WITH local elections pending questions need to be asked following remarks by the council leader, Stan Henig, that: "All parties on Lancaster council agree that we will need a major structural review after the May elections," and that, "The agreed deadline for these changes is the end of March 2000." Coupled with recent increases in councillors' allowances and remarks like "back-bench councillors," leave me wondering what these structural reforms are?

Talks must have been going on for months to warrant such comments, therefore it won't just reshape the non-elected management structure will it? As with other local authorities no doubt it will affect councillors and their role. It certainly won't be a directly elected mayor. More likely it will be cabinet 'style' also further reducing the power of the individual 'back-bench' councillor and ultimately their vote, thus conveying more power to an already discredited leadership. The lack of opposition to this indicates all agree regardless of what happens in May. I am all for co-operation but not to the extent that it damages proper debate or reduces choice at elections.

Voters need more clarity on such matters, not total silence or one party telling us what another will do, as we do now. I ask the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats, MBIs to tell us now clearly what significant changes, if any , we would get or would have got, from the current Labour proposals. For example The Millennium Bridge, Promenade car parks, The Platform, The Dukes, illuminations, and so on.

Stephen Jones

Hest Bank

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.