James Simister (Letters, January 23) continues to spout nonsense every time he tries to justify the exclusion of hundreds of children from their nearest schools just so parents in his area can keep their pick of the best of the bunch.

There is no evidence that the nodal proposals will result in increased travel, higher truancy or a break between schools and their communities.

The working group which conducted the review believes the opposite is true. Its final report to the children, families and schools committee makes it clear the nodal system would be "beneficial for the city as a whole, bringing about a considerable improvement" to the current system.

So if the working group found a nodal system will make things better, why is it now proposing to do nothing to change the unfairness which prompted the review?

The answer lies buried in Mr Simister's false claim that the working group "over-represented areas demanding change".

Again, the opposite is true. Within the group there were no councillors representing the large area of east Brighton excluded from expressing a meaningful choice of school.

Likewise, there are no councillors from east Brighton on the children, families and schools committee, which makes the final decision on admissions criteria.

This anomaly shouldn't matter because councillors serving on these committees are supposed to put aside their ward interests and make decisions for the benefit of the city as a whole.

But sadly the unfair status quo will be maintained because the councillors in a position to implement changes fear upsetting the vested interests of the privileged parents in their wards.

-Paul Grivell, Brighton