Councillor Ken Bodfish uses the self-serving argument proffered in the private sector to justify other fat-cat salaries (The Argus, July 26).

Presumably this will have a knock-on effect and other public sector chief executives will be awarded similar increases after "independent" advice.

In 12 months' time, no doubt, another round will start with David Panter being awarded yet another staggering increase to keep him in line with his peers.

The so-called independent advice is usually corporations A, B and C advising D, then B, C and D advising A and so on. You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours.

But Mr Panter has single-handedly saved the council £6m or thereabouts.

Oh, he didn't do it by himself? He had a team to help him? So they will all be getting 21 per cent increases, too, will they?

Why is it the comparability argument only ever seems to apply to those on the top of the heap and never to those at the bottom who actually get their hands dirty?

The minions have to be content with "cost of living" increases - if they are lucky. Those who pay the bills will also get comparability increases, won't they?

Pensioners are told to stop complaining and make another sacrifice to keep the fat cat in luxury.

Why did Mr Panter accept the job in the first place if he didn't feel the salary was adequate? Has he only been giving 80 per cent of his effort?

-Tony Sturley, Telscombe Cliffs