Spiteful betrayal of our trust

• Our group is one of those that Caroline Hill refers to in her letter (Better Ways to Spend £11,000, Jan19).

We rely on the paper, rather than the internet, copy of the weekly list of planning applications to keep ourselves informed and alert us to issues that need a response.
We have no funding, apart from what our members pay out of their own pockets. Local people, like us, giving their time and commitment to the consultation process by which Camden sets so much store, will now have to dig deeper to find an extra £26.52 a year to pay for what up until now has been free.
As a totally voluntary group we feel that we are just the softest target for Camden to save a few pounds.
They haven’t even canvassed local groups to find out how many would be happy to use internet only, thus reducing the number of paper weekly lists needed.
The decision to charge has been imposed, with no discussion. It is mean-spirited and petty.
It undermines Camden’s stated commitment to consult and is in direct rebuttal of the statement of community involvement which has been submitted to the government as Camden’s plan for involving stakeholders and community groups in the consideration of planning applications.
It is a betrayal of trust for Camden to print policies which make it look good in the eyes of the government but which are no more than hollow words to local volunteers.
The alternative view, that one department in Camden planning doesn’t know what another is doing, is equally dispiriting.
Sue Prickett
Leighton Road Neighbourhood Association NW5