Sir, - I was saddened, dismayed and angry to read (D&S, Dec 19), that Upper Wensleydale had failed to attract funding from Sport England for a small swimming pool.

The swimming authorities recommend no one should live further than 20 minutes travel distance from a pool. We live 40 minutes from our nearest public all-year-round pool at Richmond. Or 30 minutes to an outdoor summer-only pool at Ingleton. We are also the furthest place in England from a golf course.

Why should deeply rural areas suffer from lack of facilities, when we pay our fair whack in community charges? Property is more costly in the national park than a comparable property in a city, which will probably have a lower rating value.

The Government is encouraging the nation, especially young people, to be fit and healthy, not become couch potatoes. We have a river and lake in which to swim, but these are not the sort of places for learning to swim safely.

In this area parents pay for their young children to attend school-organised swimming classes, at great expense to themselves. It is a half-day expedition to achieve this short swimming session.

Doctors recommend that people with asthma and arthritis should swim, but again a half-day is needed to complete this. If you are very young, or old, or don't drive, the journey is even longer by public transport.

We have many visitors to our beautiful area each year, and comments are often made about the lack of a swimming pool and golf course. This happened especially during the foot-and-mouth outbreak when the public rights of way were closed for many months.

Such amenities would enhance the visitors' stay and encourage a wider range of visitors to experience this part of the Dales at all times of the year and help support the local economy.

The area has campaigned for over 20 years to get funds for a pool. We have a site already with football established, and hopefully soon a skateboard park for young people.

Eleven ladies from Askrigg area raised about £1,000 several years ago specifically for the proposed pool and some hardy souls swam in Semerwater on a Christmas Day and raised considerable funds.

All we can hope for now is a fairy godmother to wave a wand, and a generous benefactor to give us the funds - some hope! No wonder young people leave rural areas for a better social life.

KATE EMPSALL

Helm,

Askrigg.

Sir, -- I was dismayed to hear that new sports facilities for Hawes and Leyburn were rejected on the grounds of low population (D&S, Dec 19). Why are rural communities being discriminated against?

It is very clear that those who represent us are not doing their job because our children deserve reasonable facilities which will benefit their health and reduce hooliganism.

I was at a public meeting when the future of Thornborough Hall was considered and Richmondshire District Council told us that £40,000 from the sale of land at Gallowfields would be ring-fenced for a sports hall in Leyburn.

What happened to that money? Has it already been spent on top-heavy administration?

Taxpayers also spent £200,000 on the Colburn trading estate which has been empty for two years - another Richmondshire District Council project with questionable benefits. £100,000 was allegedly spent on the Croft Circuit issue and Richmond Station was yet another loss-making enterprise.

Thornborough Hall remains a white elephant and a burden to Leyburn council taxpayers. The tennis courts were allegedly sold for £116,000 although the district auditor suggests £50,000. Road humps in Brentwood cost almost another £200,000 without any tangible benefits.

Why on earth can we not find enough money to provide reasonable facilities for the Wensleydale communities who are totally neglected, not only as far as sports facilities are concerned but also health and policing?

BERNARD BORMAN

Brentwood,

Leyburn.

More confusion

Sir, - Mr Akester writes (D&S, Dec 19), criticising the confusion over the name of the Tees region but what is even worse is the confusion over the organisation of the region.

He states: "Initially, the conurbations on the Tees were combined as Teesside." Indeed they were in 1968, as the County Borough of Teesside, an unusual example of people-power.

In 1958 Ald Peter Milne of Stockton (a man of great vision) led the Teesside Study Group. The five of us (reduced to four following a resignation) investigated local government in the region. I, as secretary, was deputed to draft the plan which was a blueprint for unity. Our plan was opposed and derided by all the local authorities.

Peter and I went to London to be questioned by the Boundary Commission. Later there was a conference in Middlesbrough and an inquiry which lasted for three weeks with witnesses and leading counsel. The plan then had popular support as when I gave evidence I was instructed by dozens of organisations including all the trades unions from Whitby to Easington, 25,000 members of Townswomens Guilds, ratepayers' associations and many more.

So, in 1968, after years of thorough examination of the plan, the new borough was created - the seventh largest in the country.

It did well and was going great guns, but then a Tory Government came in with different ideas and out went the new borough. There was no proper investigation before its replacement by Cleveland County Council and again recently more restructuring by a Tory Government but no proper investigation. And so we have the present mess.

We now have three sets of councillors, three chief executives, three sets of officials, three of this and three of that. Not efficient and not cost-effective. Part of Nunthorpe in one authority and part in another. No overall planning on the things that matter. No single voice for the region, no real clout. How can we stand up against Leeds and Tyneside? And-if the regional assembly comes we are a divided area. Oh dear !

DAVID SIMON

Chairman, Teesside Study Group

Levenside,

Stokesley