SIR,

It is not often that an old cynic is shocked by what he reads in the local paper but even I was subject to a couple of cornflake-spluttering moments this week.

Firstly there was Stuart Wilcock's eloquent appraisal of Monmouthshire County Council's role as landowner, developer, planning authority, highway authority and underwriter of the Bryngwyn market.

Add prosecutor and funeral director to judge, jury and executioner and you get the picture. How did we come to this where a council has the power and wherewithal to trample the legitimate and heartfelt objections of those most affected and cast aside any semblance of fairness?

Then it struck me. Is there not a similar conflict of interest in the proposal for the Wonastow Road site? Did not the Assembly Government once own that land, the same government that could have been well-placed to pressure council officers to drive through a development plan should the mood have taken it? Just a question, correct me if I'm wrong.

Having cleaned part-masticated cereal from the kitchen tiles (believe me, not a job you want in the morning), I was forced to repeat the procedure on reading about the same council's approval of The Burgage as access to the Dixton Clinic site, a decision so crass that the only words that spring to mind are 'rank' and 'stupidity'.

For heaven's sake, they stopped the school buses using that route because they were causing traffic congestion and endangering the children walking to school.

The St James triangleabout is a turning problem for large vehicles, there is a tight bottleneck at The Nags Head and The Burgage itself is a traffic nightmare, unsuitable for cars let alone large construction vehicles.

The obvious and safest access to this site is from Dixton Road and if that means the developer has to go away, redraw the plans, lose a couple of saleable units and take a small hit on the profits, then that is exactly what should happen.

I suppose we should not be too surprised at such decision-making. After all, this is the same body which spent a great deal of our council tax to commission a report which concluded that the solution to the bottleneck at the top of Monnow Street was to extend it down the street.

There are well-paid comedians of the 'what's that all about' school who would sell their own grandmothers for material like that.

It is with these travesties in mind that I fear for the residents of Hillcrest and their protest against the unwanted and unnecessary overdevelopment proposal for The Vicarage (214 days and still no public notice on The Vicarage gate).

One wonders if the same ride-roughshod attitude will be shown when confronted with an objection letter by a local wildlife expert whose opinion is offered voluntarily and free of charge and which reaches markedly different conclusions on bats etc to those of the company employed by the developer; or another from a Hillcrest resident which dismantles the case to build in forensic detail (MCC website: application no. DC/2012/00754).

Also on the website is a petition against the proposal, compiled at extremely short notice in view of the public notice debacle, and is signed by a huge number of the residents of the whole of the Wyesham area.

One wonders if the representative on council for the Wyesham ward is aware of the strength of feeling among her electorate.

Surely here is an opportunity for Councillor Hackett-Pain to prove to her voters that she truly represents us.

I am positive that any shortcomings highlighted in the Estyn report would be instantly forgotten should she choose to ride at the vanguard of the protest movement.

Democracy is speaking to the councillor and just for once, wouldn't it be great if common sense prevailed over profit and compassion for pensioners was victorious over greed. We live in hope.

Chris Williams

(Monmouth)