I have followed with interest The Argus's excellent coverage of the mayoral debate. At the beginning, I had an open mind, although was somewhat apprehensive regarding the power in one person's control.

However, with personal experience, I realised drastic changes had to be made to the old committee system to bring it up to date. Let's face it, at times it was a talking shop and I admit I did my fair share.

The success and efficient running of any local council rests with the calibre of the chief executive. Even an elected mayor would at time have to rely on the advice and expertise of a good chief executive.

Is it not time to debate really radical changes to the local government structure to bring it into the 21st Century?

For instance, with the aid of today's technology such as answering machines, email, mobile phones and personal computers, plus the backing of a first-class secretarial service at the Town Hall, is it really necessary to have multiple councillors to each ward? With, say, a maximum of 28 wards, one councillor a ward would result in a democratic and workable council. I understand the system works well in other countries.

From these 28 councillors, four committees could be established, three running essential services. The fourth should be a small committee, chaired by the leader of the council, and should be a purely policy-making committee making decisions after consultation with the professional officers as to which way they think the council should proceed.

Lastly, it is suggested we should vote on the principal of an elected mayor first and the person afterwards. Surely the lack of knowledge as to the calibre of the candidates is causing doubt in the minds of many people. In the end, we must all remember local government plays a major part in our everyday lives and its democratic structure must be maintained at all cost.

-Jim Saunders, Beaconsfield Road, Brighton