With reference to the consultation over new electricity pylons.

One has to wonder that, given the high level of opposition to National Grid's proposals and NG's maintenance of their original stance in the face of this opposition, just who are we fighting here?

A simple analysis of the events might lead one to the conclusion that we are actually fighting NG, the IPC and the Government.

The reasoning is that, i) the Government needs to ensure that sufficient power is available to meet ever increasing demand, ii) the Government set up the IPC, a completely autonomous quango to by-pass normal local government planning issues such as was seen with the Heathrow extension.

I would surmise that their remit is to ensure the speedy passage of unpalatable projects, while appearing to offer consultation to interested parties, and iii) the Government has also appointed the National Policy Committee to formulate policy to support future projects.

Quite clearly the creation of all this infrastructure was not done randomly, and follows a previously constructed strategy aimed at the attainment of Government goals. Unfortunately, we in the UK are not very adept at formulating tactics and strategy to protect us from the dictatorial democracy.

So far our concerted efforts have followed the normal pattern , achieving media coverage and heightened awareness, but are easily ignored.

Much of what has been done has been playing to their rules which has no effect in slowing the juggernaut's forward progress.

The latest response from NG stating that in their opinion the consultation was adequate, and they will not be offering any other options other than pylons, only serves to prove they know they have been assured a clear run to the finish line by the Government, hence the infrastructure.

Can I suggest we stop playing the game by their rules, and think outside the box to formulate some tactics to gain their serious attention.

A judicial review of the failure to consult at the early stages would be a good starting point, with the aim of halting the whole process using the law that exists for this purpose.

Also carry out an analysis to determine the strengths and weaknesses on both sides, and the opportunities and threats that exist.

Perhaps the weaknesses may show us a way to hurt NG by depressing their share price and therefore gain their attention.

If we continue to offer passive resistance we will lose the fight to save our environment, etc. More aggressive, radical actions are required. People power is strong, but it needs driving home to those in our society who believe they can steamroller through their plans on an indifferent electorate.

Tim Baker Badgworth Axbridge