YOUR headline to Philip Crowe's letter says it all ("Speaking up for York", March 3), and by and large I am with Paul Cordock.

Intelligent Mr Crowe may well be, but he has no right at all to claim to speak for anyone other than himself on contentious matters which affect all of us who live in York.

He is unrepresentative of anyone but himself and, while I can accept that there is a case for constructive criticism of any development scheme put forward by the city fathers, they are the ones who have been elected to speak and make decisions for us.

I do not need Mr. Crowe, Gordon Campbell-Thomas (that well-known self publicist) or anyone else to claim to present my views.

Coppergate Two was a classic example of a perfectly valid scheme which would have made real improvements to the centre of the city, both in aesthetic and financial terms. It was certainly not perfect, as first published, but it was made clear that it could be modified to please most of us.

But was this good enough to satisfy those who delight in telling us what is bad for us? Not likely, and by a mixture of innuendo and false claims, the scheme was presented to anyone who happened to be passing Marks & Spencer, whether from York or not, in the most emotive possible terms. As a result thousands signed a petition against it without knowing any of the detail.

As we all know, all this resulted in the scheme being abandoned.

Sorry Mr Crowe, I'll be much more convinced of the height of your IQ when you start offering something constructive on my behalf, preferably as a city councillor.

Phil Fowler,

Bramble Dene, York.

Updated: 09:35 Saturday, March 06, 2004