Keith Brooks was correct to expose the hypocrisy of the various public authorities who waste taxpayers’ money on expensive frivolities (Oxford Mail, May 3).

Recently the county council leader, Keith Mitchell, warned his cabinet that the public still did not realise the full extent of ‘cuts’ facing Oxfordshire when they voted through another series of cuts (Mail, April 20).

Once again, the cuts announced appeared to be centred on the most vulnerable in society who, I would have thought, required most help and protection.

The public do realise that money-saving measures have to be taken to meet the limits set by the Government.

Those who do not seem to be aware are councillors and senior officers who gallivant on expensive courses, fact-finding missions and fund lavish beanos, all at council taxpayers’ expense. These perks should be withdrawn immediately.

I am aware that these items alone are insufficient to meet the budgetary requirements which means that some grandiose schemes, like the Frideswide Square redevelopment, will have to be shelved or passed on to a philanthropical, multinational company.

It is not wishful thinking, it can be done as shown by Sainsbury’s, which is meeting the cost of the Heyford Hill roundabout redevelopment.

Other measures that can be taken include the suspension of recruiting senior staff and chief officers.

May I remind Mr Mitchell that it was only a few years ago that the county council advertised a very imposing chief officer post which, when he was questioned by a reporter as to what the job entailed, could give no answer.

I find it hard to believe that council members showed little or no regard to the hardships which some residents will face when the Home Support Service is closed in 2012, and the consequences that will follow when youth work funding is cut, together with the closure of some youth centres.

The creation of seven hubs to replace 21 youth centres will destroy all the hard work which youth leaders have done to make their centres attractive, inviting, free and available.

Councillors fail to understand that young people form a bond with local centres. They jealously guard them and do not welcome strangers.

It would be a foolish mistake to change the behavioural pattern which has been established.

The closing down of the Home Support Service will be a cruel blow to many pensioners and the disabled, who rely heavily on its caring staff.

Transferring the service to private companies will not replace the bond and trust which people have cultivated with their carers over time.

Many carers work hours and run errands beyond the call of their duty, and it is very unlikely that private companies could afford to give such service as they are there to make as much profit as possible for all their shareholders.

If it is estimated that a saving of £1.5m-£2.5m can be achieved using private companies, what is the purpose of employing an efficiencies supremo, if he cannot make the same savings?

VIM RODRIGO, Rivermead Road, Rose Hill, Oxford