YOUR leader, Cleaning the city's stables, is surely right - though we thank them for the good work that they did do, under their present deplorable and self-inflicted circumstances, Messrs Lally and Mosson are now required to leave us. A new beginning is now required if their respective civic positions are to continue to command the respect due to them. Additionally, to voluntarily release themselves will also allow them to regain our personal - perhaps even moral - respect.

However, if the gentlemen themselves cannot do this, for the sake of the good name of Glasgow (which both have lovingly espoused over the years, and in the name of which they allowed themselves to be appointed) then there is little alternative for the appointing body but to remove them from office, quickly, professionally, and without acrimony. Otherwise, will Glasgow continue to mean ''dear, green place'' for its citizens and visitors?

Or, unworthily, for she has over recent years managed to rid herself of the title of ''no mean city'', become known as ''dung city''.

Rev C Blair Gillon,

3 Dargarvel Avenue, Glasgow.

February 2.

AS an outside observer of the goings-on in Lally Palace, I have been interested to note that the response of Messrs Lally and Mosson to the possibility of additional disciplinary action has been to vociferously threaten legal action.

Legal actions do not come cheaply in my experience and accordingly I would be interested to learn who would foot the bill for the threatened action.

Would Lally and Mosson foot the bill personally, or would the cost of the action be considered as a suitable use for the Common Good Fund?

Donald Clark,

15 Middlepenny Road,

Langbank.

February 2.

SO, Labour's Executive has wimped out. It is to be left to Glasgow's Labour Group to sort out the Pat Lally affair. How could it have done so if he had been a directly elected Provost?

Councillor Robert Aldridge,

Liberal Democrat Group Leader,

City of Edinburgh Council.

City Chambers,

High Street, Edinburgh.

February 2.