Coun Clive Smith says (Your Letters, May 26) "when it comes to addressing the concerns of our constituents, we (i.e. Malvern Hills District Council) are ahead of the game". If it were not so serious, this claim would be laughable.

Mr Smith says that a full formal consultation will take place with all the residents along Church Road so their views can be taken into account regarding proposed changes in traffic management.

In practice, however, they do not take a blind bit of notice of the views of constituents.

This is precisely what happened over the closure of the district WCs. In consultation, there was a total rejection by constituents of the proposed closure. Result - closure. Is this what he means by "taking into account" of constituents' views?

Likewise, I know of no consultation over the appalling decision to charge for car parking in the evenings. All letters have been against this move. I thought the district council was in the business of encouraging visitors to the town to go to the theatre or dine in the restaurants. Obviously I was wrong.

I also question whether Coun Smith really understands what the electorate wants. He recently stated that the saving that will accrue from the reduction in the number of directors and senior managers in the council will be used to improve services.

My own reading is that far from wanting improved services, constituents want to pay less for existing services. This is why the precept of the town council has been reduced year-on-year to such an extent that the reduction over the last four years has more than made up for the increases by our big brother, the district council.

I suspect the electorate will make their views known more firmly when next year's elections provide for a full consultation.

Keith Phillips (Malvern town councillor), Avenue Road, Malvern.