Sir, - I noted with interest the comments made by Coun Middlemiss, deputy leader of the Richmondshire Association of Independent Councillors group in the report "Bid to unveil political alliance voted down" (D&S, Apr 26).

A motion had been placed on the council agenda by the Liberal Democrats giving the Conservative/ RAICs the opportunity to "out" their political alliance. (It is a fact that the Conservative/RAICs meet together on a monthly basis and that they attend joint pre-meetings before committee meetings).

Coun Middlemiss was quoted as having said: "The Liberal Democrats appeared to have their own alliance as they were often supported by the independent councillors not aligned with the RAICs and, that the chief executive should note who voted with the Liberal Democrats."

Imagine my surprise when I recalled the comment made by the Conservative leader, Coun Alderson, at a recent meeting when he said that the Conservative/RAICs work together to ensure they get what they want. At that very meeting I was loudly accused of an alliance between the Independent group and Liberal Democrats. "For the record" we have not met and do not meet.

Imagine my further surprise when I recalled Coun Blackie's all encompassing comments in relation to his perceived majority of members at full council that "this side of the room will not disagree with..." Responding to the Liberal Democrats' request for a committee place with "that's all you're going to get" in the full knowledge that the Conservative/RAICs would vote together to ensure that. Coun Blackie goes as far as to give permission to "that side of the room" to have the odd free vote! Who is kidding whom here?

The reorganisation of local government uses the words clear, transparent, robust, and open to scrutiny. It seems somewhat ironic that those who scrutinise most closely and try to open up the discussion are automatically seen as some kind of pariah that has been fed on a diet of sour grapes.

Coun HELEN GRANT

Leader, the Independent group, Richmondshire District Council

Forest Drive,

Colburn.

What's next?

Sir, - In Richmondshire district we are wondering what is going to go up next?

Firstly the charges for the officers from the environmental department were doubled, now the dog fouling fine is being doubled and the dog warden's have been told to double their efforts, to say nothing of the exorbitant rates increases, new council offices and training sessions which include extremely unnecessary hotel bills. What will they come up with next?

The cost of lifeline telephones, so essential for the elderly or disabled, appeared to go down this year from £15.93. a month to £15.04. But there is the catch - the payments used to be for 11 months of the year, a total of £175. 24. They are now payable for the 12 months - total £180. 44.

Does the council think we are not sensible enough to notice their crafty ploys. This is an extremely expensive safety net.

Of course, council employees get a reasonable salary increase each year. Pensioners recently got less than £5 a week.

BETTY ROBERTSON

Hipswell,

Catterick Garrison.

Bad timing

Sir, - I've read in your paper about the 11 officers of Richmondshire District Council who went on an adventure training course at Aske Hall.

I for one believe that the timing was poor when taxpayers are having to pay the big increase in council tax. And why go on into County Durham to the Morritt Arms at Greta Bridge, staying two nights plus all the goodies that go with it?

ANNE FRENCH

Copper Beech Way,

Colburn.

I won't lie down

Sir, - I am pleased our council leader felt it was worthwhile (her words) to reply to my letter re positive discrimination against over 60-year-old wheelchair users (D&S letters, Apr 12). The extension to those under 60 who are carers is welcomed. Where are the named supporters of this discrimination?

Since December 1966, it has been unlawful to refuse a service to a disabled user of a service provided for everyone and since October 1999 service providers have had a duty to take reasonable steps to change practices, policies or procedures which make it impossible or unreasonably difficult for disabled people to use a service and provide auxiliary aids or services to enable disabled people to use a service.

How many years has Hambleton council being saying "no" to the provision of vouchers? I was asked in a private conversation not to raise the matter publicly last year, as it was likely to be granted in this last budget! I will never be put off.

H F BOOTH

Ashdown,

Little Crakehall.