THANK you for your editorial comment (Democracy or an exercise in self-preservation? – November 21).

It’s an important issue and we need to get it right.

Consultations are expensive and we tend to be damned if we do (because of the expense) and damned if we don’t, but it’s important to listen.

So I thank those residents who took time to give their views to the Serving Hampshire consultation.

They could not have delivered “exactly what those who head the authority wanted to hear” because we had no preferred option, albeit serious concerns with others’ proposals to split Hampshire.

We make no apology for appointing a professional market research company to undertake the consultation and give us independent analysis including a demographically representative telephone sample.

The county council’s objection to joining the proposed Solent combined authority is not about “dilution of its own role”.

It’s about the effectiveness of services.

For example, breaking up Hampshire Highways would have resulted in a more complex and less efficient service for all residents.

The county council would no longer be able to fund major road improvements in districts such as Eastleigh and Fareham that may join the new authority.

Also it would even be in the new mayor’s remit to possibly start to charge for the use of certain roads in South Hampshire.

Who wants that? Your editorial suggested that Hampshire is vainly holding out against the national political tide.

I don’t see any such tide but I do see deals falling apart all over the country. Twice now the government has contemplated announcing the Solent deal, and each time it has concluded that it is wise to draw back.

The new secretary of state for communities and local government appears to be considering a different, more workable approach.

I am pleased he has now invited Hampshire for discussions to seek a deal we can all agree on.

Councillor Roy Perry, Leader of Hampshire County Council.