TEN days ago, we were pleased to announce that five councils in our region were ahead of the game. They’d got their heads together, spoken to private businesses and agreed to become a Local Economic Partnership.

They had to chose a name and settled upon Tees Valley Unlimited.

They asked the Government to become the first in the country to take powers from the regional development agency and to access the £1bn in the new Regional Growth Fund.

Since that promising beginning, a few siren voices are saying that Teesside should go it alone because they don’t like “Tees Valley”.

It does sound a little clumsy and artificial, but then boundaries are very rarely perfect. They are usually blurred around the edges.

Yet, Tees Valley is only a name. It signifies Teesside plus Hartlepool plus Darlington which equals a sub-region that is greater than the sum of its parts.

It will be able to stand up for itself. It will have real weight: when it stands shoulder-to-shoulder with its neighbour Durham – as we hope it will to bring Hitachi to Newton Aycliffe – it will add far greater oomph to the cause than Middlesbrough or Darlington would alone.

It will be a loose economic grouping based on geographical realities and onthe- ground practicalities: Darlington and Stockton, for example, already share backroom operations to deliver cost-effective local services.

The five areas will not lose their individual identities. In fact, the populations are quite balanced – certainly none will feel overwhelmed as Darlington once did in Durham.

And what is the alternative to this grouping? A small, quiet Teesside with Darlington and Hartlepool unable to get heard at all amid the clamour from Tyneside, Durham and Yorkshire.

This is a divisive and dangerous argument – if only because the Government will not allow petty, bickering neighbours to become a flagship LEP.

We should celebrate our individuality but unite in practicality to create a common economic future.