AS a former resident in Scotland's capital, I was saddened to read of the decision to ban the photographing of children's activities within that city.

Special reference was made to those performed at this time of the year, eg Nativity scenes and playlets. Apparently, the initiative has been taken by a minority of parents -- fearing the danger of paedophilic interference through the camera lens.

What a ridiculous decision. It is ludicrous for two good reasons. Firstly, from the camera angle. As one who knows, I find it impossible, after the events and on looking at my prints, to establish which is my granddaughter or grandson. Invariably they are dressed in shawls, sheets and blankets (to look like shepherds or holy men), but, in viewing these photos later with friends, one hears oneself saying -- "that's my grandson, third green blanket on the left, or is he wearing the red curtain?"

Ignoring that aspect, am I to assume that the same councillors and families behind this decision have now forsaken holidays at the seaside, either at home or abroad? It is on the beaches that children enjoy the minimum of clothes, or, as approved by some parents, none at all. And don't they love making their sand castles and carrying buckets of water for the moats? It follows, of course, that, to accompany the Notices "No Dogs on this Beach" (with which I agree), there will appear another -- "No Cameras on this Beach or within 500 yards if fitted with zoom". On overseas beaches, this notice will be in several languages, of course, incorporating the metric system. Interpreters will be provided, especially for Japanese visitors.

Bob Pollock

Glendale Drive

Bolton