What possible benefit can councillor Francis Tonks hope to gain by repeating Defend Council Housing's mantra that, should council housing stock be transferred to "arms-length management" or a housing association, then rents would rise (The Argus, July 21)?

Is he the least bit aware how frightening it is for elderly people, especially those on fixed incomes, to be told that not only will they pay higher rents in the future but that they could also lose their secure tenures?

Currently, and over the next few years, rents, whether managed by a council or by a housing association and a registered social land-lord, will be subject to this rent restructuring system.

This uses a formula based on the value of the property, the number of bedrooms and local earnings. This ensures social housing tenants across the country will pay a fair rent.

To protect tenants living in areas where property values are high and local earnings are low, the final figure is "capped" by the Government.

Many tenants in Brighton and Hove have benefited from this formula over the past two years and will continue to do so, whatever happens to the housing stock.

As to the loss of secure tenure, it is true the Government intends to bring in assured tenancies across the social housing sector. However, there is little difference between secured and assured tenancies.

Indeed, it could be argued assured tenancies would benefit those tenants who adhere to their tenancy agreements because they allow the landlord to evict tenants who do not (rather than cannot) pay their rent and/or those who persist in antisocial behaviour, much quicker than under a secure tenancy.

All this can be verified on the deputy Prime Minister's web site, www.odpm.gov.uk

-Maggie King, Brighton