With regard to the article about Mid Sussex District Council (The Argus, June 26), it is not only the involvement of the chief executive in the ill-judged festival that should be looked at closely but the lack of attention on the part of the entire cabinet and, in particular, its leader Gordon Marples.

He recently said that while in his view the massive loss suffered by the council was now history, it was time "for the people of Mid Sussex to move on". Having considered one area of indifferent performance by the parties involved, there are others that warrant mention.

As Anne Hall points out (Letters, June 20), this executive seems to like working out of the public view. The instance she quotes is in effect an extension of the behind-the-scenes award of the contract to convert to wheelie bins which also have microchips added just in case we could be made to "pay as we throw".

The catalogue of errors could go on. But I will end by reminding readers of three council decisions that have not met with the wholehearted support of the electorate.

  • The award of a contract to draw up plans to develop our three main town centres, which will cost ratepayers a small fortune even if not a single brick is laid.
  • The loss of Clair Hall in the rush to build more flats.
  • Dishonest parking meters. After all, if you pay for an hour, it's up to you what you do with the space in that hour. Why should the council be paid twice for the same space?

It's time the whole council took a hard look at its management structure.

Maybe cabinet governance is not the greatest idea? Too easy for things to slip through.

  • BJ Whittle, Franklands Way, Burgess Hill