EDEN Council’s decision to back off from forcibly removing personal items left on graves at Penrith cemetery from tomorrow thankfully avoids the potential for distressing scenes of bereaved families removing mementos and their personal tributes to those they have lost, often in tragic circumstances.

Due to the intervention of Penrith and the Border MP David Maclean and pressure from bereaved families angry at the way they have been treated by the council, Eden has decided to step back from the imposition of an outright ban on “inappropriate” items as from 13th April, and representations to the authority will be considered before a final decision is taken.

The families affected by the council’s sudden announcement that seemingly inoffensive articles such as wind chimes, soft toys and solar lights had to be removed before tomorrow or Eden would do it for them must be wondering why this more conciliatory line was not taken in the first place. A number of them have already gone through extraordinary heartbreak and, judging by letters to this newspaper, the council’s edict has served only to add to their grief.

This was always going to be an emotional issue, particularly when it comes to deciding what is appropriate or inappropriate as a graveside tribute, and the council should have had the foresight to seek the opinions of others before it embarked on its arbitrary course of action. Certainly the views of the town’s religious leaders should have been sought, as they now appear to be, as should those of some of the bereaved.

The council says it acted in response to complaints that an increasing amount of what it described as “non-traditional” memorabilia was affecting the overall appearance of the cemetery. But there are others who find such tributes a comfort in desperate times, particularly when it comes to the deaths of infants and young people.

Penrith cemetery, set high above the town, is in a wonderful location and is generally well maintained by the council. It is a shame that on this occasion its tranquillity has been shattered by a public argument which, with a little more compassion on Eden’s part, could have been resolved far more peacefully.

Hopefully the delay will allow for reasonable guidelines to be drawn up so that people know what the council, steered by consensus, considers acceptable in the cemetery, thus avoiding the need for high-handed action in the future. The cemetery, it should be remembered, is a public place of burial and not an enclosed churchyard, where more strict rules apply.