I am writing in response to your recent reports and the letter from Cllrs John Tucker and Simon Wright in which they derides the “incorrect information” being said against the One Council proposal.

At the recent roadshow held at Ivybridge Library, I read the FAQs / key facts and discussed my observations and conclusions with Cllrs Wright and Kathy Cuthbert.

I do not know how West Devon Borough Council arrived at its present parlous state but my expectation would be that the machinations of central government over recent years have had a major impact. What is clear from the documents and my discussion with the councillors is that the One Council proposal is a bailout of sorts, with central government the driver.

It is, however, also obvious that WDBC cannot survive on its own for long without help from somewhere. Cllr Tucker considers that “like us (SHDC), West Devon has managed its finances well ...” But that is highly debatable when WDBC is about to embark on speculating in commercial property – no doubt with high income potential (but never mind the high risk to capital).

On SHDC’s website, Cllr Tucker declares that his team was elected to make decisions on behalf of residents and that residents “...should not be swayed by scaremongering..." in regard to the WDBC debt position, projected to match SHDC’s own projected £6m by end next financial year, mainly from investment in leisure facilities.

Yes, elected councils do make significant decisions for their electorate but it is hoped and expected that decisions will be rational and for the residents’ benefit.

SHDC and WDBC are closely entwined with a partiallyshared workforce but, without some evidence, I will not accept that separation would cost SHDC £3m per year as claimed by Cllr Tucker.

Cllr Tucker glosses over the essence of the deal which is that South Hams residents will fund SHDC’s own projected shortfall of £0.8m as well as the £1.1m of WDBC (with an unspecified amount over “to improve and expand services ... etc") which will, of course, be forever and combine assets and liabilities of both councils.

The latter is more glaring example of “look at these statistics but not at those” so much so that together they smack of the residents having the wool pulled over their eyes.

SHDC currently has a comfortable safety margin against future shocks with an asset to liability ratio of 1.58:1 while that of WDBC is 0.91:1.

According to the key facts, WDBC has so-called Unusable Reserves of £8.391m which is woeful and South Hams residents have to be concerned that our council is heading us into a black hole as grim as a famous private sector merger.

South Hams residents should not have to bear the cost of

“equalisation”.

Only central government can do this – from central funds – to bring West Devon’s finances more in line with those of South Hams. Only then should SHDC agree to this enforced merger.

Michael Holliday

Pinwill Crescent, Ermington