ISN'T reverse psychology a wonderful thing? My mum used it to great effect. If I was playing up, and I wanted to go this way and she wanted to go the other, she would say "cheerio" and walk away. The young grey matter would whirl into gear "she's actually going to leave me here", and I would come running.

Dog owners use it in dog training. As leader of the pack, a dog will always want to run ahead. The dog owner stops and turns the other way. Dog is now facing the wrong way and has to come running. When the owner has done this a few times the dog learns that his owner is totally unreliable and walks to heel.

Of course, not all owners suss this one out. Dogs will go away, owner starts to shout "come back you 'orrible animal". Dog hears "I'm still here, take as long as you like". Owner shouts louder, giving his dog a larger field of play. When he has shouted himself hoarse he stops. Dog loses contact with owner and begins to panic. He returns to his owner. The owner gives him a clout for going away — dog thinks he was hit for coming back. Result one confused dog.

Now, when Otis Ferry and his friend disrupted the House of Commons during the hunting debate, was that reverse psychology? There is no doubt it did the campaign against hunting a power of good. Which brings me to Echo correspondents Giles Bradshaw, M Lewis and all. I'm not sure there isn't some reverse psychology going on here.

Someone once said: "If I was going to Dublin I wouldn't start from here." Where we are now is that hunting with hounds is illegal. Their campaign should be why hunting should be legalised not why it shouldn't be banned.

At the moment the only danger to the hunting ban is a Tory government to legalise hunting. Bradshaw and Lewis are demonstrating to David Cameron the hostility he can expect if he goes into an election with this matter unresolved.

I thank Giles Bradshaw and M Lewis for their continuing efforts to persuade Cameron to kick this ball into touch.

G Holwill

Stoke Hill Crescent, Exeter

(by fax)