I THINK your correspondent’s ‘surprise at supportive letter’ (Observer, August 16), if I may be so bold, takes time to solicit views from the silent majority, who are equally capable of studying the evidence of the proposals of the link road presented and able to make an intelligent assessment of the facts for themselves.
Their judgement of course will be seen as subjective nonsense by those who have a different view, but does that makes the other anymore valid? While it is every citizen’s right to voice an opinion, complain and protest, was not the time to do this at the planning stage?
If indeed he believes in suggesting that building more roads solve nothing, I would remind him that his view and similar, have been put to those who we democratically elect to make these decisions on our behalf and have been openly discussed in your newspaper and elsewhere ad nauseum for decades.
I do not recall your correspondent’s name or indeed any of those of a similar persuasion ever appearing on a ballot paper in an attempt to gain support, preferring it would seem to regard their ill-timed protest method of dissent as a way of deciding policy for the rest of us.
Perhaps the media, short of local issues have given protestors a disproportionate importance they do not deserve. Either way your correspondent can now be rest assured that there are at least two members of the general public supporting the democratic process who disagree with him.