SIR - I read with interest your article about the 61 councillors who are going to receive free computers, desk and chair, combined fax/scanner/ printer, at a cost of approximately £174,175 - with ongoing charges of £104,635 a year.

As a local computer company I cannot believe the figures quoted.

I could provide 61 internet ready PCs with a combined fax/scanner/printer for the grand total of £45,750, maybe less with bulk discount.

Basic maths means that at £128,425 for chairs and tables, that works out at some of the most staggeringly expensive home office furniture I have ever heard of, coming in at a whopping £2,105.33 each.

Please tell me I am wrong, as I cannot believe a council that has just increased council tax by 14.8 per cent to gain much-needed resources - only to go and throw it away like this.

I am sure there are many local companies like myself who would have loved to tender for a contract like this, and yet the council seems to have just gone straight ahead and paid out £2,855 for each councillor when the savings speak for themselves.

Aside from the cost, what about the practicalities? Since the councillors already have computers in the office, would it not have been better to give these to local schools and replace them with laptops? That way there would be no duplication, and at least some worthwhile benefit could have been made.

Martin Badcock

Director, Net-WRX Ltd

PC perks for families

SIR - I don't object to our county councillors receiving free computers. What I do object to is the cost.

I run a successful IT company but it does not take a rocket scientist to divide £174,000 by 61 to see a cost of £2,800 per PC. You can get a very good computer, printer, scanner, etc for around £1,000, so who's making a £1,800 profit?

Even adding extra servers for an intranet only takes around £10,000, so there could be a surplus of almost £100,000.

However it doesn't stop there. It appears to take over £100,000 to run them per year. Even if you dedicate two junior system administrators, add in internet cost, insurance and consumables you don't get above £60k per annum. Someone is making a lot of money at our expense.

Also I think the councillors should demonstrate IT competency before receiving the equipment to avoid the PC simply becoming a perk for their families.

Neal Macdonald

MV Limited, Durham

Virtual councillors

SIR - Your article, Councillors to get free computers (May 3), illustrates how the needs of councillors take priority over those of their constituents.

A hike in council tax of 14.8 per cent was justified on the basis of an increased service to residents of the county. Surely everybody living and working here could benefit from having access to IT facilities. Social and economic prosperity can be enhanced by contact with the information superhighway.

Instead, county councillors and their families alone are to enjoy these privileges at council tax payers expense. Are city councillors, then parish councillors, next in line for this kind of perk? Where will this end?

Constituents will have 'virtual' councillors - only accessible through the use of information technology, without the need to see people in person. Surely the priority of any councillor is to have contact with their constituents and not hide behind a computer.

In setting up state-of-the-art offices in the homes, are councillors to be compensated for the intrusion into their properties? Will their homes become businesses and be taxed accordingly? Should planning permission be sought? Or will the people of Durham end up paying the price through their council tax, yet again?

H G Hansen, Durham

Monkey business?

SIR - It is difficult to see how Durham County Council can justify using taxpayers' money to furnish councillors homes with computers, chairs and desks. No wonder the council tax has increased by 14.8 per cent.

It is a pity that Durham didn't vote for a mayor. It would have been interesting to consider what type of mayor could have been elected. Perhaps someone like Ray Mallon to take on these tax and waste councillors? On second thoughts, perhaps a monkey would have been more appropriate.

Michael Galloway, Durham

Building concern

SIR - I would like to let the people of Belmont and Carrville and the surrounding areas know about the proposed building application on the car park behind Cheveley Park shopping centre at Belmont.

The application is for 11 town houses and five town apartments - this will take up all of the car park.

The applicant has also proposed to put in 32 car parking spaces and a one-way road through the shops coming in from Broomside Lane bearing off to the left, over an area of grass and trees, over to Peter's the bakers and between the ramps that are part of the shop flats.

This will be very hazardous for children and pedestrians walking to and from the shops and all the school children entering and exiting from the links.

It will also cause a headache for parents looking for parking spaces to meet their children, not forgetting other people who like to use the shops here.

Many of the 32 car parking spaces will surely be taken up by the flat owners and shop owners, so there will be very little parking available leaving drivers no option but to park on the paths, endangering our children and pedestrians.

I would urge people to see the plans at Belmont Library and, if you object, write to Jenny Green, Planning, Byland Lodge, Durham City and Mr W McVicker, Highways Division, Durham County Council, Durham.

Julie McLaughlin

Brackendale Road, Belmont

Join kids' campaign

SIR - It seems to me that Durham council feels it is more important to spend money on conference centres and car parks instead of more activities for kids.

Take the swimming baths, which must be well over 70 years old. There is nothing to stop the council from turning it into a modern leisure pool such as Wet 'n' Wild.

I am sick and tired of the way Durham Council seems to think that wasting money on nonsense is more important than spending money of things that children will find useful and enjoyable.

There is little or no opportunity to do interesting and exciting sports. The closest sports centre to Durham is Abbey Sports at the Arnison Centre and there is little to do there. Towns like Spennymoor, Brandon and Sherburn all have sports centres with good facilities, so I can't understand why Durham doesn't.

If you feel the same way as me you can write to me at the address below. Together we can make a difference.

Philip West, (age 12), 9 Wilson Crescent, Gilesgate Moor, Durham DH1 1PF.

Sewage works stink

SIR - I have been a resident of Wearside Drive for 32 years and have always enjoyed this peaceful area. However, recently a loud continuous buzzing noise from the nearby sewage works destroys our peace, not to mention unhealthy odours which drift all along the Sands area.

Would anyone who is affected either by the noise of the smells please telephone (0191) 3863505.

I am used to pitted roads, cracked, weed-filled pavements, a lack of recycling collections and of council road sweepers who barely touch the surface and indeed have not complained, but the malfunction of the sewage works is the last straw.

If nothing can be done we can only pray for the premature loss of two of our senses.

E Wilson, Durham