It is for the elected members of Brighton and Hove City Council's planning committee to respond to Green Councillor Keith Taylor's charge that they vote according to instructions issued by "council bosses" but I am happy to deal with the other points in his thoroughly misleading letter of June 14.

For readers and others unfamiliar with the scheme, I should explain that the stadium would be outside the proposed boundaries of the National Park but the proposed "transport interchange", including a coach park, would be just inside. This interchange is an important element in the transportation strategy and has to be immediately accessible to the stadium to discourage spectators from driving there, so repeating the success at Withdean. It was shown on the drawings from the very earliest stages of the design development, well before the planning application was submitted. At the request of planners, we have reduced its size.

There is no capital funding gap. In the business case summary supplied to the council, the club projects that funds in excess of the estimated costs of £48 million will be available. As is normal in projects of this size, the money will become available in stages, as the scheme progresses. The £34 million required for the first and largest phase will be available well in advance of it being needed.

The difference between the two figures is £14 million and, presumably, this is the figure Coun Taylor is trying to claim is a funding gap. The council has been undertaking an "ongoing process of review which has included seeking advice from independent specialists" and, in the report to the planning committee, "believes that the capital costs of the project are capable of being met".

There is nothing undefined about the flyover, which, like the coach park and the road through Stanmer Park, was identified on the plans when the planning application was submitted last October.

Coun Taylor's "unanswered question" may be a reference to the officers' routine request for extra information about details of the bridge design, principally the brick walls along its side. The road through Stanmer Park is actually along the edge of the park, running partly through a wood which is in very poor condition. Part of the plans included environmental reinstatement of this wood. However, council officers think there might be a better route and are looking at it closely.

The stadium transport strategy clearly sets out how visitors will come and go. It contains realistic projections on the use of public transport and how the impact on local roads will be minimised.

The Highways Agency has not asked for any improvements to local roads but simply has confirmed the need for the road link to the University of Sussex on the edge of Stanmer Park. It has also asked for a survey of the B2123-A27 junction at times when the stadium is being used for small events. This is not a major issue and the agency and its independent consultants have clearly demonstrated their overall satisfaction with the proposals.

The Green Party abdicated its responsibility by failing to turn up at the planning meeting. The Greens are not on the planning committee so had no vote but they did have an opportunity to speak. They have made sweeping attempts to discredit the council's officers and elected members, the huge number of highly-skilled and experienced professional consultants and the Albion board, and have tried to discredit the entire planning process.

Fortunately, those of us who have been closely involved in this process know the facts and great credit is due to the sound professional approach adopted by everyone who has been involved.

-Martin Perry, Chief Executive, Brighton and Hove Albion FC