IN reply to Neil Holmes' letter regarding the Chancellor's proposals to allow properties, with tax incentives, to be included in private pension schemes perhaps Neil, and your readers, may like to consider the following issues:

Gordon Brown's decision, some three years ago, to tax the dividends accruing to the pensions industry - resulted in a reduction to the industry's income by some £5 billion each year since. That triggered off the nosedive in the returns to the pensions industry (that is you and me) as a whole, with "black holes" appearing and the total collapse of a number of schemes we see in our newspapers every week.

You cannot suddenly remove an income of £5 billion pa from the industry and expect it to continue unscathed.

Mr Brown cannot admit to this howler as it will jeopardise his chances of succeeding Tony Blair for the top job. So these proposals, which are criticised by Mr. Holmes, were devised to bolster the pensions industry without it appearing to be a u-turn by the Government.

Even by Mr. Holmes' own calculations, the new scheme will cost the Treasury £3 billion each year - but in the meantime the Treasury is creaming off £5 billions each year! So who is the loser?

Meanwhile, if I could turn to another topic regarding Bromsgrove District Council, it was quite astounding to witness at a recent scrutiny committee meeting the expulsion of a Labour member from the museum working party on the basis of an overheard remark by someone sitting next to Cllr Athol Deakin.

The KGB in its heyday have a lot to learn from the present Tory controlled council. In showing its sheer naked vindictiveness it did not see further than its nose in the negative publicity that this would cause them.

As there was only one more museum committee meeting remaining could they not just overlook Cllr Deakin's off the cuff remark and save themselves a whole lot of negative publicity? Cutting off their nose to spite their face isn't in it.

Nick Psirides

Rubery