ABSTRACT
The role of public spheres as forums for debate and negotiation is also emphasised. Whilst I agree with Dean’s (2001: 645) Lacanian/Zizekian view that the public sphere, in a strict Habermasian sense, cannot exist, that such a conception ‘rests on the constitutive impossibility of a politics without, outside of, and beyond power, a politics where decision is postponed in favour of a consensus that has already been achieved’ (through power-full intervention), I do believe in local arenas where stakeholders are able to discuss planning issues. I believe in a multiplicity of public spheres rather than the public sphere of Habermas.
