Minutes of a meeting between Pembrokeshire County Council and 'interested parties' regarding Tenby's controversial summer pedestrianisation experiment have been blasted as 'biased' this week.

Both the Tenby Walled Town Residents Association and the Commercial Ratepayers Association have hit out at the county council's own interpretation of the Tenby Sounding Group meeting held 'in camera' on November 1.

They claim that the compositor of the minutes, which they received this week, has omitted huge sections of the meeting as well as "juggled details and paraphrased comments."

"This," claimed Mr. Richard Walker, chairman of the TWTRA, "is at best unprofessional, at worst maladministration," adding that, as a result "undue weight has been given to matters raised by prioritising the views of the county council that were not expressed at the meeting."

Mr. Walker has now written to Mr. Huw Roberts, the county's director of transportation, claiming that the 'minutes' make it seem that the county council's representatives "came to the meeting having decided on how to push through your plans regardless of what you were going to hear."

He also feels that the minutes do not acknowledge "the groundswell of opinion sympathetic to those most directly affected," even though numerous speakers at the meeting said that walled town residents had a particular problem which needed addressing.

"There is no evidence of your policy of working with communities"," he continues. "This is a blatant denial of the concept of partnership between people and local government.

"If the intention was not to be transparent in your consultation, and only to pay lip service to interested parties by ignoring the detailed submissions from the TWTRA and the Commercial Ratepayers Association, then you are proceeding in the right manner."

Mr. Nigel Chapple, treasurer of TWTRA and vice-chairman of the Commercial Ratepayers Association, also felt that the 'minutes' were a "complete misrepresentation" of the meeting.

"They appear to have taken the minority viewpoint and twisted and changed things around so as to make them out to be the views of the majority," he claimed.

"Statements have been attributed to organisations which just were not said. They are full or misinterpretations, inaccuracies and plays on words designed, I would suggest, to suit Pembrokeshire County Council's own agenda on pedestrianisation.

"When I came out of the meeting on November 1, I was optimistic to think that the county council were actually listening to the views of the majority of businesses within the walled town," Mr. Chapple continued. "On reading these so-called minutes, this appears to have been little more than a sop to both the businesses and walled town residents.

"The county council have told me that Mr. John Price took the minutes, but surely they should have had a proper stenographer there to take a true and accurate record.

"As they stand, these 'minutes' are a fine piece of fiction and should in no way form the basis of any future plans the county council should have for Tenby," he stressed.

A spokesman for the county council said: "The meeting on November 1 was held to enable the key representative organisations within the town to discuss the feedback following the pedestrianisation experiment.

"While a note was made of the meeting - and this note has been circulated to the individual participating groups - these notes should in no way be regarded as minutes.

"The meeting lasted the best part of three hours and it would be inappropriate to try and produce lengthy minutes of such a meeting.

"Both the town's county council members were in attendance and the meeting was chaired by Clr. Brian Hall, as the appropriate Cabinet member. The council's director of transportation and environment also attended, as did other officers from the authority," the spokesman continued. "All those present appeared to view it as a constructive meeting."

However, Mr. Martin Lamb, ot the TWTRA committee, was 'less than convinced' by the response of the county council.

"When we received the information, a compliment slip was enclosed stating : "I attach a copy of the minutes of the meeting"

"It seems disingenuous to me to say that because the meeting lasted three hours they could not take an accurate record, or don't county council meetings last that long!

"Why did they not take the opportunity of using the town council's minute secretary

"The council misses the point, whatever the records were, they were just not up to an acceptable standard.

"I am concerned that the cabinet/council will not have the opportunity of making a decision on the true feelings of the meeting if all they see are the notes that have been circulated.

"Or do they just do as they are told?"