The complaints of Dorchester Town Council regarding the secrecy of West Dorset District Council (“Deadline for future of arts,” May 15; “Town v. district in asset distribution,” May 21) seem amply justified.

Recent reports imply that the proposals for Charles Street and the Fairfield are effectively a done deal, in spite of assurances that all we have heard so far have been suggestions.

There were public presentations (not consultations) on September 26, 2017 at which it emerged that no consideration had been given to housing development (the first two abortive plans did start with housing accommodation, and Charles Street was originally a residential area).

The follies of the current retail proposals have been well aired, and are so obvious that there was strong immediate public reaction at the presentations.

The recent on-line “consultation” was nothing of the sort, will provide no useful or relevant data, and was far too self-selecting to be valid.

The uncertainty over the market is serious. Stall-holders that I spoke to recently were as much in the dark as anyone else, and some felt that any disruption might see them leave.

The lack of constructive liaison with the Town Council over public toilets and the market is a deplorable failure of basic courtesy as well as seriously undermining trust in WDDC.

It is tempting to believe that a rural, Conservative-dominated WDDC is aiming a wrecking act of revenge against a Lib-Demvoting Dorchester, safe in the knowledge that, with the end of the District Council next April, they will not have to answer for their actions.

If that seems improbably petty, anyone who has attended WDDC meetings, as I have done, will not be so sure.

Barry Tempest,
Dorchester