If the University of Oxford were to bombard me with as many leaflets as the “Save Port Meadow Campaign” has, there would be an outcry in your columns.

Yet the latest missive from this campaign (backed by the CPRE that recently were arguing that homes should be built on brownfield sites. Was not the land upon which the Castle Mill flats were built, a brownfield site?) uses very emotive and, in some cases, inaccurate language – “damage done to Port Meadow”, “completely unnecessary to ruin Port Meadow” and “Port Meadow blocks.” There has been no damage done to Port Meadow, and it certainly has not been ruined.

The flats are not on Port Meadow, and it is inaccurate to describe them as Port Meadow blocks. Yes the view from the meadow has been affected – as it was when the houses and apartments bordering the railway were built some years ago, and as it was with the ribbon development of Wolvercote, many years ago.

Sadly a local campaign, which I am sure was started with a genuine concern about the impact of the Castle Mill development and for which I initially had some sympathy, is now attracting those people for whom criticising the university is a way of life. With CPRE funding it is now resorting to the biased language of the professional lobbyists, and is in danger of losing any credibility it once may have had.

Dave Horner

Bridge Street

Osney Island

Today’s letters

 

  • Do you want alerts delivered straight to your phone via our WhatsApp service? Text NEWS or SPORT or NEWS AND SPORT, depending on which services you want, and your full name to 07767 417704. Save our number into your phone’s contacts as Oxford Mail WhatsApp and ensure you have WhatsApp installed.