There should be no place for secrecy in public affairs other than in matters of national security or, in rare cases, to protect the safety of individuals. Other than these exceptions, the rule should be: if it's being paid for with public money, the public have every right to know all there is to know about it.

The T&A is currently in communication with public bodies throughout the area to find out how they propose to respond to the Freedom of Information Act 2000, which comes into force later this year. Let's hope that by that time all organisations will have realised their obligations to openness and that meetings behind closed doors will be a thing of the past.

It is, after all, in their own best interests. It eliminates any chances of misunderstandings arising.

What, for example, are the taxpaying public to make of the refusal of the Manningham and Girlington Single Regeneration Board to allow the public into its meetings or to publish the minutes of those meetings?

The publication of its annual report and accounts, including the performance of its delivery plan, is all well and good as far as it goes. However, if the board is to command the total trust of the people who provide it with the substantial funds it is administering, as well as of the residents of the area, it needs to be seen to be fully accountable.

The appointment of an officer "to improve links between the board and the community" could lend itself to charges of spin doctoring. An open door at board meetings would surely do the job much more effectively.