I WOULD like to respond to the rather hysterical and ill informed letter from Cllr Anne Moore in the pages of your paper last week (Penarth Times, March 20).

It is following on from the article in which Sully and Lavernock community council expressed their disappointment that her husband as leader, and the rest of the Vale of Glamorgan cabinet members or paid officers had refused every invitation to attend any public meetings organised by both Bob Penrose and myself or other organisations in regards to the proposed siting of a permanent traveller site in Sully.

Anne, I’m sure would be well aware of the meetings between myself , Bob and Vale council officials in the presence of senior legal officers in which our demands for action in removing the present illegal occupants of the former waste site were blocked and turned down.

Our presentations and demands included our outrage that the promise of eviction proceedings given to us and the Sully public to start in October 2012 proved to be false and were replaced with a now two and a half year period of toleration by Anne’s Labour party administration.

She of course is aware of the detailed presentations on the unsuitability of the site given to her own committee by myself, Bob Penrose , the director of the adjoining Beechwood College for Autistic students and Sully Community Council vice-chairman Chris Tatt.

The LDP process to which Anne refers is of course still live and includes again detailed objections to the suitability of the Hayes Road site by myself available to public scrutiny, my objections of course mirror those of the Vale's own commissioned feasibility assessment of the site which concludes that "this site is not suitable for a traveller site".

One must wonder at the competence and logic of a Labour administration that puts forward a site that the Vale’s own commissioned study recommends against. This of course can also be added to the highly publicised comments from the present traveller occupants of Hayes Road that they do not agree with the permanent construction of a traveller site at the location which also reflects the views of travellers in a previously commissioned report that they prefer sites along the A48. Chuck into the mix the submission to the LDP process from the Welsh Assembly which also questions the suitability of the site.

It seems that only Anne’s Labour Party administration appear to not only tolerate the present illegal occupation of the site for the past two and a half years but is now proposing a permanent site there.

I feel that Cllr Moore's comments owe more to reaction of the loss of face in the original criticism of the constant refusal of her husband and the rest of the Vale's cabinet to invitations to face the public of Sully than a lack of effort from both Sully councillors over this matter.

It has been well documented in the pages of this paper in the past that over £70,000 plus disappears into the coffers of the Moore household per annum paid for by the Vale of Glamorgan ratepayers, one would have thought that perhaps a sense of duty, if not one of shame might have prompted an appearance of the Leader of the Vale of Glamorgan council in order to explain his party’s rationale to those who provide this vast sum of money. I now extend yet another invitation to Neil Moore ( Anne if she wishes) and the Vale cabinet to face the Sully public.

Kevin Mahoney

Cllr Sully Ward