WE can argue about whether the National Health Service is in crisis; perhaps we can agree that it is in some disarray.

Why then is Lancashire wasting a lot of money on a public consultation on the future of mental health services?

There will be more than a dozen major public meetings, a good many presentations to various groups.

There will be the vast expense of publishing and distributing tons of weighty documentation and many hours of costly review at the end of it all.

Why, when the major decisions on the future of mental health services in the county have been taken?

"We do need local people's views," we are told. Oh no you don't. But you have probably been told to go through the consultation motions.

Does anyone in the NHS imagine for a moment that if there is an overwhelming objection to the main proposals, three new hospitals to replace 15 specialist mental health units, the whole plan will be scrapped? Of course not.

We are told that over £3 million has been invested across Lancashire in community mental health services.

This sounds good, but actually the spend on mental health services in East Lancashire has consistently been well below the national average and this is an area of high need and deep deprivation.

Apparently current units are "not fit for purpose" and many environments are "below acceptable standards."

This really does beg the question: "Why are they unfit for purpose" The unit in Blackburn is only a few years old.

The number of NHS mental health beds in Lancashire is being cut by as much as half "because demand is falling."

The national rate of schizophrenia and serious mental illness has not changed for years, the rate of dual diagnosis and number of people with complex problems is increasing alarmingly.

With the new much-amended Mental Health Bill imminent it is likely the rate of sectioning will increase.

We will end up with one site instead of two here in East Lancashire.

This decision has already been made, with some token consultation, but it was clear that the "decision makers" have always been keen to sell the idea of a single unit.

A lot of staff, users and carers are not going to be very happy, especially as transport costs are soaring. Services "as close to people's homes as possible?" Hardly.

There are some excellent innovations in mental health but the way decisions are made is undemocratic and authoritarian.

Consultation? Perhaps. Influence? I don't think so.

SERVICE USER, Blackburn.