AT THE Vale Council Planning Committee on Thursday, November 3, the planning application related to the BP Sports Field in Sully was reportedly refused permission. So far, so good.

There is, though, the legal possibility that this welcome rejection could be appealed against. My limited knowledge suggests that such cases are not infrequently successful at that later stage.

Surprisingly, the affair of the possibly dodgy letters of support (some of them, that is) was not allowed to be openly discussed in that meeting.

Even a representative of the developers was refused permission to comment on this particular – very controversial – feature. Some will feel unhappy at this restriction of democratic public discussion of a matter of real interest, not only to Sully residents.

One (Plaid) councillor was reported as saying that the “sub judice” rule should not apply here. I am not, of course, a lawyer but, until there are future possible arrests and criminal charges brought against any of these letter writers, I suspect that his interpretation may be correct.

What then is the rationale of this suppression of open public debate?

Michael O'Neill

Railway Terrace

Penarth