06/10/04

How much more user friendly and interesting than those of other big towns in the area. Mainly because they have kept giant money-grabbing factory shops out and allowed smaller British businesses to have a chance.

I can't understand why Stockton Council has changed its policy and says it is because of central government policy.

So it looks as though the huge monopoly companies are not satisfied with the millions of pounds they vacuum from the area and have persuaded an unthinking, gullible Government that town centres benefit from factory shopping.

I had hoped this Government would have at least slowed the unhealthy growth of powerful global monopolies, but the deliberate undermining of the postal service will leave us again with uncertain, unreliable confusion, etc.

The cost of not standing up to these global bullies is far broader than their narrow monetary policies indicate. Like nuclear energy, the real costs only become obvious much later. - C Davison, Billingham.

REGIONAL GOVERNMENT

ADVOCATES of a regional assembly point to the purported success of the Scottish and Welsh parliaments as examples of what, given the same opportunity, could be achieved here in the North-East.

Actually, the only feedback I have seen from Scotland and Wales is that their parliaments are bywords for waste, extravagance and bureaucracy; in both cases the local consensus being that they were set up for the benefit, not of the Scottish and Welsh people, but of the Scottish and Welsh Labour elites.

Here local democracy is dying on its feet and it is in this state because of the stranglehold exerted on North-East public life by the Labour Party. A regional assembly offers no solution to this state of affairs; indeed it would only compound it, as I suspect it is intended to.

The only hope of improvement is in local people waking up to the fact that they are living in the early 21st century, rather than the early 20th century, and deciding to think for themselves, instead of slavishly voting Labour at local elections. - T Kelly, Crook.

THE latest tactic employed by Derwentside District Council to whip up support for its 'three council' solution to any local government shake-up in County Durham is to have its binmen plaster 'Three Council' stickers to wheelie bins throughout the district.

Sadly, the stickers serve only one useful purpose: to show people where to put the latest copy of the council's magazine, Inside Derwentside.

There could be no more appropriate place for such a load of misleading rubbish.

The magazine includes comments from Independent Councillor Watts Stelling, speaking on behalf of the other Independent councillors as their 'leader' in support of the three council option.

The views he expressed are not mine and I dare say not those of some of my Independent colleagues either.

The magazine says that having just three councils providing local government services in County Durham will mean fewer councillors than at present, be cheaper to run and cost the taxpayer less.

What it doesn't say is that one new unitary council will mean even fewer councillors and offer even more savings.

A single all-purpose council will be £12m cheaper to set up than three and will cost almost £35m a year less to run.

The magazine also claims that in the event of a 'Yes' vote in next month's referendum on a regional assembly, all of the existing councils in County Durham would be abolished.

That's just not true.

If there were a 'Yes' vote, and people rejected the idea of the council being split up into three, the existing district councils would be abolished and their staff and functions would be transferred to the existing county council which would be re-named County Durham Council. - County Councillor Reg Ord, Burnopfield and Dipton, Durham County Council.

CONSIDERING myself as being of no more than average intelligence, I place myself as one among the majority now being asked to make decisions beyond our comprehension.

I refer to our being asked to make a choice in the forthcoming local government referendum.

Could it be cynicism on my part, or just plain common sense that tells me that self interest rather than the greater public interest has prompted many public personalities to voice their opinions?

Throughout my entire life of 80 years, the Labour Party in this area has been the ruling party. It's therefore a reasonable assumption that there are those who have joined or supported this party with self interested opportunism as their motivation.

Whatever the result of the referendum it's almost certain we'll still have these same councillors dictating policy by simply jumping from one gravy train to another.

If any reorganisation of local government be needed, shouldn't the first priority be to rid ourselves of one party domination.

A greater degree of proportional representation in decision making might then allay the many charges of cronyism and favouritism associated with local government. - AW Dunn, Spennymoor.

HUNTING

I CAN'T make my mind up about foxhunting. On the one hand, a farmer states that a fox can kill everything in sight. On the other, it is cruel to chase an animal for hours until it is exhausted.

And do the people on horseback take too much pleasure in the chase, it being necessary to kill foxes? Or is there more than a bit of feeling like landed gentry, what with fancy dress, cups of wine, tally ho, toot, toot on the bugle et al?

Is there no way to relocate foxes to fields overrun by rabbits? I was definitely uneasy to see Parliament invaded by those who disagree with a proposed Bill (and a Labour Government). - F Atkinson, Shincliffe.

NO doubt there will be many pro and con letters about foxhunting in the weeks to come.

I am opposed to hunting with dogs, but not exclusively to save the fox from a horrible death.

Without hunting with dogs, the fox will take its chance of survival with all the other creatures at the mercy of the world's ultimate predator - human beings.

I sympathise with people whose livelihood depends on hunting, but there are many instances of workers losing their jobs without redress.

There is something sad and quite depressing about human beings hunting to death a wild animal for sport.

Surely these people demean themselves and our society by association.

I was appalled to read that huntsmen breed foxes so that they can hunt them to death.

The Countryside Alliance states its traditional way of life is being destroyed.

It used to be traditional to put little boys up chimneys and to put children as young as six down coal mines.

So let's dispense with the puerile 'traditional' argument and hope that people in both rural and urban areas can behave in a more civilised manner. - Hugh Pender, Darlington.