Councillor E Lewis has accused me of seeking to mislead the readers of the Cornish Times. My letter, which preceded his remarks, explained my view that the council has imposed a council tax increase that is unfair and unnecessary.

The Council Cabinet has attempted, through Councillor Lewis's letter, to put an acceptable spin on the Council's decision to raise taxes next year by over four times the rate of inflation. I have received numerous letters of support from across the district for taking a stand against the forces of mediocrity. Amongst these have been letters from pensioners who point pit that they will receive a pension increase of just 73 pence per week next year. In this context any council tax increase is unfair.

I cannot be accused of misleading readers when I report that Caradon District Council's Tax was £78.10 per year for an average property in 1996/7. It is proposed to be £108.42 In 2000/01. This is a 38.8 increase in four years. These figures are drawn from a report to the members from the Director of Resources dated February 23, 2000.

Planning compensation claims are entirely funded from the resources of council tax payers. It follows that if no compensation payments were payable to the Knotts then council tax could be reduced.

The council's actual expenditure on 'Corporate Management' w as £697,009 in 1998/99. The revised estimate for 1999.00 is £798,270. This is a 16 per cent increase in administration costs in the last year alone.Councillor Lewis accused me of distortion in relation to members' allowances. Members Basic Allowances are currently £372 per year. The Cabinet proposed to increase this to £1,700 per year.

I was very pleased that Councillor Lewis's letter referred to the external review recently carried out at Caradon. The first item on the list of areas for improvement identified by the review was 'Strengthening both member and managerial leadership.'

The review's praise for the council being open is in large part due to the success of policies introduced by the Liberal Democrats to hold council meetings at times convenient for the public to participate. Councillor Lewis remains a very prominent opponent of this democratic measure.

I have not attempted to mislead readers. I have merely sought to make them aware that not every member of the council believes that soaking the public is an acceptable alternative to good management.

COUNCILLOR W R CROCKER,

Menheniot member