Letter: Councillor's estimate for work was a bridge too far-fetched

Not only was the proposal and the consultation process, or lack of it, discussed very fully. But one of our Shropshire councillors presented us with some interesting statistics regarding the finances of the county.

Councillor David Evans was asked directly about the possibility of raising the council tax to meet some of the costs of providing services such as the libraries and also how large were the county's reserves. Councillor Evans explained that they had not raised the council tax for seven years and that to do so would incur penalties from central government and require a referendum to be held and that the reserve fund was £25 million.

When he was challenged that the reserves were actually £135 million he said that large reserves were needed. He said this was for contingencies such as the replacement of the bridge in Ludlow which was swept away by floods and that it had cost £100 million to replace.

This is strange, because council tax could have been raised by two per cent each year without needing a referendum.

Over seven years this could have gone a long way to save many services from the perilous state of decay that now exists.

Even more strange is that the bridge in Ludlow apparently cost about 100 times more than it should have done. It should only have cost about £1 million. This is confirmed by press reports at the time and by fellow bridge engineers.

Those who voted for the councillors, and those who did not, are entitled to be represented by people who have a firm grasp of the financial and social implications of the proposals made by the officers of the council and who will ensure that proper democratic scrutiny is applied to all decisions taken.

John Annetts, FIStructE MICE (Retired bridge engineer) , Church Stretton