25/11/04

As the people of the North-East voted against the elected version, perhaps it's high time that this was also knocked on the head, and it should have no powers at all.

Its vision only suggests growth in the urban conurbations and I would presume that the majority of its members are from these same conurbations.

We should all campaign for its abolition as it is council taxpayers' money which helps fund this. - County Councillor John Shuttleworth, Durham County Council.

SCULPTURE

THE idea of putting a sculpture in the shape of a bowler hat on the Theatre Corner site is, to me, tasteless and not in keeping with a site which provided entertainment for Bishop Auckland for over 100 years.

Such a sculpture has no direct significance with the history of the site.

No doubt it is an attempt to link the theatre with Stan Laurel, who neither appeared there nor had any connection with the theatre other than being the son of Arthur and Madge Jefferson, who named the theatre and made it one of the most important in the North-East of England.

The first Laurel and Hardy film to be shown there, The Bohemian Girl, was not shown until June 1947 after the theatre had been taken over by Essoldo. Their films were always shown at the Kings Hall Cinema.

Such a tasteless sculpture is an insult to the memory of many lessees, managers and performers who brought this theatre through changes of theatrical taste, three major wars and a series of depressions in trade in the area.

If a symbol of theatre life on the Eden Theatre site is to be erected it should take the form of the masks of comedy and tragedy, since both these forms of entertainment were provided by the many performers who appeared at the New Royalty tent theatre, the Masonic Music Hall, the Theatre Royal and the Eden Theatre, all of which stood at Theatre Corner.

By all means commemorate the significance of this important historic site but let it be in a way that is in keeping with the happy memories of the people of Bishop Auckland, who made up the audiences.

Do not allow greed for grant aid and the artistic whims of some sculptor to leave Bishop Auckland with an eyesore. This site and the people of Bishop Auckland deserve better than that. - John Land, Bishop Auckland.

SMOKING

CAN a smoke-free zone be made so that non-smokers can enter and leave shops and supermarkets without inhaling second hand cigarette smoke? Non-smokers have rights as well as smokers. - Tom Nicholson, Darlington.

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS

I WOULD suggest that Mr Pender (Has, Nov 23) reads a little history of the 20th century.

At the end of the First World War, the victorious allies sat down to carve up Arabia. They then reneged on all their promises to the Arab nation, led by Lawrence of Arabia, the only man who united them. He advocated that Arabia should be carved up on tribal lines, which would probably have saved a lot of heartache that is going on now.

After the war, which was trumpeted as the war to end all wars, the League of Nations was set up. This became a non-effective talking shop.

Here comes the Second World War, and the whole scenario started over again. The United Nations comes along, which is rapidly becoming yet another debating society.

One common denominator in all this appears to be the French. After being bailed out twice by the Allies, they object to everything now for purely selfish reasons.

From this it would seem nothing changes, except the French scuppering everything for their own ends. - Jim S Hammer, Darlington.

HUNTING

I READ the letter from John Milburn (HAS, Nov 23) then read the very interesting column by Peter Mullen.

I would advise Mr Milburn to read the column, then he might realise, as he has obviously been brainwashed at some time, that the hunting ban is not about "animals being ripped to shreds for pleasure" as he puts it, but it is, as admitted at the weekend in the national press, by none other than the minister for rural affairs' parliamentary private secretary, Peter Bradley, a class struggle, not about animal welfare.

The class issue comes to light in Mr Milburn's letter, when he decides that, because a person considers himself a huntsman, he owns a horse and, consequently, should be able to afford any fines levied onto him if he decides to continue hunting come next February.

I wonder if, in fact, Mr Milburn knows the full implication that the hunting ban will have on people, not horse owners, but ordinary people, of which there are thousands, myself included, who enjoy a walk in the open countryside with their dogs, flushing up the odd bit of game for the pot.

Would he like to see people like this imprisoned and their pets impounded? I have no doubt that an elderly person, whose dog catches a rabbit or a hare by chance, would find imprisonment as nauseating and horrific as a wealthy horse-owning huntsman.

Mr Milburn is of the same opinion as many people, that the Hunting Bill is just to stop people in red coats riding about the country with packs of hounds murdering furry little foxes.

Might I suggest that he reads a bit of background information on the Bill before passing judgement on all hunters. - Patrick Blewitt, Darlington.

AIRPORT

I AM sick and tired of the army of whingers, Christopher Wardell being the latest, constantly complaining of the new name for our local airport.

Surely, these people have more important things in their lives to worry about?

These whingers obviously have no idea of the background to the new name. Durham Tees Valley Airport is here, Teesside is not, so accept it and get over it. - P Wells, Shildon.

DARLINGTON TOWN CENTRE

I AM dismayed at Darlington Council's plan to vandalise the town centre by destroying the historic Victorian features on High Row.

From a local population of over 100,000 they 'consulted' about 300, presumably hand-picked cronies.

So whatever the real agenda behind the plan to rip the heart out of Darlington's town centre, the people are apparently the least consideration as usual.

Darlington is not a trendy new town, so why tart it up to look like something it is not? It is a historic town forever linked in the nation's mind with the birth and development of the railway in Victorian England.

Is the council so ashamed of this heritage that it won't be happy until it has destroyed every last vestige of this unique inheritance?

Most of us do not want it replaced with a poncey, soulless, ultra modern market place so similar to many others spreading like cancers across the land.

Rather than wasting £6.5m on this, why not reduce our council tax instead?

Surely they can make improvements to the town centre if they must, without having to desecrate it. - A Hall, Darlington.