"This crazily timed gathering gives false hope to the countries that want a constitution and unnecessary fear to those, like the UK, that don't.

"The meeting is unhelpful, divisive and embarrassing to Germany which did not want it.

"This is exactly what David Cameron meant when he said the EU should stop flicking fluff from its navel and get down to tacking the real issues that face Europe and the world in particular high unemployment and climate change."

Although Friday's restricted meeting looks like a ganging up of pro-constitution states the 18 participants "will not take an official position" which begs the question: is the meeting just an expensive waste of time and money?

Let's jolly well hope so! MPs receive good salaries and generous expenses which provide for several staff.

If Mrs Ussher were anything but frantic, I'd want my money back.

Some points to consider:

Would a joint Burnley and Pendle be big enough? Other areas would suggest that a unitary authority ought to have at least 250,000 people to make it efficient. Burnley and Pendle combined would be somewhere under 200,000.

The Lib Dems are in favour. They currently control both councils, and have an iron grip on Pendle.

The BNP are claiming to oppose such a merger. Could this be because they've sat down, done their sums, and realised they won't have any councillors?

In truth, we Tories would have fewer, if any at all (if the ward divisions are based current County Council boundaries) in Burnley.

Current County Councillors, if they are shrewd when choosing which committes to sit on, can earn the equivalent in expenses of a full time wage. No wonder those turkeys are not voting for Christmas.

Nevertheless, if the unitary council does something to curb the wastefulness of the current county council, it can't be all a bad thing

Having fallen out with the BNP, he is now trying his luck with the England First Party, a BNP-look-a-like. Methinks this is a practice run for the May elections.

The question is, will the BNP stand against this former election fraudster in May or will they not contest his election?

Volunteers would help save money

I FIND the report regarding the proposed cut by Burnley Borough Council of up to £100,000 to the Citizens' Advice Service, (Express, Friday, January 5th), and the possible results to a very valuable community service, very disturbing.
However on looking at the jobs on page 73, could the situation be improved? I notice that the Burnley Citizens' Advice have two job vacancies, both at a wage of over £15,000, both for people who must be fluent in Urdu. This rules out over 90% of the population straight away.
My wife has worked for many years both in Burnley and North Wales for the CAB as a volunteer and does not speak Welsh or Urdu, with never any problems, and only received bus fares to the job.
Adverts such as this only serve to divide the community and do not promote racial integration. Since my retirement, I now do voluntary work for two organisations, for just my out of pocket expenses, and I don't speak any foreign languages, I can always use a volunteer translator if required.
So could the Citizens' Advice not ask for volunteers first, and reduce the wage bill? Then may I apply?

I WORK FOR NOW'T, Brierfield

www.burnleytoday.co.uk

Their total vote was 1102, which he correctly points out.

However, the 2001 census for Padiham alone states there are 11,090 residents. Even allowing for a change in population over the past 6 years, the BNP vote is barely 10% of the 'residents'. 2237 voted for parties other than the BNP, and 8-9000 didn't vote for anyone.

He has confused the terms 'residents' with 'voters'. The two are generally not the same.