I am all in favour of openness and transparency – so agree with the direction of travel you suggest. Yes – there are some exceptions – but there is not a great appetite to follow the major diet of local authority dastardly doings – or triumphant deployment of good ideas either.

I don’t think a concentration on expenses gets us very far as they should be in the open – but they aren’t the be all and end all of what politicians do or should be held accountable.

I know how hard it is for local journalist and how much pressure they are under – but there are real and big and important stories going on probably in most areas in London that never see the light of day. And I still hope that journalists long to scent a good story and track it – particularly when they are doing their time on local papers – and yearn (hopefully) to break stories of import and challenge to their skills.

Or am I just impossible romantic about a journalist’s lot?

Because it takes so much time and dedication, and experience. Local papers pressure their staff to turn stuff around quickly.

Journalists on the nationals have more time – sort of – and they hunt in packs (often). And they’re usually much more experienced than those on local papers, even if the territory is unfamiliar.

Local journalists can and do excel: look at the coverage of the Rhys Jones shooting, where the local reporters knew a lot of the background but of course couldn’t print it.

You want to know what would help local journalists? Obliging local councils and organisations to publish what they do. Free up the crime data (not just those pathetic maps which don’t tell us anything useful), expense accounts, no more secrecy for MPs’, councillors’, civil servants’, local administrators’ work: that would be a start. Commit the Lib Dems to that – and you’ll start to see local journalism flourish.

At the very least, the journalists on the local papers might have a little more time to go and hunt out stories that aren’t being written.

Charles Arthur