"What's all this about, mate?" In talking and joking with 5,000 people, it is clear a copy of the No newspaper is the first many have heard of the mayoral debate.

People are not reading The Argus letters page. And who can blame them?

Lord Bassam's minions have ignored his plea for decency.

Yet again, on October 3, there was the dreary parade of spurious claims about the 19th Century and New York. There's no need to read a letter by R G Jenkins - it's always the same old tack.

Let's get real. There is a different world out there from the letters page.

One sees and hears so much, not least the preposterous notion that Councillor Brian Fitch is to be made a Lord at the end of the year. So much for reform.

Whatever, there is much fun and banter. "I can certainly say No - unless it's beer you're talking about," a man told me as he began reading.

My impression is that, on the contrary, Sue John and Lord Bassam, for example, do not give any sense of enjoying themselves.

In his case, perhaps this is the result of having thought of himself as a Ken Livingstone-like figure only to find there is dislike of him across the board.

"Why do all this?" I am asked. I always reply by citing Councillor Middleton's writing that I was "talking rubbish" when putting forward constructive ideas about the King Alfred centre, which consultants are now being paid to elaborate.

It is clear to me a mayoral system would only intensify that very arrogance which is inherent in the "leader and cabinet" one.

There was I, willing to give time and effort to the neighbourhood, only to be told I was "talking rubbish". It sticks in the craw, Coun Middleton.

To vote No is to take matters back to the people they concern. And, along the way, a plan has emerged among national journalists for a different local newspaper.

These are more interesting times than Lord Bassam anticipated.

-Christopher Hawtree, Westbourne Gardens, Hove