David Cox, Cllr for West Teignmouth, writes:

I was surprised to read in this newspaper that Mike Hockin, chairman of Dawlish Chamber of Trade, blamed Teignbridge Council because Tesco has won a High Court battle to stop rival Sainsbury's' plans to build a new store in Dawlish.

I think Mr Hockin should look a little closer to home if he must apportion blame. I strongly recommend he reads the minutes of the development control committee of June 23, 2008, and November 10, 2008, available via the Teignbridge website. the links are also posted on my blog http://www.cllrdavidcox.blogspot.com">www.cllrdavidcox.blogspot.com.

Dawlish's Conservative district councillors pushed for the Sainsbury's application to be approved without delay, despite warnings that the council would almost certainly face a legal challenge. I understand Dawlish councillors were under extreme public pressure; one Dawlish councillor said it would be 'political suicide' for any Dawlish councillor not to support Sainsbury's; however, they could have supported my amendment without compromising their position, they chose not to.

The amendment I proposed, seconded by Cllr Connett, was for deferral. This would have delayed, but not necessarily refused, Sainsbury's planning application, allowing for both applications to be considered together; and avoided giving Tesco the opportunity to mount a legal challenge, as well as negotiate a better contribution for Dawlish town centre from Sainsbury than the derisory £200,000 offered – Dartmouth got £383,700 from Sainsbury's.

Regrettably my amendment was lost by nine votes to 13. Had the committee accepted my amendment, Teignbridge council tax payers would not have to find an estimated £40,000 in legal bills.

However, the ultimate irony of this sorry tale is that Dawlish may end up with Tesco after all. Tesco has been refused planning permission, mainly because Sainsbury had permission – now the court has taken Sainsbury's planning permission away; Tesco has a pretty cast iron case to take to the planning inspector.MORE LETTERS IN OUR ONLINE EDITION