Letter: Open planning
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.From Mr Jed Griffiths
Sir: In the course of his musings on the review of local government ("Who said size was not important?" 4 October), Professor Michael Chisholm is quoted as saying: "There is a lot of low-grade corruption in district councils regarding planning decisions." Nothing else in the article throws any further light on this alarming statement.
Does Professor Chisholm have any evidence for what he says? Is he going to produce it?
Those of us who are aware that the planning process is open to public scrutiny, and to the scrutiny of the Department of the Environment and the local government ombudsman, among others, will require a good deal more than a bald statement to be convinced that corruption in planning decisions is anything but a very rare occurrence.
Yours faithfully,
Jed Griffiths
President
Royal Town Planning Institute
London, W1
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments