Cllr Terry Falcao, of hermosa Road, Teignmouth, writes:

I am responding to Roy Phillips' inaccurate and bizarre letters in the last two weeks' editions.

Mr Phillips is wrong to suggest that Dawlish's CCTV system was funded by Teignbridge. It was funded by Dawlish tax payers. Newton Abbot's system is part funded by Teignbridge and part funded by town traders and supermarkets and is aimed at the high level of shoplifting in the daytime. It is staffed and this is an ongoing cost.

Mr Phillips should be aware that Teignmouth's CCTV system and Townwatch scheme has attracted attention from far and wide as the model to follow. The costs for the equipment were significantly cheaper than the system at Dawlish, and the specification is higher, permitting excellent night time images. It is undertaken by excellent volunteers who monitor the cameras at night, when neither Newton Abbot nor Dawlish have cover. The last administration at Devon County Council also promised a sizeable contribution to our CCTV system which we are led to believe the current administration will honour. The costs quoted by John Ware included rent for a small shop for two years and the conversion of a shell into a state of the art control room. Those are one-off costs and the only costs that the taxpayer will bear in the future is that of maintenance.

Mr Phillips will recall from his days as a councillor that CCTV had been approved for many years but not implemented at least in part because of the dysfunctional way the council used to operate. During the past four years, the councillors have largely co-operated for the sake of the town.

As the person who the councillors appointed to project manage the implementation of CCTV system, I can say that costs were kept tightly under control and the scheme was incrementally increased and improved year on year. All the councillors took a close interest in the progress and costs of the scheme. The police are building a good working relationship with Townwatch volunteers and the substantially increased detection of crime is an achievement that we should all be proud of.

Last week's letter, however, was bizarre. Mr Phillips advocated developing the grounds and outbuildings of Bitton House, converting the upstairs into apartments and selling them off. Bitton House is a Grade 2 Star building and such development would never be permitted even if the town's folk would contemplate such an outlandish suggestion.

Bitton House has been purchased for the town twice. It is part of this town's heritage and as a building of significant historical importance must continue to belong to our residents.

I recall that Roy Phillips has in the past also advocated turning the Carlton Theatre site into an apartment block. That suggestion was equally ill-considered since the theatre is on the Den (part of the heritage of future residents). THIS AND OTHER LETTERS ONLINE