Sir, As a non-resident of Tenby, I am unable to comment on the difficulties which the residents may be experiencing during pedestrianisation in the town. But as a frequent visitor, usually on our bikes or by bus to do some shopping, I am very keen to see the pedestrianisation scheme go through. The centre of the town can then be most pleasant to walk through and clearly, our visitors appreciate the relative calm, quiet and safety of pedestrianisation. I sincerely hope that the inspector at the recent public inquiry, Mr. Clive Nield, took the opportunity during recesses to wander round the town and see for himself just how chaotic the traffic situation can be with not just double parking in Tudor Square, for example, but triple parking! Must this be allowed to continue? Surely not. I could only attend the public inquiry myself as a very interested non-resident and then only briefly on two of the days. But I was extremely surprised and disappointed to learn that the TWTRA were all for pedestrianisation, but... only if it didn't affect their members! This attitude is presumably the TWTRA equivalent of the NIMBY principle and the concept of striving for something for the concept of 'the greater good of the community' seems to have completely passed them by. Whilst I'm sure that TWTRA members, local trades people and businesses would not be guilty, it is a fact that all systems, whether its welfare benefits, health services, speed controls on our roads or whatever, they are all prone to abuse, human nature being what it is. Cracks allowed in any system can only get wider. PCC now have the unenviable problem of how to minimise abuse of the pedestrianisation scheme without allowing too many concessions which could well ruin the whole concept.

Paul Rich,

'The Burgage,' St. Florence.