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

We need answers

Isn’t it surprising how things turn out?

Our beloved council had an offer from a sort of mega-tycoon, who was into developments in a very big way. He knew enough to make a mega fortune and drew up a sort of plan to put Swindon on the map. And all this without our council having to regenerate virtually anything.

But, guess what? They turned it down flat. Refused to re-examine it. As our clever councillors can spot problems from a mile off. That’s why they are having to re-do Wellington Street again.

Dr Laurie Marsh has been responsible for some successful developments, which is more that can be said for some of the council’s ideas.

Councillor Oliver Donachie treated it with scorn. So did our old friend on the council Dale Heenan. Wasn’t he the guy that was pushing for the hideous museum and art gallery?

Why have they thrown this idea away? Well, obviously because nobody on the council was able to come up with it

And secondly because the council has no vision, no idea how to develop anything.

How many times have we heard of all these wonderful ideas supposedly coming from the council? What happened to them?

Nothing, of course.

Dr Laurie Marsh was at one time the biggest property tycoon in the UK.

He had also found out which banks would have financed it and he chose banks who specifically invest in ethical projects for public benefit.

Our council usually choose the most expensive. No surprise there then.

I feel the council should be forced into explaining to Swindon residents just why they have discarded this scheme out of hand.

It certainly sounds better to me that anything that the council have ever come up with.

But it’s really up to all you, Swindonians. Ask your councillor and make sure he or she gives you an answer.

David Collins, Blake Crescent, Swindon

Not just for hermits

‘What you said’ (SA, September 24) showed a difference of views about climate change between people who support the massive international action because they recognise the scientific consensus that today we face a serious problem which threatens us and our children, and others who have no clue.

For the latter group, either the scientific consensus has completely passed them by or deep down they know their children are facing a worse life than they but the change of routine necessary to stand up for those children is just too disturbing a prospect for them. So, we get excuses.

“The world will end anyway”. Brilliant. Imagine, “Ok doctor you’ve told me smoking causes cancer but hey, I think you’ll find we all die anyway so I’ll keep smoking thanks very much.” Or, “What? My children’s school is wasting time on road safety. Don’t they know everyone dies anyway? Health and safety gone mad!”

Then we get, “Don’t they realise … vehicles burn emissions by being sat there”. (They don’t but I think we know what was meant). Solution? Turn the engine off. But anyway, how is this an argument for relying on fossil fuels?

Again: “Why not in school holidays?” Put another way: Why not when it would be easier for the media to ignore the protest?

And we get the obligatory but irrelevant nonsense “look they’ve got mobile phones and carry water bottles and go on holiday.” As if only hermits who forego all contact with society have any right to oppose the destruction of the planet.

Peter Smith, Woodside Avenue, Swindon