SIR – It pleases me to compliment you on your leading article today.

Through building on the Sty Lane greenfield land the developers are looking at a profit in the region of £20 million.

For the appeal they will therefore spare no legal expense.

I always understood that fairness was a tenet of English law in that one party should not be disadvantaged.

Surely this is a clear case for the Government to specify that those seeking to appeal, should be obliged to provide match funding to those against, who are financially disadvantaged?

While appeals are a necessary safeguard, they are basically unfair in that they are only applicable to the rejection of applications, with no chance of redress if an application is granted.

The interpretation of planning law is a matter of opinion and our city planners in recommending the Sty Lane and other current applications have created an overwhelming influence for them to be eventually granted.

If the planners had recommended rejecting this and similar applications, then the applicants may not have appealed and if they did would be unlikely to succeed.

To be fair, the remedy is on our doorstep and not Westminster’s.

John Pashley, Westcliffe Avenue, Baildon