Planning in London

Save CABEs soulWho would be the best people to head up a body dedicated to improving architecture and the built environment? Shouldnt it be the people who have spent a working life doing just that, in the service of the subject that either chose them, or they chose out of interest? Appropriate checks and balances are not hard to implement. Any such body needs leaders who can exercise judgement, inspire and deploy enthusiasm culled from great experience. Equally, where public probity is required, there is no shortage of experience that can be applied. The baby that shouldnt be thrown out with the bath water in CABEs case (but which looks as though it will be) is the appreciation, understanding and entrepreneurialism with which Sir Stuart Lipton has infused CABE as chairman, and the adroit perspicacity of Planning in London's joint editor and publisher Paul Finch (he's not writing this!) in the role of chair of the design review committee. Those who know Ken Shuttleworth would expect a similar quality of chairmanship to Finchs, and if conflict does arise, another member of the committee can do the job temporarily in his place. What's the big deal? Read into the mandarins lust for probity their envy of CABEs pragmatic apolitical autonomy which has delivered a set of appealing notions good design, better public spaces ideas people might vote for outside of party allegiances. As we all know, it's not possible to make things happen without politicians. To excise and emasculate CABEs source of inspiration by insisting its new leaders are not from the industry is an act of political vandalism. CABE must fight back hard and demonstrate where its real power comes from - the agile of minds of people committed to a cause undiverted by pecuniary or political advantage, or by imaginary impropriety. The auditors' call for Commissioners from 'independent backgrounds' is a recipe for check-box ignorance. Let CABE be as open as possible about its workings. Its only statutory power is to be able to call before its design review committee schemes which are in progress. And no scheme promoter need do this unless a planning application has been made. But where applications have been made, its meetings should be open to observation by the public. It might also usefully publish the results of those pre-application meetings it holds, which clients find so useful, once an application has been made. Perspicacity and impartiality, like justice, need to be seen to be done. Dont, please, let Whitehall, like the dreaded Dementors of Azkaban, suck the soul out of CABE.