I must respond to the decision to no longer have posted online objections to planning applications.

I must point out that this doesn’t just apply to objections, it also covers letters of support and any other communications that people might want to address to the planning department on a particular application.

Without this posting online by what other means could we be sure that our comments have even been received and read?

We would be entirely relying on the integrity of the department, a step too far in my view.

As for all this documentation being provided to councillors in written form, a recent large development in Little Lever drew several hundred e-mails, letters, petitions, etc.

To produce 21 paper copies of such public comments for members of the planning committee to read would require them to be scanned anyway and then printed and would cost cost several times more than the just scanning them to the online file.

Furthermore, councillors on the planning committee barely have time to read the details of applications, let alone plough through mounds of paperwork. To read them online is the most efficient way for everyone.

No, this will not do. Transparency is paramount to the integrity of the planning process.

This department already has a lamentable record in strictly adhering to the letter of planning law and there is already enough hidden in confidential talks with applicants without public comments being hidden as well.

With a majority of 22 over other parties, the Labour group seems to think they need only pay lip service to democracy and transparency.

It’s bad enough being in a situation where all decisions are made by just three councillors rather than with the old committee system.

For other electors who may be as concerned about this backwards step as I am, then your chance to really make your comments will come on May 22. They won’t be able to hide that.

Paul Richardson Ripon Close Little Lever