Letters: Prescott's myth

The opposite is true. Power will not be pushed down from central government but pulled up from local government. An elected regional assembly in the North-East would, for example, see planning decisions, previously taken by those in Darlington, taken by those in Newcastle.

Similarly, an elected assembly would not bring extra money to the North East but take money away from local residents. Ken Livingstone's London assembly is already hitting council taxpayers with precept charges five times what the Government originally promised.

An elected regional assembly in the North-East would probably have about 25 members. They would be charged with representing over 2.5m people. That means one assembly member for every 100,000 members of the electorate - hardly bringing decision making closer to the people.

In addition, the creation of elected regional assemblies will mean the abolition of shire county councils to be replaced by amorphous regions created along map grid lines by some civil servant in Whitehall. This abolition of 1,000 years of history at one stroke will see the interests of rural communities subsumed into the urban centres and will not come without cost.

Using the Greater London Assembly example, we can estimate that running them would cost £300m a year in administration and bureaucracy, blowing out of the water the Deputy Prime Minister's claim that they would reduce bureaucracy.

John Prescott would also have us believe that regional assemblies would be good for the local economy. Well not according to the director of the CBI here in the North-East, Stephen Rankin, who said that businessmen worry that elected assemblies would hinder rather than help them and would over-politicise the Regional Development Agency's regeneration work.

The only economic benefit of any kind would be to the new assembly members. Politicians paid £35,000 a year out of our taxes to do a job already done much better by our existing county councillors, and the accompanying bureaucracy this new tier of politicians will inevitable bring.

So regional assemblies would not give power back to the people, would not give people a stronger voice, but would mean the taxpayer financing another bunch of unneeded politicians. In other words an expensive white elephant that would do nothing to help address the real problems and issues facing the North-East, the North-West or Yorkshire and the Humber.

THE EARL PEEL

House of Lords,

Westminster.

Urban majority

Sir, - The House of Commons has passed a Bill which, if approved by the House of Lords, will result in foxhunting being banned in England and Wales, as it is already in Scotland. While this decision is the result of a vote in a democratic country, and reflects the view of the majority of MPs, it does not recognise the position of a very large and significant minority.

Indeed, it is fair to say that the views of the urban majority have decided the issue without regard and consideration for the country people, the majority of whom seem to wish foxhunting to continue in its present form.

Perhaps the House of Lords will recognise their responsibilities to the whole population and either amend or reject the Bill.

Looking ahead even further, this type of situation does not auger well for the proposed regional assemblies where, inevitably, the urban majority will be in danger of overriding the wishes of the countryside people on many other issues.

PAUL HIRST

9 Hird Avenue,

Bedale.

Fuss over nothing?

Sir, - Is "Spectator" literally making a fuss over nothing with regard to the Scotch Corner sign? I ask because I wonder if the Scotch Corner Hotel still exists. Have you tried looking it up in the telephone directory or Yellow Pages?

I think the owners are trying to do away with the old name and are trying to replace it with their own brand name relating to their chain.

Perhaps they are sabotaging the sign themselves to destroy the last vestiges of the traditional name. Send a keen investigative reporter!

PETER BLUNT

The Cottage,

Howden Bridge,

Northallerton.