I FEEL we have reached the end of a hard-fought battle with Bury Council regarding its proposal to close four residential homes.

I do hope the embarrassment we have obviously caused this council will remain in their minds for years to come and also that local people remember a small minority of people can change the process of so-called democracy.

However, I do have some outstanding questions which I hope our letter-writing councillors will answer without any of the usual sarcasm or arrogance of previous correspondence.

The phrase "over reliance" was used as an excuse to close residential homes by Bury Council. I therefore ask why this council has an "over reliance" on social services staff (1,420 social services staff for a population of 180,608 in Bury Metro) in relation to other councils i.e. 1,285 staff for 214,403 in Greenwich, and 1,325 staff for 218,063 in Barnsley.

With these figures in mind, does Bury Council intend to reduce social services staff? Due to closure of three residential homes, an obvious "over reliance" on such staff could give Bury Council a problem in the future. Or might the extra staff be needed to cover for the high incidence of sick leave, which again is well above the national average?

Returning to the use of the phrase "over reliance" to justify closures of residential homes, may I see the written evidence of this.

DAVID J. OGDEN,

Countess Lane, Radcliffe.