I SUSPECT that Mary Chabrel (letters, April 20) and I share a similar vision for the future of transport in Lancaster.

I'd certainly like to see a much improved bus, rail and taxi service, a major reduction of traffic in the City Centre, greatly improved facilities for pedestrians and cyclists, attractive places such as Dalton Square freed from the parked cars which spoil it and cleaner, quieter, safer streets. I think that traffic congestion is the most serious issue which faces Lancaster, and I utterly believe that a sustainable, integrated public transport system would improve our quality of life, make our city even more attractive for business and visitors and help to create jobs and opportunities. I do not believe that a single carriageway, landscaped Western bypass will have anything like the impact that some fear. However, I would not want to build it if I was not absolutely convinced that a new road, a new bridge and a new means of access to points west of the city centre is an essential elements of the transport system that we need. Congestion is ruining an attractive city, levels of atmospheric pollution the length of the A6 from Galgate to Skerton are completely unacceptable, we have a serious problem of road safety and the vitally important regeneration area at Luneside cannot be properly accessed.

Just outside the city the road from the A6 to Cockerham is one of the most heavily used rural roads in the country, partly because one of the district's major manufacturing employers is based at Glasson Dock.

Glib slogans and wishful thinking will not stop Lancaster choking.

Of course we should develop rail freight from Heysham but even rail companies do not believe that they could take more than 10 per cent of goods currently carried through our city by HGV's.

Mary Chabrel's vision offers no help to any of us who need to access the motorway network and nothing for buses, taxis or cyclists who need more road space.

A Western bypass would be a crucial part of a sustainable transport strategy assisting the development of park and ride and freeing Lancaster from traffic which wants to avoid it. Alongside measures to reduce city centre car parking and the introduction of charges for workplace parking it would provide opportunities for public transport to move and further incentives for us all to use it, get on our bikes or walk. Consider how attractive St George's Quay would be if we could free it from through traffic by providing an access to Luneside from the West. Throughout the whole day of my cross examination at the Lancaster local plan public inquiry not one person opposed to the Western bypass offered any realistic alternative for the development of public transport, the improvement of our environment or the creation of jobs and opportunities.

Not one of the people who carried out a ludicrous protest about the western bypass on the day of the opening of the bus station has taken up my offer to meet. If any Lancaster resident opposed to the western bypass is prepared to move on from parroting slogans about all roads being bad and actually face the real practical issues of daily life in this city I'd be happy to meet them.

Who knows, we might even find some common ground.

Hilton Dawson MP