THERE is an air of resignation about the campaign to keep Richmond's courthouse open.

The magistrates' court committee, a little-known body which runs the local courts in the county, signalled some years ago that the Richmond court's future was under review. But nevertheless the proposal to close is unwelcome.

Virtually all the significant democratically-elected organisations and individuals consulted about the closure have objected even though all of them know the proposal it is a fait accompli.

The magistrates' courts committee is not in itself a very democratic organisation. Its membership of JPs is appointed by the Lord Chancellor and 80pc of its funding comes directly from central government. If the committee decides to do something there is not a great deal our local authorities or our MP can do about it.

But object they should because after closures in previous years of Stokesley, Leyburn, Easingwold and Thirsk, Richmond is a closure too far.

A key factor is distance. Hawes to Northallerton is almost 40 miles - a journey of over an hour on the best of days. Richmond to Northallerton is much less but the twisting road between the two is frankly poor. East-west road connections in this part of the county are generally not good, as the courts committee seems to suggest in its consultation document.

Another factor is the impact on the area around Northallerton's rapidly expanding "super-court" in Racecourse Lane. The courthouse, although opposite County Hall, is in the middle of a residential area. What will be the effect of every case, be it criminal or licensing, from a huge area of North Yorkshire being heard there?

While circumstances will be different, it is also worth posing the question why the Dales town of Skipton, with Harrogate's courthouse relatively nearby, is to retain its courthouse when Richmond, which serves a similar area, is to lose its facility?

While it is appreciated that the survival of a local court is not a cause which will necessarily excite the people in way a threat to other local services would, it does not mean they are not worth fighting for.

It is certainly not sufficient justification for the magistrates courts' committee to say it has to save money, therefore this court must close.

It smacks of arrogance and the committee has not endeared itself to this part of North Yorkshire with a document which is clearly a decision dressed up as consultation