AS a resident of Poole, I really must respond to the comments made by Christchurch councillor Lesley Dedman (Daily Echo, August 15) on council tax.

If the merger had not gone ahead then Christchurch residents would have faced rises of four per cent per year like the rest of us. As it is it will be around 3.7 per cent. So it could be argued that we in Bournemouth and Poole, by facing a greater increase, will actually be subsidising Christchurch.

Whilst the same services will be available to all the residents of the new authority, it may be that with a much older population and therefore drain upon adult social services, we will be paying for the care of the elderly of Christchurch.

There is also the question as to who pays for the cost of the action. Christchurch’s budget and council tax has been fixed for this year so it cannot be directly recouped from the residents of Christchurch. It will have to come out of Christchurch's reserves and therefore there will be less to pass on to the new authority. It will therefore be at a cost to the residents of Bournemouth and Poole. That is manifestly unfair since we had nothing to do with it.

The financial arguments are actually much more complex. For example, whilst much has been said in Christchurch about the finances of Bournemouth and Poole, in fact they will be making a greater contribution to the reserves of the new council than Christchurch. Their reserves amount to around £1.50 per head whereas Christchurch’s are £1.20. Furthermore, the only way to determine fairness of council tax is to look at what is raised and spent in a particular area. Such figures are not available. Certainly I am left wondering if in fact it is the residents of Christchurch who are the beneficiaries financially at least of the merger. However, that can only be speculation since the issue is more complex than people make out and I cannot prove it.

RF COOPER, Laidlaw Close, Poole