IN REPLY TO David Wilson (Letters, October 13), my enquiry about the identity of the Chichester Society newsletter’s regular contributor ‘Cicestrian’ wasn’t intended to suggest that he was fictitious; still less that the society’s executive committee was using him as a stalking horse for their own views.
I’m assuming his gender, by the way.
But, a casual reader of the newsletter might well think he was in some way ‘in house’, since he has the highest-possible profile there.
Over the past four years he has appeared in all 17 issues of the magazine, expressing trenchant views on numerous subjects.
Almost invariably he gets at least a full page to do this; sometimes it’s two pages.
Only once (in 2008) has there been a declaration that he’s an independent writer and not a spokesman for the society.
Unfortunately, David Wilson still refuses to reveal his name.
It’s baffling that the Chichester Society should be so keen on anonymity in this instance.
There’s already far too much that’s opaque in the planning system.
Shouldn’t we expect amenity societies – of all people – to be on the side of transparency?
If any of your readers can help me find ‘Cicestrian’, I’d be very happy to buy a round of drinks for the three of us!
Hawthorn Close, Chichester