Adam Trimingham is being unfair in calling objectors to certain developments "whingers".

Some developments may be completely out of scale (like the giant silver sheds at the waste transfer site at Hollingdean) or uneighbourly for a variety of reasons - they may be unreasonably traffic generating or inappropriate in the townscape.

Objections may well be in the public interest.

There could be a failure to give the public accurate information with reasons for the development.

Genuine participation, not just consultation (or, even worse, just information), on an already agreed plan should take place well in advance, when changes can still be made and before battle lines are drawn. The saga of the new library is a case in point.

The Brighton Society objected to the proposal for a new library in 1973 because it involved too much demolition in Church Street.

We campaigned successfully against two subsequent designs as they were inappropriate in the townscape of Church Street and New Road. Our campaign was not negative and had a positive outcome which has resulted in our outstanding new Jubilee library, a landmark building in the best sense of the word.

Some years ago, there was a proposal for a children's home near my house.

The director of social services took the trouble to come and talk about the scheme to the Preston Society and explain the reasons this particular site had been selected.

We were very proud when not a single objection was lodged against the scheme.

It is in the public interest to campaign against a park-and-ride scheme which cannot, by itself, achieve its stated aim - to reduce traffic congestion in central Brighton.

No one is objecting to the new sports centre in Hove but it would be irresponsible not to consider the impact on the surrounding area of such a dominating and "way out" scheme.

The problem is that the sports centre has to be funded with private flats, an extra 40 per cent of flats have to be added to provide social housing and yet more private flats have to be added to subsidise those.

Hundreds of one- and two-bedroomed flats are planned for the seafront: 2,000 at the Marina, more at Black Rock and yet more at the Brighton Centre and the King Alfred.

The shared-ownership flats are not easily affordable for many key workers and children are not allowed to live in the flats at the Marina.

We are told many older people whose children have flown the nest will want to leave their family-sized social houses to occupy these flats on the seafront.

Can we be sure of that without a thorough up-to-date survey of housing need?

The real whingers are the car owners who will not walk, cycle or use public transport, complain about their taxes while the cost of motoring is falling, and ignore the cost of their actions in terms of pollution and global warming.

-Selma Montford, hon secretary, The Brighton Society, Clermont Road, Brighton