FOR the purpose of clarification, it appears neccessary to point out to D Laycock (Letters last week) that all taxpayer's contribute to services that they might not directly benefit from, such as higher education, public transport and the emergency services.

As a result of homophobic hate crimes, a proportion of taxpayer's contributions are spent protecting lives frequently rendered unliveable due to the prejudices of an unenlightened few.

Ms Laycock's account of her amazement' at Lancaster city council's investment in the Pride 2005 event also assumes that LGBT communities are somehow exempt from taxation and are, therefore, not contributing to council tax.

Taking stock of these inconsistencies then, should the council treasurer really be forced into thinking like a Dickensian Scrooge, who is so busy worrying about pounds, shilling and pence that he misses the point about worthwhile investments?

Although, more than likely, a generous, understanding and accepting person who is merely misinformed, the writer's sentiments do appear to suggest that the council should only offer assistancefor events sanctioned by a heterosexual moral majority.

A festival' like Pride however, offers a celebrational space for those who do not live or love in a conventional way. Yet crucially and in addition to celebrating the different life choices and contributions made by LGBT communities, Lancaster Pride is also fuelled by the imperative to enlighten.

Rhona O'Brien, Heysham.