Coast boast

He suggests Ovingdean is "obviously the best option". Obviously the best for whom?

Not for the residents of Ovingdean who will be directly affected should this go ahead. Nor for the many thousands of folk who visit the area for its open spaces, fresh air and relatively unsullied beach.

In asking for the views of local communities adjacent to the eight sites, Southern Water has allowed insufficient time for residents to consider the options and, by doing so, admonished itself of responsibility for the ultimate decision of which site should be forwarded for planning approval.

This policy of "divide and conquer" is cynically aimed at setting one community against another and has more to do with public relations than genuine democratic process.

Our committee, the Campaign for Ovingdean Against Sewage Treatment (Coast), is expressly concerned with opposing the planning application for the siting of a sewage treatment plant in Ovingdean.

Our position is that the planning application should be made for a brownfield site - a position supported both by the findings of the Portobello inquiry and Southern Water's own "key principles for site selection".

Mr Wilkinson suggests siting the works at Ovingdean will have "the least impact on the city's environment", by which I presume he means it will impact on the least number of people who are likely to object.

Or perhaps he advocates opening the floodgates for the development of the last remaining green spaces between Newhaven and Brighton, which would surely happen if planning consent was granted?

His assumption that the site would be "invisible" except from the air is presumably based on Southern Water's simulation.

It is certainly not a claim made by Southern Water anywhere in its supporting literature. Make no mistake, Ovingdean may have the smallest catchment that may be affected but it will be the most vocal in its opposition.

-Jay Butler, Coast publicity officer, Ainsworth Avenue, Ovingdean