In response to the letter which appeared in the Wimbledon Guardian (Councillors turn a deaf ear to what residents want, October 5) I would like to explain the stance I take when voting, which is the result of much reflection and discussion with members of all political parties.

I am entitled to a vote. In addition, should the vote be tied I am required to make my vote the casting vote.

However, I believe the approval or refusal of something as important as a planning application should be decided by a consensus of views on whether or not, on balance, the UDP supports the application.

Therefore, should the vote be tied, I fulfil my responsibility to make a decision on the spot as to whether an application should be refused or approved.

I otherwise only vote where on planning grounds I have felt particularly strongly (in the past this included applications to build on playing fields and applications for the conversion of particularly small houses to flats).

Sitting on the planning committee is a difficult job for all members. Their decision will not please the group for whom the decision goes against and applications can and should only be turned down when the planning arguments justify it.

This is why committee members vote without a political bias and this is why I avoid voting twice unless the planning argument is in my view particularly strong.

COUNCILLOR WILLIAM BRIERLY Chairman of the planning applications committee