Campaigners have slammed the actions of eight councillors who stood by their controversial decision to release five areas of land across High Wycombe and Bourne End for development.

Last month, Wycombe District Council cabinet members agreed to release Gomm Valley and Ashwells, Slate Meadow, Terriers Farm and Abbey Barn north and south for future development.

This decision was then reviewed with a number of recommendations made. However, the cabinet then rejected the proposals and upheld their original decision.

Some residents have reacted angrily to this decision, with campaigners saying they have “ignored the strong feeling” against plans.

Bourne End Residents' Association chairman, Jim Penfold, who has been fighting plans to develop Slate Meadow, said the decision is undemocratic.

He said: “How can anyone agree with the way the cabinet are making their decisions, it is totally a dictatorship.

“There is a strong local feeling against releasing the reserve sites, not just for Slate Meadow, but for all of them.

“And now they have just ignored what was a strong case put forward by the (WDC) improvement and review commission and to ignore it dogmatically, I find it hard to use another word other than appalling.”

Hands off Gomm Valley campaigner, Ian Morton, said: “I find it astonishing that this small group of eight cabinet members has voted to ignore the wishes of the body set up to scrutinise their decisions.

“It is clear that this cabinet has an attitude of "we know best" that is doing great damage to the reputation of Wycombe District Council.

“This council has no mandate for releasing Gomm Valley for development even from its own internal body.”

Last week, WDC cabinet member for planning and sustainability, Neil Marshall, defended the decision of the council.

He said: “We know that the decision to release the reserve sites is controversial, but this is a bullet that we have to bite.

“The truth is we can’t stop development happening on these sites because they have historically been reserved for development, not reserved from development.

“If we had decided to not release the sites we wouldn’t be stopping development, we’d simply be losing control of development.”