Sir – Christmas is the time of giving, not taking. I am astounded at not only the arrogance of the councillors who voted themselves  a 19 per cent rise in allowances but the impertinence of councillors Rose and Bulmer in attempting to defend it.

Councillors used to be members of the community who had a proven record in management, administration and financial control, usually having run their own businesses or been senior managers in larger companies. They were volunteers, semi-retired or retired with time and experience to put something useful back into their community.

Admittedly some, hopefully not many, used their position to enrich themselves which was and still is illegal, I might remind them.

Then it was decided that they should be paid expenses so that they weren’t out of pocket by being a councillor. Then, somehow, these allowances were increased to reflect loss of earnings. That was brave as it acknowledged that that was all they were capable of earning in the real world.

As regards councillor Rose boasting or complaining about his 18-hour days, six days a week, if he were working for me I would wonder why he wasn’t coping with his job. Time management problems? Unable to delegate? Taking on too much to work effectively?

The rises being recommended by an independent panel is no excuse.

A few weeks ago one of your correspondents cited a list of disastrous projects promoted or allowed over the years by councillors of all political parties.

In the real world those responsible would be sacked to ensure they didn’t cause more harm, yet it is still going on. The expensive Port Meadow fiasco, the extremely costly recent and current roadworks programme.

Who picks up the tab for their incompetence? And they have voted themselves a “pay rise”.

At least they will have a Happy New Year.

Michael Walsh, Oxford