• JOHN Gulliver’s article (A contract killing for private consultants, January 21) begged a few questions.

Why are cash-strapped councils allowed to waste taxpayers’ money on consultants for projects (for example Phoenix Road, Somers Town, £200k makeover) that are more efficiently, effectively, and cheaply developed and decided by elected representatives, council officials and local communities?

Why are ordinary residents all over the UK continually required to spend money on legal battles, and devote their time to fighting the imposition by developers of poorly designed, overbearing, tower blocks that destroy neighbourhoods and offer little in the way of affordable housing?

Why do politicians harp on about the importance of communities and then deprive them of any say in matters that affect them and their children for decades?

And why do politicians and planners ignore the fact that a strong community with green spaces and a pleasant built environment is the best way of fighting crime and urban decay?

Since there are no viable answers, and there won’t always be a John Betjeman around to prevent disastrous choices by ignorant planners, I would like to propose a solution.

Would an MP present a draft bill to parliament for a CIR, community impact report?

There is already the requisite environmental impact assessments public bodies and non-governmental agencies must carry out before building new structures, and the DIS, discriminatory impact statement, that must accompany new laws, but both of these would fall into the CIR, community impact report.

A CIR would save money by negating the necessity of the other two.

Councils, Network Rail, Transport for London and town planners will be legally obligated to take into account the discriminatory (in terms of income, diversity and ethnicity), natural (the need for parks, clean air, trees, and quiet) and built (architectural quality, aesthetics, amenities, upkeep and affordability) environmental impact of any decision: whether to hire consultants to reconfigure streets or green-light new housing and office buildings, particularly when existing buildings could be refurbished with less waste and disruption.

This report will not be hastily assembled as lip-service; shrouded in secrecy, or published too late to make a difference. It will be open to public scrutiny and a prerequisite to any decision that affects the lives of thriving communities.

As it will be assembled and signed off by accountable officials, with the input of communities, it will reduce the need for costly judicial reviews and legal battles.

A CIR with teeth, enshrined in law, will bolster democracy, simplify and strengthen planning decisions, give weary taxpayers a break, and result in a more liveable, loveable, city.

JOYCE GLASSER
Savernake Road, NW3