I am grateful for Traditional Unionist's letter (August 14).

He correctly identified the double standard running through the TUV proposed 'alternative,' and also exposed the congenital weakness that lies at its heart.

The double standard is that under TUV's 'alternative' SF would be full partners and have a veto over progress via the community protections proposed by TUV.

The TUV proposed power sharing super council would only administer a restricted range of responsibilities - education, health and roads.

A majority of devolved responsibility would revert to central government including culture and language, equality, finance and personnel and reform local government.

On language and culture TUV's 'alternative' would hand responsibility back to people already committed to an Irish Language Act that would result in bilingual status for Irish alongside English.

It would hand cultural funding back to those who under funded the Loyal Orders and Ulster Scots.

On equality responsibility would revert to a government that has sought to criminalise Christians over controversial issues like gay rights.

On finance and personnel it would hand responsibility for the former Maze site back to a government in favour of a shrine.

On reform of local government it would transfer responsibility to a government which has already produced proposals for seven super councils placing Craigavon and Banbridge councils in an overwhelmingly Nationalist/Republican council including Armagh and Newry and Mourne.

Instead of the existing proposals placing Craigavon and Banbridge alongside of Armagh in a Unionist majority council.

But what of those issues that would be administered by this new 'Super Council?' On Education, the TUV 'alternative' would create a situation where local politicians could only administer central government policy.

This would place responsibility for post primary transfer back into the hands of a government opposed to all forms of academic selection and is on record as being prepared to implement the McGuinness/ Ruane proposals.

TUV's 'alternative' would remove the legislative protection of academic selection and the Craigavon based Dickson Plan and replace it with a comprehensive system.

As I have stated previously - this 'alternative' is a dog's dinner that I could not support.

I am glad that others are also beginning to see it for what it is.