SINCE the inception of BCP Council we in Christchurch have been aware that part of this new conurbation has run out of building land, and that Christchurch will thus be in line for developments which will forever change the pleasant nature of our quiet town.

And I use the word ‘developments’ as your article ‘developments worth £3 billion’ is headed, as despite the overuse of the word ‘regeneration’ both by Cllr Broadhead in this article and from BCP in general, whilst ‘regeneration’ means restoration or renewal, ‘development’ means converting land to a new purpose by constructing buildings. So let’s call a spade a spade.

It is clear that the putative £3bn worth of ‘developable options’ and ‘identified potential’ as stated will not only include the publicised 15 sites, but sites such as Saxon Square in Christchurch.

This is a site with such local sensitivity that after a public outcry at the suggestion, denials by the administration were made on its inclusion. However, despite these denials we now find that BCP are actually in talks with the leaseholder of Saxon Square.

But not only is there the longstanding and very real fear of our residents that Christchurch will be changed for the worse, there is also another concern glibly passed over by Cllr Broadhead in the article.

This is of course the utter lack of scrutiny of this new company which it is said will be enjoying ‘autonomy and freedom’.

Jolly nice for them, but very clearly in the event of problems, the council (ultimately the taxpayer) will be responsible for picking up the pieces.

Yet who is to represent the council on the board? The dismissive, ‘opposition councillors want to sit on the board’ comes from a recent meeting of overview and scrutiny (upon which I sit as the only member from Christchurch) when we were told that only the leader and Cllr Broadhead will ultimately be on the board, which will otherwise be non-elected people.

Surely as Future Places is funded directly from BCP budget, and owned by BCP, and problems will end up at the doors of our residents, there should be representation at board level from the very large opposition membership to ensure transparency, and give a voice to the large number of residents who did not vote for the present administration.

CLLR LESLEY DEDMAN Christchurch Independent Mudeford