It's hardly surprising to see some regulars from the green ink brigade (Letters, December 4) spouting off about councillors' allowances.

The argument of Messrs Nunn, Smith, Grinstead and Bayliss that the rise in allowances contributes to the increase in council tax comes a rather spectacular cropper when you remember there are now 54 councillors rather than the 78 there were prior to May's elections.

Even with the increase (and £10,000 is hardly a fat cat salary, is it?), the total cost of councillors' allowances is lower - yes lower - than last year.

Presumably, though, as the number of councillors has fallen, the overall demands on their time have not.

If their allowances had simply kept up with inflation, they would be paid more than £9,000 a year anyway.

And if you don't pay councillors for taking time off work or putting their careers on hold (they are not exempt from council tax, mortgages and grocery bills), you end up with a council packed full of rich, white retired men and few of the new faces B Bayliss wants, which is hardly representative is it?

I'm not saying the lot we have are the greatest, but if you pay peanuts ...

-Mr G Kennedy, Hove