By Lorraine Maries; chairman, Protect Dundonald Rec campaign

I must correct your statement that it was the Protect Dundonald Rec Campaign Group that complained about Councillor Peter Walker.

It was not – complaints were made by a number of Merton residents.

An essential part of the democratic process is taxpayers’ right to question the behaviour and decisions of those in charge, but it was Merton Council’s legal department that decided to refer these complaints to an independent investigator.

As a campaign group, we are very concerned that Council processes are not open, honest and transparent. This appears to be another example.

The investigator’s report included serious criticisms, but it is “confidential” so the public and most Councillors cannot see these.

The investigation may have cost “several thousand pounds in unnecessary legal fees” but this is negligible compared to the amounts the Council intends to hand to the lawyers in an attempt to build on Dundonald Rec. against their own Core Planning Strategy.

The Restrictive Covenant, which prevents building on this valuable open space, is a binding contract not a ‘legal technicality’.

The council’s legal advice should not give them any grounds for optimism.

Their application to the Upper Tribunal is very unlikely to be successful and will take a long time.

By pursuing this scheme the council is wasting our money and putting the future provision of education in Wimbledon in jeopardy.

When is the Council going to be honest and come up with an alternative site?

Your letters make it your newspaper. Make sure your voice is heard by sending your letter to: letters@wimbledonguardian.co.uk

Click here to go back to the letters page.