I and many Whittlesey residents are intrigued by the words attributed to Colin Gale in your article where he confirms that the local Labour Party were the ones that called the Whittlesey by-election.

I have spoken to many, many Whittlesey residents about the issue surrounding the declaration of acceptance of office that I didn’t sign.

And the vast majority agree with my view, that this was a regrettable but understandable oversight and that the best way forward would have been to co-opt me back onto the council rather than force Whittlesey people through a £7,000 by-election.

Incidentally, the circumstances I found myself in are not uncommon. I have found a number of similar instances up and down the country and it suggests to me that there is a wider issue that needs looking at. Something I intend to take up.

In calling this election, Mr Gale is acting in the interests of the Labour Party, not the residents of Whittlesey. We are seeing the same irresponsible attitude to public spending locally that we saw from Labour nationally prior to 2010.

You also quote Mr Gale as saying that he can speak on behalf of residents. Well, actions speak louder than words.

Where was Mr Gale’s voice when car parking charges reared their ugly head again a few months ago? Where was he during the whole supermarket debate?

When has anyone ever heard him say anything about the need for a bridge over Kings Dyke crossing – something which I, alongside Councillor Ralph Butcher, lobbied for incessantly during my time as a county councillor and which sees plans now coming forward?

I am pretty sure when this by-election happens people will look at actions and what individuals’ records actually are. They will see the actions of the Labour Party as a piece of unnecessary party politics that is against the interests of Whittlesey.

One final point of note, in his letter to Fenland District Council Richard Kent criticises me for not knowing the rules, but gets them wrong himself.

MARTIN CURTIS

Via e-mail