In these difficult times it is right that local authorities should look at every aspect of their business to see where savings can be found. South Oxfordshire District Council and Oxfordshire County Council have both announced that they are investigating a significant cut in the number of councillors serving on their respective authorities.

The impending cuts mean that there will be job loses at all levels and in all sectors of our local councils.

It cannot be right that councillors should be immune from the same scrutiny that will face all employees of the authorities they run.

What is extraordinary is that the majority of Oxfordshire’s councils do not appear to be even considering the line taken by Oxfordshire and South Oxfordshire.

The leader of South Oxfordshire Ann Ducker implied this week that her members would have to admit they were under occupied if they were asked how many residents had contacted them recently.

Bob Price, the leader of Oxford City Council, appeared to suggest the opposite when he implied that a large cut in councillors would lead to the need for a significant increase in time commitment from members.

Both of them cannot be right.

It is not only a shortage of cash that means councils should be looking afresh at the number of representatives, changing roles are also a factor.

The establishment of cabinet or executive rule at local authorities has meant an increase in responsibility and involvement for the small group at the heart of the council’s management but a drop in responsibility and involvement for the rest.

If Oxfordshire County Council — the biggest spender and the authority with the fewest members per head of population — can contemplate reducing its numbers, then the lower spending and more heavily represented districts ought to be able to also.

In many parished areas, it is possible to be represented by three parish councillors, three district councillors, a county councillor and an MP.

This all costs money and, in an age when many of us are able to communicate directly and effectively with our local authorities without the intermediary of a councillor, one has to question whether a more streamlined approach is needed.

Those authorities who consider that councillors do not need to face the same scrutiny as other services should demonstrate why that is the case.

How much time are councillors spending on council business, particularly when they do not hold positions of responsibility?

How often are they contacted by residents and how much time do they spend on constituents’ business?

If there is a viable saving to be had at no expense to local representation and democratic accountability, then it is an easy saving to take, and one that could spare other vital services.