COUNCILLOR S Greenwood (Letters, April 10), states that it is Blackburn with Darwen Council's job to provide the tenants with accurate, factual information to enable them to make a decision.

Would he tell us when this information will be forthcoming?

To date, all we've had is that the newly-formed non-profit-making local housing company will hold rent increases down to one per cent plus inflation for the next five years and that they will be able to borrow the money required to carry out the necessary repairs and modernisation, whereas the council will not.

A management board of six councillors (why?), six tenants and six independent professional people will run the company. If the management board will run the company, why does it need a chief executive and officers?

What about how the chief executive will be appointed? What is his/her salary? similarly, how will the officers be appointed and at what cost?

What will the housing management costs be compared to the council's current costs of £9.54 per week, per dwelling? How much will the local housing company need to borrow and why such an amount? What is their business plan?

The tenants already have a say in housing matters via their councillors and tenants associations, if they care to use the service.

If all rent income was used on housing matters, then there should be no need for the council to borrow money to carry out repairs and modernisation. Taking into account the absurdly high housing management costs of £9.54 per house, per week, there would be a rent income of £450,000 per week and after just 13 weeks there would be some £5.85 million in the coffers ready to be spent on repairs and servicing the housing debt during the following 13 weeks.

With £2.5 million set aside for debt repayment, the balance of £3.35 million, at £13,000 per unit, would fund the repair of 257 units.

Whether 257 housing units could be repaired and modernised in 13 weeks is a moot point, but if it is less, then less money would be needed.

During the second quarter a further £5.85 million would be collected to fund the next 257 houses in the next quarter, etc, etc.

After just one year, up to 1,000 houses would have been attended to and £10 million paid off the debt.

Thus, after fewer than 12 years, all the housing stock would have been dealt with and the housing debt repaid and no rent increases and no need for the council to borrow any money.

Now apply similar figures to a non-profit-making local housing company with a smaller initial debt and it is obvious that after just six years, it cannot help but make a profit and a huge profit at that. Far more than can be ploughed back into repairs, etc. Bonuses for the chief executive and officers perhaps?

JIM BUCKLEY, Ulverston Close, Blackburn.