So the City Fathers have voted for an 11 per cent pay rise, which is in line with inflation since their last increase in 2003/04.

Nothing is said about the fact that local government employees in that period have had to put up with below inflation increases.

But what do we pay them for? Just recently we have received a letter from them asking us to tell them where we want cutbacks, so that, as in the last time they tried this exercise, and things went wrong, they were able to bleat: "Well, it is what the citizens asked for."

Surely, decisions like this are what we (reluctantly) pay them for. Also, do we pay them to pursue their own agenda, as in last year's debacle where time and money was spent pursuing a proposal to ban the sale of foie gras within the city boundaries. What benefit was that to the city as a whole?

I have an agenda that would see the City Fathers go back to the time when they sat on the council for the sheer pride of serving the city, but I doubt very much that one councillor would vote for such an agenda.

Maybe they would if they sent a letter to all householders asking them about it.

But, unlike foie gras, there are no political points to be scored in my agenda.

John Sutherland, Barfield Road, York.


* Since 2001 I have written a number of letters to The Press with facts and figures which were undoubtedly relevant to the current debate on the controversial subject of council allowances.

May I suggest that if any readers are interested in putting City of York Council allowances into context with comparable authorities that they check the internet.

Just key in "councillor allowances (name of authority)". The results will be interesting - to put it mildly.

Liz Edge, Parkside Close, York.