IN conflict with the policies of Government, county and district councils, and against the wishes of local residents, city councillors have reversed the local plan to accept a monstrous, questionable retail development on an out-of-town greenfield site.

During the critical council meeting, the proposal for a retail park at Nunnery Way was branded as a fudge, with councillors apparently posturing to retain the votes of football-supporting electors.

The infamous 18 conditions are either so vague and meaningless, or so impossible to meet, that one wonders whether councillors are either nave, or just afraid to speak against what they know to be a bad scheme.

The truth is that, if the conditions are strictly applied, they could never be met. If the Plan is changed and the club ignores or fudges through the conditions, what teeth will the council have to enforce them - if they want to, that is!

The council decision carries a high risk of Government veto and will cost council taxpayers a great deal of money, and probably more than the rejected lifeline for the Swan Theatre.

The business developer may have 10,000 signatures, but from a population of 100,000, this is pitiful. By comparison, some 11,000 signatures were collected from the Swan Theatre in a much shorter time. On just a moral basis, does not the council have a much greater obligation to support the Swan?

Ultimately, the application will still be called in by the Secretary of State, and could well be refused. These facts are well known and offer a smoke screen for councillors to appear to support the scheme while privately they may oppose it.

When the Government eventually throws it out they can then hide behind John Prescott and blame the Government for refusing the application.

M H LOCK,

Co-Secretary of Spetchley Road Area Residents' Association.