Sir, – Over the last few weeks, you have published letters about events at St Andrew's. The latest one, ("Church on the move April 21") from an anonymous contributor, seems to hide the fact that there are still differences of opinion about the proposed changes inside St Andrew's and therefore prompts a response.

The point raised by several correspondents, that there has been no reduction in the size of the congregation due to current dissent, is not relevant. Those who disagree with the proposed level of redevelopment will continue to worship at St Andrew's and support a sensible level of reordering work.

It has sometimes been suggested that those who have expressed disagreement with the proposed plans have been unable to accept change. Although this is a totally unjust statement, it is an easy way of dismissing the large number of resignations from important positions within the parish.

It should be recorded that written responses received from the parish membership, following a presentation of the revised scheme, resulted in a majority not wishing to proceed with the scheme.

As the Rector and Parochial Church Council have decided to ignore the wishes of that majority, it does seem entirely reasonable that democratic argument should continue.

Nor am I convinced that the revised scheme will serve the community any better than the original proposals. Installation of a balcony that will supposedly replace the amenities available at Church House (which is rarely used by the parish) has no proven use and creates more problems than it solves.

I believe that the proposed changes are so significant, expensive and far reaching, that the whole parish membership should be given the opportunity of a simple vote upon the issue of this resulted in a majority in favour of the whole of the proposed scheme, then I would gladly accept that a democratic process of decision making had been fulfilled.

Mike Barter

The Herald Letters page is where you will find the strongest views on a wide range of subjects each week.