Hear All Sides

COUNCIL TAX

FOR the year 2002-3 Darlington Council says it is going to have to put up the tax above nine per cent to cover the Dolphin Centre and the Civic Theatre.

Why do those who use these leisure services pay for them, and those who don't use them have a reduction in their tax?

My wife and I are pensioners and have never had any use for the Dolphin Centre. So why should we pay for it?

There will be many more pensioners who think the same in and around Darlington.

How many pensioners would rather have an extra tin of beans than a ride on an exercise bike? - R Robinson, Darlington.

WHEN Darlington rate payers voted for a unitary authority it was due to the excessive rate increases imposed by Durham County Council,

When Darlington Council says that a rate increase of 9.5 per cent this year is not enough, and this after a rate increase of 12.4 per cent last year, it shows that it has the same failings and is totally divorced from reality.

When annual inflation is two per cent, and falling, Darlington Council will have increased rates year on year over the last two years by nearly 25 per cent.

If expenses have increased on this scale over two years then the council is failing the rate payers and it would seem that spending is out of control.

Anyone with any business acumen should be able to reduce council expenditure dramatically by cutting the empire builders down to size. Perhaps the council should be introduced to something most ordinary households understand. It is called a budget and if you cannot afford it you do not get it.

Any increase in rates this year over three per cent would be a disgrace. - K Peacock, Hurworth Place.

IT amazes me that due to the high rate of expenditure by Darlington Council, Councillor Williams selects the Civic Theatre and the Dolphin Centre as areas where closure could be in the offing.

The two venues are the jewels in the corporation crown. The Civic and Dolphin venues bring in a lot of out-of-town business to Darlington as well as a lot of pleasure to people of all ages and status. - PA Evans, Darlington.

COUNCILLOR Richmond is fully justified in bringing to the attention of Darlington ratepayers the increase in council tax.

A 42 per cent increase over the Labour council's term of office is concerning. However, in the context of what the townspeople have received in return it becomes quite appalling.

Notwithstanding Coun Williams' tired rhetoric - blaming everyone else during his term of office - what have the townsfolk of Darlington received for this massive injection of cash?

In short, nothing. Not one project of note in 20 years. It is easier to list the services we have lost since his party took control, starting with care homes for the elderly, finishing with a ratepayer-owned and operated bus service and a plethora of lost causes in between.

So where has all the money gone? - Charles V Johnson, Darlington.

WITH reference 'Police Authority' (HAS, Jan 15), the correspondents and their appeal to the local taxpayer concerning police pensions and the soaring cost of its application, are pathetic and an insult to the many of us whose pension starts when we are 65 years old and do not receive the same perks and allowances.

The correspondents infer that it is not the fault of the police officers themselves, who deserve a good pension after a lifetime's service - 20 odd years is not a lifetime's service.

Then to make the plea that either there will be less police officers on the beat or taxes will have to rise, seems to suggest an emotional choice based on the usual rhetoric and irrelevant blackmail.

Make the retirement age of police officers 60 years, then make them work to retirement instead of early retirement and the huge payouts they can receive. That would save us a fortune and pay for a more efficient and productive force.

The majority of citizens work a lot longer for a lot less and when they finally retire live on a lot less.

Many people pay a council tax that causes them great hardship and could do with less tax not more, and considering they are clobbered on their direct and indirect taxes, paying extra so that police officers and others can retire early and be better off is an insult to the intelligence of the citizen.

It is time the politicians got off their gravy train and gave us all a better deal. - John Young, Crook.

IN reply to your article "Tax must rise to pay for police" (Echo, Jan 15) Councillor Ken Walker, chairman of Cleveland Police Authority, must be joking if he thinks the public will be amicable towards the proposed increase in council tax after the amount of Cleveland tax payers' money spent on the Ray Mallon fiasco.

If this council tax rise is accepted, Cleveland will have the dubious honour of being near top of the league with regard to council taxes. Don't you think we are suffering enough Mr Walker? - AL Carter, Marske, Redcar.

CHESTERFIELD HOUSE

HOW sad that Councillor Williams felt it necessary to make disparaging remarks during the planning meeting on Wednesday January 9 2002 re- Chesterfield House about objections raised by the Council for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE) and English Heritage.

As one of the organisations whom the DLTR invited to comment when preparing Planning Policy Guidelines, and also the recent Planning Green Paper, CPRE is fully qualified and entitled to express objections to proposals we feel are not beneficial to any city, town or village in this country. We are composed of members who care not only about the countryside, but also for urban areas.

Councillor Williams would be well advised to keep his comments strictly to his knowledge of planning matters during meetings in future. - Mrs L Holmes, County Durham Branch Co-Ordinator, CPRE, Darlington.