I AM the grandfather of Samuel Hazle ('An apple day doesn't appeal to Sam', EA, July 3).

I would first like to thank you for airing the issue. But having re-read the story, I was left with the impression that Sam's mum Clare was advocating the consumption of sweets by Sam during his morning break at school. This is not the case.

Clare would never advocate the consumption of sweets by Sam or by any other child at any time of day, much less in the middle of a busy school morning.

Clare has never offered sweets to Sam or any of her children as a reward for good behaviour and would consider such a policy bad parenting.

The irony is that Clare is wholeheartedly in favour of this Government's initiative to promote healthier eating habits in our schools.

The point of Clare's objection is very simple. We are fortunate enough to have been born into and reside under a free democratic system of government. The freedoms we all enjoy as citizens of the UK were hard won and paid for with human lives and surely the freedom to choose what you put into your own mouth and eat is basic to those rights.

Any erosion of those rights is a very serious matter and not to be treated lightly or allowed to pass unchallenged.

Whereas Clare supports the adoption of the scheme to promote healthier eating, she feels very strongly that, if Sam chooses to have crisps, that basic freedom of choice should not be denied him nor should he be segregated from his peers as a result of exercising his right of free choice.

RONALD HAZLE

Allenbrooke Crescent

Rodbourne

Swindon