Sir; Your call for the PM to lower fuel taxes panders to the self interested attitude that prevails in your industry. The farming industry is at the pinnacle of hypocrisy when its members call for the reduction of tax on diesel. While the public that they claim to represent pays 48p per litre, farmers pay a meagre 3p per litre. The farming industry is wholly reliant on the taxpayer to stump up the £4bn to meet the bill for BSE, in addition to the CAP grants and other indirect subsidies. It is ironic that this self interested group on the one hand sneers at anything European, complaining about the spectre of a federal superstate, while on the other demands equality of taxes. You may care to explain where the savings in expenditure may be gained to fund lower petrol taxes. Would your magazine support the closure of hospitals or the ending of hot school meals, or reductions in rural policing? Or would your editorial call for less spending on roads, the elderly or the frail? The rural lobby may have difficulty in accepting a Labour government's authority, but the government has to govern and has a huge democratically otained majority to do so. It should not pander to the greedy self interest of the few and your magazine should be more imaginative than taking an editorial stance straight from the press releases of the Countryside Alliance. Arthur Dunn Worthing {{LETTERS }}