Of course Lord Rogers of Riverside is right. You, like the Prince of Wales, may not like the development he designed for the Qatari Royal Family, but we have a system for dealing with such opinions: the democratic planning system.

HRH, you and I have had plenty of time in which to voice concerns through the usual channels. But the Prince has bypassed this through the ultimate in old boys’ networks — the prince-to-prince network. We all know dodginess goes on in planning — discreet whispers between power brokers and the money men.

But is it really the kind of thing we expect our Royal Family to be doing? Say the Prince had done similarly in another pet subject — perhaps covertly criticised a brand of biscuits — that company might have grounds to sue. What makes him think that he can do differently in architecture? This is a clear abuse of power, fair and square.

The Prince is not just expressing his personal opinion, like you or I might. His opinion, especially in Qatar — where the Royal Family effectively is the Government — carries far more weight. In Britain we have a different system in which members of the Royal Family do not stick their noses into politics.

You might think this planning system is wrong, and I’d agree. Local planning, like local democracy in general, needs rebuilding from the foundations up. Planners don’t plan these days. They manage. Our “democratic” system is, like most walks of life, dominated by the private sector.

If we want truly proactively democratic planning, councils would involve everyone in creating their own neighbourhood, so that it wasn’t left to a battle between developers and extremist Nimbys, such as the Prince, both working the system.

Editor's choice

• The 100 Best Films of the Decade
• 70 facts you didn't know about Marvel
• The 50 Biggest Movies Of 2010