ONCE again I find myself in general sympathy with the local government sentiments so tellingly expressed by Farnworth's George K Brown. (BEN November 19).

George is entirely correct when he states that the local Town Councils should be given more power, because, as I see it, they have precious little at present.

Just what can they do? Well, they can raise a small rate and spend endless hours discussing just how they should spend it. High on the agenda, no doubt, will be the trappings of mayoral office, while the rest will probably be allocated for some scheme or other that should, properly, be paid for from the Borough coffers.

But, what about matters of real importance? Can they make planning decisions? No. Can they control how the various Borough services are run? No. Can they control how the Borough's finances are spent in their own district? No. In other words, they are really nothing more than a talking shop, probably more divided along party political lines than united for the good of the township.

I suspect that a well organised, non-political pressure-group would be more effective at making Bolton Council sit up and take notice over the various matters of local importance that arise from time to time.

George is absolutely spot on when he says: "Bring back the 1960s". In those Urban District Council days there was real local accountability by both officers and councillors. Bigger is very definitely not better.

As a born and bred Kearsleyite, I am convinced that Kearsley Council looked after its "patch" far better than the present service we receive from Bolton Metro. The highways foreman knew every grid; the electrician, every lamp, and both saw to them, as necessary, without the need for endless phone calls to get anything done.

Democracy worked better in the Council Chamber, too. None of this modern, Labour-inspired, undemocratic, inner sanctum rubbish, whereby a few privileged "executive member" councillors make decisions behind closed doors and then when all has been decided, invite pointless comment from their out-on-a-limb fellow councillors.

Equally undemocratic, in my view, is the much increased tendency to delegate to officers matters that should, properly, be decided by elected councillors.

In those pre-local government re-organisation days, residents had a much greater personal representation than they have today. Kearsley residents, for example, had 15 councillors instead of their current three.

Each councillor was elected for a three year period, sat on every council committee and so had unrestricted opportunity to speak -- and more importantly, vote -- on every aspect of council business. Each committee sat monthly and its business was formalised at that month's full council meeting, so there was no wasted time. Councillors sat each Tuesday evening and in this misguided era of paid councillors, it's worth mentioning that they did it for nowt!

Tom Wolstencroft

Highfield Street

Kearsley