TODAY I read with disbelief the appointment of the new Swindon Council directors.

Following a national advertising campaign costing £30k to find the best possible people in the country for these positions, we end up with three people who are already working at SBC in similar roles. If they are the best that money can buy,why is the council currently rated as weak by the Audit Commission, when other councils can achieve good and excellent ratings?

I am sure that the individuals concerned will be delighted by salary increases of between £15k and £35k per annum each.

We are assured that this will be funded by reducing the current equivalent positions. An alternative suggestion might have been to increase their pay by a smaller amount and not to cut the voluntary and community funding budget this year instead. Which incidentally is not far off the cost of the recruitment campaign.

The advert talked about "improving every aspect of our business." Perhaps that explains why the new directors could also earn an additional £15k pa in Profit Related Pay. Profit?

If the council WAS a commercial business then it is doubtful that this situation would have been allowed to happen. Director's salaries are always under scrutiny.

Unfortunately in this case, the shareholders (i.e we council tax payers) have no say.

ALAN HAYWARD

Sparcells

Swindon