THE promoter's argument for the stadium project appears to have changed, with the stadium not so much emphasised now as the key feature.

Instead, it seems that the superstore has now become the indispensable city need, or at least this the impression conveyed by David Hallmark in his substantial article (Evening News, Friday, April 9.

So why the obsession with this DIY store, and in this particular location when we already have four others around the city perimeter, but not one in the town centre for those unfortunate people who cannot drive?

And why won't they consider Tolladine goods yard? Is it because brownfield sites are more expensive to build on? What other sites have been considered? Where was the sequential test? Was it waived, and if so why?

Mr Hallmark's statements wrongly concluded that the development had long been approved by Worcester City Council.

In fact, successive councils have opposed a retail development of the huge scale that he wants; and the present council has only recently obliged the promoters by ignoring rules that have the sole purpose of protecting the city from just such abuses.

Where big business is involved, citizens' sole remaining defence is the independent Government Inspector, who has confirmed that for many reasons, the retail development is wrong for this particular site.

He also confirmed that it is not the purpose of the planning system to prop up an ailing business by freeing the club from its accumulated debt.

The lobbying of people's representatives is a noble part of British freedom. When such lobbying becomes excessive, however, and lies in the hands of those in powerful positions, it drowns out the voices of citizens and threatens our democracy.

The Inspector's decision is a considered one, with none of the bias that we have recently been subjected to from the promoters. His decision should be accepted gracefully, in the knowledge that is in the best interests of all, and not just a vociferous minority.

S JOHNSON, Worcester.