Replies to the Guardian article on Future Shape/easyCouncil/One Barnet

Guardian letters has some responses to the article last week about the Grant Thornton report on Future Shape/easyCouncil/One Barnet, and the more recent report on Suffolk council's plan to outsource all their services.

Your report on Barnet's madcap privatisation schemes (Auditor challenges Tory 'easyCouncil' model, 24 September) left out one other fact which incenses local residents. The Barnet councillors trying to slash services have given themselves huge allowance rises. The council leader recently got a 55% rise to £54,000 a year, while other leading councillors saw their allowances double to £35,000. The best-known of these councillors, Brian Coleman, was quoted in July as saying: "I don't have to justify what I earn. Councillors are worth every penny they earn."

Roger Kline, Barnet, Hertfordshire

Just to be clear, the phrase "generally robust" used to describe the governance and planning of our Future Shape change programme was not the council's defence, but the words of Grant Thornton, the independent auditors.

As Future Shape has moved into the delivery phase, Grant Thornton also made a series of recommendations about changes to governance that reflect this. These recommendations are sensible and have been adopted.

Nor has the council any policy of closing libraries. We are, however, asking residents how they would like their library service to be delivered. Changes may involve the current building stock – or a more innovative solution. But protecting public services cannot mean the simple replication of last year's model.

Cllr Lynne Hillan, Leader, Barnet council

One of the biggest casualties of Barnet council's new policy is likely to be the voluntary sector. The charity I work for provides advice on a range of issues, particularly welfare benefits, debt and housing, to disadvantaged members of the community. Just the sort of activity David Cameron has been encouraging us to do. But Barnet has now stopped our modest grant and told us we will have to vacate our premises early next year, so we will probably have to close, with the loss of 30 trained volunteers. The "big society"? It would be funny if it wasn't so tragic.

David Miller*, Secretary, East Finchley Advice Service

* Not to be confused with David Miller of "Not the Barnet Times" blog fame.

Barnet councillors' expenses and the People's Charter of 1838

I think there have been worse crimes perpetrated by our MPs than over-claiming on their expenses - to wit, their crap policies. I also think there is danger in a populist press campaign that undermines people's faith in the parliamentary system - to promote what in its place, exactly?

But, of course, many of the claims have been shocking. One that gained my attention, late in the day, was Ann Cryer, Labour MP for Keighley, claiming £1,350 for a table and £795 for a rug. How many of her constituents would think of paying that much for a table or a rug? (Answer: a lot more if they thought someone else was paying.)

Now, I do support the old Chartist demand of payment for MPs - it has allowed the working class to have representatives. In this regard, it is interesting to see Mike Freer and Matthew Offord, Tory PPCs for this area, giving up their day jobs for a few months in order to concentrate on their parliamentary ambitions. How many other people would be in a financial position to do this?

I don't, however, support the idea of politician as a profession - and a lucrative one at that. MPs should earn what, on average, a working class person earns. That would keep their feet on the ground. I also support annual parliaments: people will say that it would be bureaucratic, but I think a more responsive political system would pay massive dividends in the long run - and more people could have a turn.

Here are the six main demands of the People's Charter of 1838. Ignore the obvious sexism and see what you think of it as a set of reforms:

A vote for every man 21 years of age, of sound mind, and not undergoing punishment for crime.

The [secret] ballot. - To protect the elector in the exercise of his vote.

No property qualification for members of Parliament - thus enabling the constituencies to return the man of their choice, be he rich or poor.

Payment of members, thus enabling an honest tradesman, working man, or other person, to serve a constituency, when taken from his business to attend to the interests of the Country.

Equal Constituencies, securing the same amount of representation for the same number of electors, instead of allowing small constituencies to swamp the votes of large ones.

Annual parliaments, thus presenting the most effectual check to bribery and intimidation, since though a constituency might be bought once in seven years (even with the ballot), no purse could buy a constituency (under a system of universal suffrage) in each ensuing twelve-month; and since members, when elected for a year only, would not be able to defy and betray their constituents as now.

While on a political probity tip, it is good to see David Miller of Not the Barnet Times getting a reply at last to his request to see Barnet councillors' expenses. They are little league compared to MPs' expenses, but there are still some questions to answer.

Welcome to Barnet, the bloggingest borough of them all

Congratulations to David Miller (Not the Barnet Times) and Roger Tichborne (The Barnet Eye) whose blogs have been chosen by the Guardian's Dave Hill (Dave Hill's London Blog) as two of the best in London.

Envious? Me? Not a bit of it! I revel in the success of my fellow Barnet bloggers (natch!) and the fact that Barnet has so far produced a third of London's best blogs: two from the six chosen so far.

Is this mere coincidence? Or is it that we have particularly skilled blogsmiths in Barnet? Or is it, just possibly, that Barnet provides a surprisingly rich seam of scandal and gossip for us to mine? It's probably a bit of all three, but the latter must be very important.

Former Barnet council leader Mike Freer set out to win a reputation for Barnet as a trendsetting, flagship Tory borough. His problem was that once his actual record was placed under the tiniest bit of scrutiny, it was seen to be badly scratched.

Freer and his fellow councillors crave publicity but abhor scrutiny, it's an irritant to them, and they've done what they can to disparage the people who examine what they do. But the lights that Barnet's bloggers are shining on their doings will not dim soon.