Sir,

I'm once again moved to use your paper to register my disconcertion over the planned waste disposal site at New Hedges/ Bethesda.

In your edition of August 17, Clr. Rowlands has shown that he has possibly attended a course on Political Speak, a.k.a. How to Disguise the Truth and Make Everything Sound So So Good! (used by so many politicians the world over.)

One of the reasons given for choosing this site is because it has 'space to expand' - Does this mean it will be enlarged in the future?

We are assured that:

• 'Impact will be minimalised'. This is an admission that there will be impact on the local community, the question is how much? What will the impact be?

• 'The access road and containers (being) sunk below road level so as not to be seen from the main road'. Does this mean the site will be invisible from the highway? A sort of Secret Civic Amenity Site with hidden access! (Quite dangerous especially on the only 60 mph stretch of road between Tenby and Kilgetty). The council doesn't seem to have any sympathy for the residents on this stretch of the A478! And I do know how already difficult it is to exit a property in Bethesda during the summer months.

• 'Odours will be kept to a minimum'. Let's use the word smells. Smells will be kept to a minimum. This means there will be smells to waft on a breeze to the residents of the Brooklands home, Bethesda Cottages, The Leys and other properties in the area, not to mention into the vents of passing traffic. L'eau de New Hedges!

• 'Noise levels produced will be less than the background noise already generated by the traffic on the A478'. This means, you live in a noisy place already, so our noise won't make any difference to you! The (to be) affected properties, especially those on the same side as the 'Amenity', have quiet back gardens, which offer their residents an oasis of relative peace from the traffic noise caused by the busy, fast road passing their front doors. The council's plans don't take into consideration that these already noise plagued people will now have to deal with an onslaught of more noise and 'minimalised' smells at the back and sides of their properties.

• 'Traffic impact is expected to be negligible'. Well Dear Clr. Rowlands, I may not be a student of mathematics, but I do know that an average is attained by counting a number and dividing that number by another number to find the average, simplistic? To try and use an average of vehicles using this road throughout the year as an argument is simplistic! We all know that this road has a huge increase in traffic during the summer months, and it is during these months that the demand for this site will be at its greatest; garden, hotel/guesthouse and pub wastes are just a few of the wastes seasonally produced. I do not believe that only 9,900 vehicles use this stretch of road daily during the summer months, or that the increase will be 'negligible'.

If the assurances 'that careful consideration has been put into the proposed site plan to ensure that the facility will have minimal impact on the neighbouring community' were true, then why the outcry? Why don't we all support the plan?

Another councillor recently said in the Tenby Observer that there is no 'Plan B'. Why?

The map shows us the site will be over 130 metres from Brooklands Home (still too close to any residential property), but does not show any other property nearby of which there are several. This is not a case of not in my back yard, but a question of trust in local democracy.

Clr. Rowlands says other sites in the area were 'rigorously assessed'. Has the public been given a chance to see which sites the council so rigorously assessed and rejected? Maybe this site was chosen because it has the least amount of residents to object. They have not reckoned with the public outcry and are now on the backfoot trying to sell a plan that is unsellable. Will they railroad it through? - Yes, they probably will.

Jan Bowen,

(former Tenby resident),

Darmstadt,

Germany.