PLEASE keep your letters to 250 words maximum giving your name, address and daytime telephone number - even on emails. Email: letters@swindonadvertiser.co.uk. Write: Swindon Advertiser, Unit 1 and 2 Richmond House, Edison Park, Swindon, SN3 3RB. Phone: 01793 501806.

Anonymity is granted only at the discretion of the editor, who also reserves the right to edit letters.

Canal brings benefits

I would like to register my support for option two in paragraph 3.9.11 in the heritage section of the local plan consultation document.

I would also like to register my strong objection to option three in the same paragraph.

Removal of restoration in the town centre destroys almost the entire point of having a canal at all.

The Wilts and Berks Canal Trust’s plans are for Swindon to be at the hub of two cruising rings, connecting the town with the River Thames in two locations, and with the Kennet and Avon Canal, thereby connecting Swindon with the 6,500 miles of canals in the UK.

This would bring significant environmental, social and economic benefits, not just in tourism but in regeneration in the town centre, which is sorely needed.

I also submit that the suggestion in option three, querying the deliverability, is an untrue statement.

An ARUP survey in 2005, commissioned by the council, established that it was deliverable; nothing since has changed that.

On a point of order - Swindon Borough Council is a partner in the Wiltshire Swindon and Oxfordshire Canal Partnership; other partners include Wiltshire Council, the Vale of the White Horse District Council, Oxfordshire County Council, the Wilts & Berks Canal Trust, Thames Water, the Canal & River Trust, the Environment Agency, Natural England, Sustrans, the Thames Valley Chamber of Commerce and others.

How can the council be a member of this body, dedicated to restoring the entirety of the Wilts & Berks Canal, while taking action preventing restoration within its own backyard?

Dr Chris Barry, Swindon

By elections needed

May I respond to Dr. Brian Matthews’s last two letters?

The first one tells how two doctors have now joined the LibDems.

I have no idea what their doctorship represents but should it be health then should they and other similar doctors in Parliament return the massive fees that were spent on their training to the Government?

His second letter boasts of people turning to the LibDems, including MPs who have moved across the house.

I believe all such MPs should be excluded from Parliament until a by election has been held and confirm them remaining in Parliament as they are now members of a different party to which they were first elected.

There are a number of MPs who after getting elected, now view themselves above those who put their cross against their name.

May I remind Dr Matthews that there are Christians in others parties as well who donate to the welfare of unfortunate people at home and abroad.

John Oliver, Brooklands Ave, Swindon

That’s no way to govern

Re: ‘There’s a spring in the step of the Lib Dems.’ (SA, September 18, Dr Brian Mathew)

“There is much to be optimistic about and the Liberal Democrats really are the positive hopeful alternative the country needs,” writes the ebullient Dr Brian Mathew, seemingly straight-faced.

No mention of Jo Swinson’s revoke (Article 50) -to Hell, it seems with the will of the people. Of hard won democracy itself.

One thing that the Lib Dems have demonstrated is that they are neither Liberal nor Democrats, if they believe that ignoring the result of a national referendum really is the way to govern a country.

Jeff Adams, Bloomsbury, Swindon

Letters to the Editor: What do you think?

Do you have an opinion on our reader letters? Get in touch.

Add your contribution now By uploading a contribution, for use online and in print, you accept our contributor terms. You will either own or have permission to use anything you provide.