I DISPUTE the claim of Councillor Fraser Reynolds, leader of Durham City Council, that my council was invited to participate in the district councils' "referendum" (HAS, May 25). We were not approached.

We made inquiries when we first heard about the district councils' plan, but were told nothing had been decided and they would let us know in due course. The next we see is the district leaders lined up for the launch of their poll, by which time we were told it was too late to participate and send electors our information to sit alongside the districts' leaflet in the ballot packs.

Their leaflet, which Coun Reynolds states has been scrutinised for balance and fairness by the body hired to conduct the poll, is misleading and factually incorrect.

It misrepresents our financial proposals, omits key information and states we made false claims about the level of stakeholder support for our proposal, which we refute.

It provides no information about the other option voters are asked to consider and is little more than a thinly-veiled attack on the unitary proposal.

The leaflet is not balanced or fair and we have serious misgivings about the conduct and validity of this poll.

Councillor Albert Nugent, Leader, Durham County Council.

I WELCOME the referendum being held by the seven district councils in Durham on the structure of local government.

Unlike the county council, the districts have been prepared to ask residents their views. The county council's reluctance to consult the people is no doubt due to the response it believes it will get.

The idea of a single unitary council for Durham was rejected a few years ago by voters and a recent telephone poll by the county council showed that 72 per cent of people said "no" to the creation of a super council.

It is hardly surprising. A single council for County Durham with a population of half a million people will be remote from local communities with decision-making centralised at County Hall.

Set-up costs are likely to be two to three times those the county council claims, far outweighing any possible savings.

Local services could also be under threat as decisions are made by councillors with no knowledge about a particular area. The area I represent, Durham City centre, will have only four councillors out of 126.

The public, who will pay for any new council, will, I hope, make their voice heard and support retaining the present structure.

Councillor David Freeman, Elvet Ward, Durham County Council.