SIR – Barry MacKenzie-Williams (August 8) asks me to join him in arguing for a solution to help cut out unnecessary costs of running the council and questions whether one council is cheaper than seven.

He uses the old chestnut, lack of Government cash as the reason. He knows, as I do, that is a lame excuse. He knows his party came to power and made a pledge to keep council tax increases to 2.5 per cent or lower. They did this for political ends, regardless of the financial circumstances of the council.

Worcester City Council now has one of the lowest council taxes in the county, and we all enjoy the benefit of that. But it is now faced with a home-grown financial problem it wants others to cure.

It has been claimed by the city council that Worcester, as the county town, should get higher levels of Government cash compared with neighbouring councils because it incurs higher costs. I’m happy to argue for extra cash and several times I have asked for evidence to help make the case in Whitehall. No such evidence has been forthcoming.

I’m a fair-minded man, Barry. I’m happy to sit down with you and discuss the merits of one council or seven, or shared services, to cut back on unnecessary costs. But in turn, all I ask from you is an acknowledgement that local decisions, possibly made with the best intention by your party, have hugely contributed to any financial pressure the council now faces.

MICHAEL FOSTER MP,

Worcester.