SEVEN district councils in County Durham face being swept away as the price of setting up an elected regional assembly.

The Boundary Committee for England report, issued on Tuesday, is recommending that a referendum ballot paper due out in October gives voters two options, alongside the main question asking them if they want an assembly to be set up.

The first would be an all-purpose single unitary authority covering the whole of County Durham.

The districts of Teesdale, Wear Valley, Sedgefield, Chester le Street, Derwentside, Durham City and Easington would be abolished and their functions transferred to the county council, which would be renamed County Durham Council.

The second option is to have three unitary authorities based on the existing districts, whose councils would all be abolished.

Their functions would be transferred to three new unitary districts to be named East Durham (comprising Durham City and Easington); North Durham (a merging of Chester le Street and Derwentside); and South Durham, which would take in Sedgefield, Teesdale and Wear Valley.

The Boundary Committee was asked to present at least two options for creating a unitary system of local government if the referendum returned a vote in favour of a North-East Regional Assembly.

It dropped the option for two all-purpose councils comprising Chester le Street, Derwentside, Durham City and Easington districts, and a merger of Sedgefield, Teesdale and Wear Valley, from its proposals, which have been passed to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Durham County Council has campaigned for a single authority and has also made it clear it believes Durham City would be an ideal location for a regional assembly.

Its leader, Ken Manton, said: "It is - and always has been - our preferred option, and the level of support which the Boundary Committee's final recommendations shows it has received more than reinforces the findings of the recent Mori survey, which placed it as the people's favourite."

The report revealed that of 847 written representations from MPs, regional bodies, councillors, political groups, local organisations and residents, 686 expressed a first preference for a single unitary structure; 51 expressed a first preference for three councils; and only 15 wanted two councils.

Coun Manton added: "It is very reassuring, particularly when you see that the people supporting our preferred option include community leaders and 'big hitters' in the world of business, and national and regional organisations."

Understandably, the district councils who have banded together under the banner of Local Choice - Local Voice, think differently.

Chairman Robin Todd, deputy leader of Easington District Council, said: "We believe such a huge council would be unmanageable and not locally accountable."

Wear Valley District council leader Olive Brown ageed: "A single unitary authority in County Durhan would be a risky experiment because it will be huge.

"I don't think it will be able to cope with such a hands-on approach, as local authorities can.

"County Durham has got a mix of urban and rural areas. We want to be closer to the people and one authority would move away from this closeness."