HAVING read Coun Sturgis' statement following the second fiasco in relation to the building of homes in and around Chippenham, Coun Sturgis's take on reality needs a serious sense check. His dismissive and 'spin'-based responses to what the inspector uncovered are unforgivable. Coun Sturgis needs to be reminded that there were 12 matters to be reviewed and examined by the inspector. The inspector broke the hearing into 12 matters over nine days, based on the evidence submitted by the council, which they'd had over two years to prepare for, taking account of the previous debacle.

On the hearing's second day, and before the end of matter four, the inspector had rightly and understandably collated enough concerns to suspend the hearing, because the council's supporting evidence was woeful and frankly embarrassing. This was evident to all, as on the morning of day two, the council's Spatial Planning Team where making up and voicing potential solutions 'on the hoof', to what were basic and obvious problems with their submitted plans!

The inspector's suspension due to the serious shortcomings in the council plans actually spared the council further humiliation, as a clear lack of detail and proper consideration became evident in the early matters examined. So less than a third into the matters to be examined, a very experienced inspector had already seen how lamentable Coun Sturgis's submitted plans were!

The plan and site selections for the core strategy have simply been reverse engineered by Coun Sturgis and his team, to justify an eastern link road. (The inspector also quickly spotted this.) They are of course now in an impossible position, because the site selections do not make fundamental sense when measured against the criteria within the housing brief they are to deliver.

The council can try and put a brave face on this and 'spin' all it wants. They would, however, do better to go back to the drawing board and complete the core strategy and site allocation proposals, professionally, evenly and evidence based, without any preconceived agendas which clearly underlie the current and flawed submission. The first and necessary step is the removal of Coun Sturgis, and some of his immediate team who think it acceptable to waste our hard-earned money on plans which are unfit for purpose.

ANDREW STEVENSON, St Mellion Close, Chippenham