SO Labour Councillor Jim D'Avila believes that Swindon has a "moral duty" to look after asylum seekers? He also utters the baffling statement: "If groups opt out, the burden falls unfairly on the shoulders of minorities and this can cause potential difficulties in society."

What exactly does this mean? Is it just a way for Mr D'Avila to appear politically correct but without offering any useful, cost-effective solution? Does he mean that if we, the tax payers, don't give up money to help house, feed and clothe these asylum seekers they'll start fighting among themselves?

Perhaps Mr D'Avila would like to think again. Or perhaps it should be spelled out. Thanks to our pathetic excuse for a council, we don't have the money to help our own citizens, let alone asylum seekers. We are already witnessing "difficulties" among members of our own society now that the council has announced drastic social services cuts.

These Swindon residents have every right to come first in the queue when it comes to local authority help. They should not be pushed aside by those who have taken a dash through the Channel Tunnel. If the money isn't there (and we are assured that it isn't) the answer has to be: "Sorry, no. Maybe next year." It's that simple.

When the council has stopped wasting our money and actually balances its books, maybe the situation can be looked at again. Until then, concentrate on those who are entitled to local authority help rather than asylum seekers demanding it.

J BLAKE

Ponting Street

Swindon