DOES it not seem strange that some months ago the disused airfield site at Throckmorton was considered to be an unsuitable location for a large housing estate?

It was suitable however - without consultation of the local residents - to be a burial site for many thousands of animal carcases during the recent foot-and-mouth crisis.

Why not? There's a big stinking landfill site down the road anyway. It's a nice big cheap area to discard waste.

So now, this piece of land, despite it's unsuitability as a residential area, and the thousands of carcases liquefying underfoot, becomes suitable to house hundreds of asylum seekers.

Or is it that the location has been rendered so unattractive that it is now a cost-effective solution?

Does it not also seem strange that nearby residents' campaign for literally years for a small bypass (Wyre Piddle) yet something we all don't want can be organised for us in five months without our consultation?

Did any of us elect our politicians to be treated in such a way?

Aside from these local issues, the whole scale and location for these proposed centres is utter madness and is clearly being driven by cost.

As for Lord Rooker's comments on the issue, the man has quite clearly lost it.

My wife and I resigned from the Labour Party within two days of the decision over Throckmorton being announced. It's time to fight.