I must correct a turn of phrase in your report headlined "Bid to derail £220m leisure plan rejected" (The Argus, June 17).

Readers who are keen to have a public inquiry concerning the King Alfred planning application which was submitted last autumn and resubmitted this March need to be aware it was not a "planning inspector who dealt with the proposals" but rather the local plan inspector at the public inquiry a few years back "who dealt with the proposals".

We still seek to have a public inquiry into the present and current situation.

The High Court case challenged some of the content of the recently adopted Local Plan which allows housing to be put on the site of the King Alfred together with a new sports centre and the way in which that content got there.

Brighton and Hove City Council as landowner has approved of the scheme in principle but the planning application has not got approval and is expected to be withdrawn.

Policy and resources committee on June 29 will receive a report and discuss where the council is going with this. This soap opera has some way to run yet.

ING could pull the plug. There could be new designs and a new application. The council could surprise residents and decide they have had enough.

Certainly, Morris Abrahams and Nigel Furness have suffered over this and one hopes the council will not pursue any of the reported angry suggestions made in the High Court concerning these two men. To do so would be vindictive. They had the good of the community in mind.

-Valerie Paynter, saveHOVE, POB 521, Hove BN3 6HY