Like so many with weak arguments, those opposed to the elected mayor with cabinet are simply resorting to personal abuse.

They accuse those in favour of wanting to be corrupt or power-crazy and interested only in the money.

Oddly enough, those of us in favour of the elected mayor with cabinet simply believe the system will deliver public services decisively to the people who need them - all of us, at one time or another in our lives - more effectively.

And we think businesses, the voluntary sector and unions will find it more productive to work in partnership throughout the city when there is clear city-wide leadership.

We believe an elected mayor with cabinet can listen to the many voices throughout the city and honestly make responsible and accountable decisions between competing views in the best interests of the city.

And that must include listening to councillors of all parties too. So I will continue to campaign passionately for a decisive form of local government unshackled by indecision. I, and others, are arguing for the future, not the past.

The committee system is indecisive and is shameful in giving only an appearance of democracy. We all know decisions are actually taken behind closed doors in political groups.

It is all the worse for pretending to be transparent. The elected mayor has a mandate from the whole city and must take responsibility openly, as they do in so many progressive cities throughout the world.

As for candidates declaring their interest now, has Kevin Allen (Letters, July 12) such contempt for democracy he thinks people should nominate themselves for a post the people haven't created?

Those of us who are in favour of the elected mayor with cabinet are fighting for it for reasons of principle, not personality.

-Simon Fanshawe, Brighton