Sir, - I was surprised at Spectator's scornful rejection of the Tees Valley concept and disgusted with his snide remarks about Teesside. As I understand it, the impetus for the Tees Valley Partnership came mainly from Darlington when, in 1996, it chose to opt out of dependent status within the county authority of County Durham in exchange for an interdependent association with the four other unitary authorities in South Durham and North Yorkshire, .i.e. the Tees Valley Partnership.

Spectator's piece is a strangely illogical argument. He argues that Darlington has no association with Teesside and yet writes for a newspaper whose very title confirms that there is a relationship. Neither, it would seem, is geography one of Spectator's strong points. He writes that Darlington' s associations are with County Durham and North Yorkshire and not with Teesside. So Teesside is not connected with County Durham and North Yorkshire?

I am a Teessider from south of the river. As far as I am concerned, that makes me just as much Yorkshire as the folks of the gentrified "Middle England" hamlets of Richmondshire and Hambleton with whom Spectator, no doubt, thinks Darlington should be identified , rather than with us common Teessiders.

Altogether it is an unpleasant commentary. Terms like "blighted" and "keeping at arm's length" suggest the underlying thrust of the article is that besetting sin of the English - snobbery.

Nobody is suggesting that the Tees Valley Partnership is a replacement for traditional county loyalties. It is simply a pragmatic recognition of the fact that, economically, the urbanised areas of South Durham and North Yorkshire, on either side of the Tees, have a long-standing community of interest. It is not a county. It is a voluntary relationship of equals, no county hall controlling the purse strings or dictating the agenda.

We are moving towards regional government. The reality of our sub-region is that if we finish up in a North-East region, individually, we are small fry compared to the large Tyne and Wear towns.

The nightmare scenario is that the county loyalists will push for regional boundaries which will result in our area being split between a regional government in Leeds and another in Newcastle. In this case, we will be two unimportant, inconsequential peripheries.

It is essential that we co-operate in promoting our area if we want a viable economic future. In the real modern industrial world, we cannot afford such petty, parish pump prejudices as exhibited by Spectator.

V E WOOD

3 Home Farm Cottages,

Yearby,

Redcar.

Profits on tap

Sir, - The transfer of the ownership of Northumbrian Water was published by you 14 days ago and is the concern of everyone residing in the Northern region.

The reason given by Suez some time ago for wanting to sell NW was because it believed the returns were too low for the capital investment required compared with continental utilities. Another reason given was that the Suez borrowings were so huge, the sale of some of its assets was necessary.

Considering that last year a £92m profit was obtained by Northumbrian Water from a turnover of £400m, to secure anything better would be spectacular. It is difficult to understand why Suez should want to sell the whole or any part of the business and we now see that it has retained 25pc of the shares thus contradicting its original reasons for selling.

MD John Cuthbert's comments are geared to the favourable prospects for institutional investors and likewise chairman Holliday is overjoyed for blue chip investors. Neither gives much attention to the most important section in this business - the 4.3m customers.

Water and sewerage services enjoy the position of a complete monopoly. It is without risk, as it must always operate profitably. Every person living in the region is compelled to pay its charges without an alternative.

Built into the charges is an amount paying off loans on construction work etc which on completion is the firm's and not ours. It has no marketing costs. There are no advertising costs unlike other utilities engaged in strong competition.

With this colossal commercial advantage, it does not take much acumen to identify a gilt edged investment. The crucial question for the future is what constitutes a fair profit?

The director of Ofwat will have to exert a strong will to safeguard the interests of 4.3m customers.

Mr Cuthbert assures us that there will be no impact on the level of service Northumbrian Water Group plc will give. There is undoubtedly a lot of good service but it is to be hoped there will be an improvement in the way the Marske sewerage system was dealt with, where inordinate efforts were required before a commitment for vital work was obtained.

D C McKINNON

56 The Oval,

Hartlepool.