I was saddened to read the scandalously intemperate and totally inaccurate letter from Dr Tucker (‘Shocked but not surprised’).
I don’t intend to dissect his assertions. Suffice to say that the consultation by Highways England was deeply flawed.
For example, two Northern bypass options were postulated and then withdrawn due to their cost. But they included a complex interchange at Lavant.
I asked, under Freedom of Information, what the costs would have been without that interchange. After much pressure, Highways England admitted they did not know. Eventually, in a distasteful atmosphere of North versus South acrimony, that consultation was aborted, under the pressure of a majority vote for ‘no option’.
That acrimony has generally been defused by the cautious, objective and democratic process instituted by Louise Goldsmith, which focused first on defining agreed objectives and is now working towards evaluating possible solutions to meeting those objectives.
What is therefore so sad is that those who failed to get their way in that original consultation are still fighting old battles and resorting to half-truths and abuse.
Professor Harold Baum, Hersee Way, Selsey