A 'YES' vote for a wish list idea for a supermarket is not the same as confirming public approval of the proposals presented by Safeway for a new store in Great Harwood.
Yet isn't this the 'simplistic' way both the press and the Labour Party have presented this issue? It is not surprising that many Great Harwood people feel confused; some insulted.
As with the earlier traffic calming diktat, to oppose is to be 'anti.' There are no shades for discussion.
It is time, I believe, to prove a point that there are shades for discussion. Public debate counts and party politics has no place in important local affairs.
I throw down the gauntlet to the Labour and the Conservatives to arrange a public debate on this issue. Others may wish to join forces to endorse the planning proposals. I would be happy to publicly defend my opposition to them.
Such a public debate should not be about the wish-list idea for a supermarket, but the planning proposals presented by Safeway, all of which have been publicly endorsed by Labour from our MP down.
I am calling in all the political/council bluff so that the public may obtain a wider understanding and make an informed decision. That's all. If the Labour/Council lobby are right, they have nothing to lose. The public have everything to gain.
PHILIP CONGDON (former Referendum Party candidate), Hindle Fold Lane, Great Harwood.
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article