Letters: Ridings restoration

Harry sets out the position as it is and not how the bureaucrats, media and empire defending politicians encourage us to think it is.

I was not surprised to read David Walsh's comment. No matter how many times you explain the situation, Dave and his colleagues always reply: "We don't want to be part of Tory North Yorkshire." I was, however, most surprised to read June Imeson's negative comments. Is this not the same June Imeson that fought so gallantly to keep Great Ayton out of the now abolished Cleveland County all those years ago? Was it not a fight for Yorkshire after all but a plan to create the best chance of Tory control?

In truth it is nothing to do with local government re-organisation.

Regular changes to local government areas over the past 30 years are what have caused the confusion and loss of identity in the first place. We don't need to change anything to reassert our real identity as part of the North Riding of Yorkshire.

All local people have to do is to use Yorkshire or NR of Yorkshire as part of their postal address. People should stand up and insist that banks and utilities etc. include our real county when writing to customers. They will soon get the message if it means losing custom. The Royal Mail Automated Sorting System is set up to cope with this. Remember, Cleveland County was abolished; the North Riding of Yorkshire was not.

The possible introduction of regional government is most likely to mean that the plastic 1974 counties like North Yorkshire will disappear. This will provide our best chance to reassert our real Yorkshire for all cultural, ceremonial, sporting and postal purposes.

At no extra cost, other than erecting signs and insisting that our real counties appear on maps, alongside regional and local government areas, we can properly restore the Ridings. Forever after local government areas can be chopped and changed whenever necessary without the inevitable heartache and loss of identity.

Coun CHRIS ABBOTT

Essex Close,

Redcar,

Yorkshire.

Tees Valley identity

Sir, - Whilst I respect Harry Mead's views on the desirability of historic counties (D&S, Feb 14), I wish he and his fellow Yorkshire enthusiasts would recognise that not everyone agrees with them, and that there is a substantial body of people in Teesside, Cleveland or the Tees Valley (however you term it) who hold a quite contrary opinion!

It is extremely obvious to all that the settlements in the Stockton, Middlesbrough and at least part of Redcar & Cleveland areas, whilst retaining their own identities, form a distinct and coherent area, entirely different from the areas of Yorkshire and Durham that surround it. The idea that these areas should be split via a redundant historic Yorkshire/ Durham boundary is absurd and somewhat offensive. The imposition of further layers of signage welcoming people (erroneously) to Yorkshire as well as the Tees Valley/Middlesbrough would only add to the confusion Harry Mead claims to exist.

I am sure that many people in this area would welcome attempts to develop a sub-regional identity (eg the Tees Valley) if only to counteract the view that the North-East begins and ends on Tyneside! Further confusion with Yorkshire and Durham will only weaken this.

Lastly, the view that the boundaries of historic counties were somehow entirely sensible and unchanged through time is a fantasy, requiring the wearing of rose-tinted spectacles to take seriously.

T A BOUNDS

Pembroke Drive,

Ingleby Barwick.

Ridings live on

Sir, - I refer to the article by Harry Mead on historic counties and the return of the Yorkshire Ridings (D&S, Feb 14).

I get a little agitated when reading in both national and local newspapers of the demise of our Ridings.

The Ridings have never been abolished, it requires the sovereign's signature to do that.

It is still legal to use the term North/East/West Riding on one's address when writing or completing documents. One can still record one's birth on the certificate as North/East/West Riding, whichever is appropriate.

Anyone who doubts this should contact the Director and Registrar General of the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys (OPCS) at Catherine's House, Kingsway, London WC2B 6JP for confirmation.

G BROOKS

Easby Lane,

Great Ayton.

Pipe dream

Sir, - I was surprised when reading Harry Mead's article (D&S, Feb 14) on "Restoring our glorious shires" to find him taking a swipe at me.

My remarks were made against regional government but I am not certain that was the subject of Harry's article. I do not recall saying "there is no point in returning to the past" as that is not the issue. I would have no objection (other than cost) to reinstating old and beloved boundaries but I think that is just a pipe dream. However, I am pleased to be given the opportunity to state my objections to regionalisation.

Regional government means the abolition of either or both county and district councils with the regions being administered, in our case, from Leeds or Wakefield or Bradford etc.

In the 1971/72 reorganisation Peter Walker MP said he wished to marry Town and Country. On behalf of the people of Great Ayton I sent him a telegram saying that Great Ayton was married to North Yorkshire and had no wish for a divorce! The same applies now. I do not wish our largely rural area to be married to the metropolitan counties and be represented by very few councillors. More remote government or yet another tier?

Thirty years ago the re-organisation was enormous, with many new offices and many new jobs. Ten years ago we were encouraged to seek unitary status which took a lot of time and created much animosity - and in our case to no avail. Regions will take away contact with people and increase public apathy.

Those are the reasons I say leave well alone. Like Harry Mead I am proud to belong in North Yorkshire but every re-organisation is at the expense of Joe Public. Regional government, if implemented, would be unpopular, unwieldy and very, very expensive.

JUNE IMESON

Leader of the Council,

Hambleton District Council,

Northallerton.

Regional folly

Sir, - I attended the meeting in Northallerton which was part of the soundings exercise organised by the existing unelected Yorkshire Assembly to determine the level of interest for an elected regional assembly.

If the current assembly recommends to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister that the people of Yorkshire (ie. West, South, North and Humberside) have shown an interest in holding a referendum, legislation will be put through to allow for the holding of a referendum during the lifetime of this parliament in 2004.

What was not made clear in a report in the D&S, (Dec 14, 2002) was that the Government Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bid does not allow for three tiers of government.

In the case of an assembly in the Yorkshire area, this will have no impact on the existing local government arrangements in West and South Yorkshire and Humberside where unitary authorities are the norm

But for North Yorkshire, the decision to allow a referendum will more than likely lead to the abolition of North Yorkshire County Council. Furthermore, it will then be the people of Yorkshire as a whole who will then vote on this proposal in the following referendum. So the voters of West and South Yorkshire and Humberside will have an influence on what happens in this county. It doesn't need rocket science to calculate we will be outnumbered.

Northallerton would lose its status as the county town to either Leeds or Wakefield and as a consequence, the important issues of farming and rural economy will suffer.

The speakers from the current assembly maintain there was a high level of knowledge amongst the public about the, proposed referendum - I would beg to disagree. We have until February 20 to let the current (unelected) Yorkshire and Humberside Assembly know our feelings - its telephone number is 01924 331580. Let it know how you feel before it is too late.

Coun IAN WOODS

Chairman of Thornton-le-Moor with Thornton-le-Street Parish Council.