent, and in most cases against their wishes.
In addition, everyone entering or leaving the eruv area would be compelled to pass through one of the eruv-believers 'gateways', which many people with other beliefs find offensive.
Not only would the poles be an imposition, but it is possible that their positioning to cause compulsory passage through the 'gateways' would be in breach of the Human Rights Act.
In view of this possibility, further work on the eruv should be suspended by Barnet Council unless and until it can assure its taxpayers that it has obtained legal advice which excludes the likelihood of an infringement of the Act.
Elizabeth Segall
Eruv BoundaryOpponents' Committee Cricklewood
November 7, 2001 20:39
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article