What comes across most strongly is how acidic her response is to what were obviously genuinely felt concerns that Mr Eckford had and that he felt he had no other alternative but to voice.

The vitriolic retort about the UN Children’s Charter is laughable. Has she herself actually read it? Article 3 clearly states that in all actions concerning children, the best interests of the child shall be of primary consideration. Can Ms Petrie categorically state that this is the case, in the instance of the children being balloted at the Primary School? Or was it more that ECDT’s best interests lay at the heart of that matter?

The only way to find out any information about this group is via their website, which more often than not is extremely out of date. Any attempts to communicate via email are again more often than not ignored. So what other choice was left open to him?

Have this group actually tried to communicate openly and honestly with the residents of Earlston? Have they tried keeping the residents of Earlston updated? Unfortunately the answer to these questions is no. We are still waiting for the second newsletter that was promised in June, nearly 2 months ago now.

Earlston is a small village that has been ripped in two by this business. Who is out there to actually mend that rip? ECDT claim they are for the village, but I see no evidence of them making any attempts to unite a broken village, in fact quite the opposite. I am, etc.

Name and address supplied