Sir, – I never cease to be amazed at some of the extraordinary decisions made by our Liberal Democrat councillors who control Waverley and Farnham, but their latest idea to abolish the post of chief executive of Waverley Borough Council is beyond belief. It is the latest in a long list. After aggressively encouraging tenants to vote against a Conservative housing stock transfer proposal in 2000, they seemed surprised that a similar proposal by them was rejected by those same tenants in 2005. Remember their potty idea to reduce Downing Street to one lane without a second thought to where the traffic would go and then wasting tens of thousands of pounds on a traffic survey? They boast each year of how they have restrained council tax increases and expect nobody to notice that to do this they have raided capital reserves. This is the oldest trick in the book for which a public company would be scathingly treated in the stock market. They have recently introduced a waste- disposal system that allows rotting food and kitchen waste to fester in a wheelie bin for two weeks in hot summer temperatures, claiming that 100 councils elsewhere are doing this. Is that really true? And now, Waverley Borough Council is to be led by four senior departmental executives serving as acting chief executives on a rolling two-month rota. This decision flies in the face of any recognised management practice. With the best will in the world, the style and aptitude for management at this level of any four different individuals are bound to vary. Consistency of decision making will be difficult to achieve, and reporting lines for getting decisions made will be confused. Furthermore, their existing responsibilities will be interrupted. If a business proposed a structure of this kind, it would be laughed out of court, and Waverley is a business in itself with an annual budget of some £15 million. Even worse, as the current post of chief executive has been deemed to be redundant, the decision cannot easily be reversed. The potential for chaos is bad enough, but what also concerns me are rumours of a potential merger of Guildford, Woking and Waverley into a unitary authority. Mergers are always a messy business. If ever an organisation needs a strong leading voice, it is during a merger. The parties to it have to fight long and hard on behalf of their employees for their share of management positions and, in this particular case, on behalf of the interests of Waverley residents, who are widely dispersed in small market towns in direct contrast to Guildford and Woking.

John Littlewood, Greenhill Road, Farnham