#Stonehenge landscape is close to my heart, having grown up and worked there. I've seen a lot of schemes come and go. My GCSE coursework was on the road scheme and 14 years later I taught exactly the same case study to my old school...

But this scheme has been the most vitriolic. Sadly it's also seen the most duff facts presented by both sides. I've been accused of being pro-tunnel & anti-tunnel by both sides because I've disagreed with some of the 'facts' used in their campaigns. So let me correct a few now.

"There are no traffic problems at Stonehenge." This one's hilarious - usually presented by people that have just driven past and not seen any traffic. This is a bit like me claiming that it's perpetually daylight in Bath because I've never seen it at night.

The truth is that there are frequent monumental queues on the A303 at Amesbury. The worst tailbacks were once 10 miles long - as far back as Thruxton race circuit. There's more than enough evidence to safely dismiss this argument, so I won't waste any more time on it.

"You can't hear the road from Stonehenge". This is a new one, & equally stupid. The path around the stones is 150m from an arterial A road. In truth, you can hear the road from all around Stonehenge bowl. In 2008 a lorry crash closed the A303 for a day - the peace was remarkable.

"The road will block the aquifers for the River Avon and dry the river up, putting Salisbury Cathedral at risk". This is quite mad. The Avon is already a full river when it passes Amesbury and has a catchment area so huge that the loss of one shallow valley (if the road even...

...does impact it) will not make any difference. I've never seen it severely impacted even in the worst droughts. More the the point, the Avon joins the Nadder at Salisbury Cathedral. The idea that it might dry up is completely insane.

"This plan is just about the tunnel, not landscape access". Many tunnel opposers have very legitimate concerns that, with the road gone, English Heritage will have sole control of access to the stones. This would be an appalling state of affairs, and the fact EH want to...

...stop up the two rights of way that pass the stones only increases concerns. Tunnel supporters claim that this is nothing to do with the road scheme and is something that can be addressed later. This is disingenuous. The removal of the A344 and new visitor centre has already...

...shown EH's scant regard for visitor access that doesn't pass through its turnstiles. To think that the largest wholesale change to the landscape that's ever happened isn't intrinsically linked to public access is optimistic at best, or deliberate ignorance at worst.

"No archaeology will be impacted because it's a tunnel". It's a tunnel with entrances and a new dual carriageway all within 1 mile of the stones. The whole area around Stonehenge is packed with equally significant monuments and features - Stonehenge is simply the most visible.

Make no mistake - huge amounts of prehistory will be impacted. There's a silver lining of sorts on this point though - so little of the landscape has been excavated, that this does provide some opportunities to learn more about what may lurk beneath the grass.

"It's a waste of money." Well, it's going to cost less than the government has mislaid in PPE orders that haven't produced any PPE and (so far) not accounted for. Perhaps not a fair comparison, but it puts things in perspective.

"It will only move the traffic jam further down the road". The current road problem is exacerbated by 3 things - the first roundabout you hit after leaving London (Countess Roundabout), changing from dual to single carriage way, and people slowing down to view the stones.

With these problems solved by the tunnel scheme, the new place where you'll hit single carriageway is 13 miles down the road. But with the view and roundabout problems removed, there's a good chance that the queues won't be as bad. It's also not on a village's doorstep.

And this brings me to a final point. Whatever your thoughts on the international significance of Stonehenge, the road is a local problem. For decades the villages of Amesbury, Durrington, Larkhill, Shrewton & Winterbourne have suffered from traffic problems that have impacted...

...their everyday life and health. They see NO benefit from their proximity to Stonehenge - their is no tourism trade, it's probably only the petrol stations that benefit. Even when a dedicated bus service from Salisbury to Stonehenge was established, it took lengthy campaigns...

...to get it to even stop in Amesbury and benefit locals as well as tourists. Locals have been shut out of the Stonehenge debate at every stage. The fault for this lies firmly with EH, who have put every obstacle they can in the way of local engagement. Even the free access to...

...the stones for local residents (a condition of its gifting to the nation) is constantly under threat. National Trust also have questions to answer: despite being the largest landowner in the area, they have no presence there and haven't done anything for local benefit.

At the same time more housing demands have been placed on Amesbury, which has more than doubled in size in the last 30 years to become a commuter town. But there's been no infrastructure improvements to support that. A road that was insufficient in 1990 is now totally inadequate.

And I think this tunnel is the result. If you remove local pride from heritage don't be surprised when most of the local population support any change that will improve their lot. This is the only infrastructure improvement Amesbury has seen for decades, and it's long overdue.