Posted by Damian
on 6/9/2009, 21:21:11, in reply to "Re: Architects' leader attacks prince "
195.93.21.99
--Previous Message--
: Why? Should only elected officials be allowed
: to speak or those appointed by them? Shoudl
: journalists, for example, be prevented from
: speaking out or TV commentators? Would you
: have a state where only those authorised by
: the state can give their views? If you live
: in a neighbourhood where there are plans to
: construct a new factory, a wind farm,. a
: nuclear power station, or a new highway,
: should you be denied a view? Are you one of
: those who politely and respectfully accept
: that everything governments and their
: agencies do should be accepted without
: questino and would impose legal restrictions
: to prevent anyone other than government
: officials or representatives from voicing
: their views.
As I already said,I've no objection to anybody expressing their views on anything they choose.Everyone has that right whether they be heir to the throne or a beggar in the street.What people are concerned about is whether the PoW is being given undue power to stop planning decisions that he doesn't happen to like.What happens if his views on a piece of modern architecture should happen to clash with mine? Do I get to have the same input on whether it goes ahead as he does and,if not,why not? After all,both of us are entitled to our opinion and neither of us have been appointed to make the decisions.