I ATTENDED the recent 'farce' of a planning meeting, expecting to listen to arguments both for and against the proposed 24-feet lighting units for Baxenden 'Village Green,' more commonly known as The Rec.

The chair, at the start of the hearing, reminded everyone, including the committee, that the proposal before them was for the floodlights ONLY and NOT the multi-use games area (MUGA) - which by the way can be erected whether residents/ratepayers want it or not, without any need for planning permission) - and any facts or comments should only be related to this issue.

A spokesperson for BAXRA -- Baxenden Residents Association made his argument precise and clear and did not once mention the MUGA.

The next speaker spoke about the youth of Hyndburn and spoke in favour of the MUGA. He mentioned floodlights ONCE in a passing sentence.

The next person spoke at length about the MUGA and commented how surprised he was after the public outcry and many letters of objection to the MUGA that it had now turned into the residents JUST wanting to object to the floodlights....

Did we miss something here?

Didn't the chair TWICE remind each person allowed to speak that they were only there to put their argument across concerning the floodlights?

This was a clear case of a planning committee which had no intention of sticking to the facts -- allowing speakers for the proposal of the MUGA and their own members to voice their comments to the committee on the proposal of the MUGA when they were only there to pass or reject the floodlights.

I know this is not the end -- Baxenden deserves to be heard and if our own council chooses not to listen, we'll make sure somebody else does!

'Puzzled' (name and address received).