I thought of offering a prize to anyone who could pinpoint the sites in these photgraphs - but that could be a bit unfair because they aren’t local.

In fact I took the pictures on holiday whilst strolling between the place where I was staying and my daughter’s home. So where do you think she lives?

The chances are that you’ve placed the pictures in a run down industrial city or area of deprivation.

It’s most unlikely that you’ve placed them in one of the country’s tourist attractions - the historic city of Canterbury in Kent.

Nor did I have to go looking for this graffiti - it was everywhere.

I have to admit I was shocked - and grateful that here in Derwentside we have an active team whose job it is to remove the scourge of graffiti. The key is to act quickly - to remove the stuff as quickly as possible. If it’s left it will simply multiply.

That’s why it’s down to each of us to report what we see. Between the local community, the police and our anti-graffiti team we can maintain our pride in our area. 

We may not be a tourist attraction, and we may not have a mediaeval cathedral in our town, but I was proud to be from Consett as I walked through Canterbury this summer.

There’s an 11 mile circular walk around Consett on Saturday September 6th, led by volunteer countyside warden, Steve Shippen.

Start time is 10 a.m. at Ebchester Station on the Derwent Walk.

Don’t forget to bring your own packed lunch!

The coming of a single unitary council is going to make local forums and partnerships more important than ever. Whether we like it or not, they’re going to be critical in putting the case for our locality alongside your local councillors.

That being the case, it’s important that as many ordinary people as possible get involved. Don’t leave it to someone else or you’ll risk self-appointed cliques getting more influence than you’d like - get involved and play your part.

The Wider Stakeholder Forum describes itself as “a consultative/scrutiny group, membership of which is open to any organisation voluntary, community, public or private, who delivers services or operates within Derwentside or any member of the community who is a service user.”

The next meeting of the Wider Stakeholder Forum will be held on 9th October, starting at 4.00p.m. in Consett.

If you are interested in taking part it is very important that you contact Janie Pollard on 01207 218 271, giving your name, contact details, telephone number and an e-mail address (if you have one), so that details can be forwarded to you nearer the date.

It’s no good leaving it till the last minute. If you do, you’ll miss the boat.

I don’t know about you, but in all the spy stories I read as a kid, when the spy got the blueprint he could do anything; build the submarine, assemble the nuclear bomb, whatever. The blue print was a detailed document.

Not so the new county council’s blueprint which is to be discussed by the cabinet on September 11th. If the “taster” provided to the scrutiny overview committee is anything to go by it its just a rather vague recipe for “motherhood and apple pie”.

It was given a pretty effective panning by members of all political persuasions, frustrated that four months into the new council all we’re getting is buzz words and platitudes when what we really want to know is how we’re going to ensure that service standards don’t plummet across the county in April 2009. 

Of course, we’d prefer services to improve, but since it will take a miracle to maintain them in the first instance in the absence of any clear cut plans, improvements may have to wait!

I was delighted to be at a recent Bridgehill Residents Association and hear the most upbeat report I have recently heard in many a year about possible developments at Shotley Bridge Community Hospital.

There wasn’t much specific to report yet, but I sensed something of a change of mood which chimed in with some of the conversations I have had with medical professionals and administrators.

Being realistic we are not going to get back the General Hospital we had, but there seems to be an increasing recognition that there is a valuable resource in Shotley Bridge, capable of delivering more services that it curently does.

It’s to the credit to our district council that it has put money up to support the day surgery unit when it was most threatened, and has provided some budget to support ongoing promotion of the hospital and exploration of new opportunities. It has also set up the “Supporting Shotley Bridge Hospital” group to feed into the “STAKEHOLDER STEERING GROUP”.

This is a really important group which meets with senior executives from the NHS Trusts, representatives from both district and county councils, and hospital staff at all levels as well as local GPs. The more strength the group has, the greater its voice, so I urge anyone interested to join. The easiest way for internet savvy readers of this website to do it is by emailing k.earley@derwentside.gov.uk

You can also just turn up to the next meeting which is ay 6.00 p.m. on September 10th in the restauraunt of Shotley Bridge Hospital restaurant. It will be addressed br Dr John Levick, a local GP who is also chair of the Derwentside Primary Care Group. It should be well worth going to.

Sadly for me, councillors are excluded for the moment.

The title of Item four of the next cabinet meeting at the County Council is a bit ironic - “Business as usual - Consett Sport Project - Report of County Treasurer”.

The only this that is “as usual” about this is delay.

It’s more than five years since this project was supposed to be set in motion, but a lack of openness about the finances, and clinging to a pipe-dream of an all singing, all dancing Sports Village long after it was clear that the finance wasn’t there, has resulted in the project being put at the mercy of the County Council Cabinet.

You might think that with four Derwentside-based councillors in that cabinet Consett’s interests would be well looked after. You’d be wrong. Instead, old rivalries between the district and county council threaten the new facility.

The notes for this section of the cabinet meeting read: “Purpose of report - the report seeks approval to appoint consultants to examine proposals by Derwentside District Council to design and build a sports facility.”

That sound ominously like civil-service-speak for kicking it into the long grass. 

Make up your own mind by clicking this link: http://www.durham.gov.uk/durhamcc/etech/DCCMinutes.nsf/6fe09dd7d993002780256aef003c01ab/f2ffabd7442a1fc6802574aa004ee04d?OpenDocument 

Today there was a meeting of the county Planning Committee. No decisions affected Derwentside directly, so I found myself in a position I will become increasingly familiar with - making decisions about areas I am unfamiliar with which will affect people I will never meet.

One decision was particularly difficult. A proposal to use a former landfill site for composting of green waste was before the committee, and a site visit had been ordered.

On the one hand there is clearly a need for such composting on environmental grounds. On the other, there was a clearly inadequate and potentially dangerous access, and some wider questions about the suitability of the site.

The best thing about the process was that there was real debate. Local people put their case with passion, and it was clear that councillors were carefully weighing up the arguments before reaching their decision.

In the event I cast my vote for what proved to be the majority view. But if the decision had gone the other way I would still have been satisfied with the process.

I’m sorry if I’ve bored you by writing about something that has nothing to do with my role as your councillor. I just thought it was good to record the fact that there are good days at the office!

I’ll save venting my frustration for the next meeting.

The last chance for is fast approaching you to register to attend the consultation event on how local needs should be served in the unitary authority.

Action Area Partnerships (AAPs if you’re into jargon) are the Big Idea built into the original proposal to create a unitary council. They will be tasked with delivering the promise made by the county of “Greater choice and voice over services through more locally-focused and action-oriented ‘area action partnerships’, as successors to existing district-based local strategic partnerships.

Your chance to find out more and have your say in Consett is on April 29th at St Patrick’s Church Hall, starting at 6.00 p.m.

You can’t just turn up, though. Spaces are limited and to book your place you need to ring Janie Pollard on 01207 218271.  Alternatively email j.pollard@derwentside.gov.uk

Before you turn up you may want to do your homework by consulting http://county.durham.gov.uk/sites/lgraks/Attachments/consult%20document.pdf to put yourself in the picture - or not.

Yesterday’s piece about the proposed swimming pool has produced a response from Justin from Aquatic Design Group, a firm in America as follows:

“Mr. Temple,

Our firm specializes in the design of aquatic facilities around the world and have designed many similar pools to the one (or two depending on the chosen option) you are considering. The general rule of thumb is the bigger the better…as long as you can support the increased costs that come from the increased water space such as chemical costs, electricity, and other utilities- not to mention the initial capital costs that it takes to build the pool. If I can be of any additional assistance please let me know. Best of luck with your project!”

I’ve responded and will be really interested to find out if Justin can help me track down some sound information on and workable examples of similar projects.

It’s good to know this website reaches parts that others cannot reach. We seem to be generating more enthusiasm from across the pond than from County Hall.

Mind you, great though it looks, I don’t think the design of of some of their local projects will quite suit the Consett climate!

For a bigger picture, click the picture or visit http://www.aquaticdesigngroup.com/portfolio.html 

I’ve had a number of approaches from people regarding the proposed new swimming pool which will be a 25 metre pool and therefore smaller than the current pool. There is also to be a 12 metre learner pool.

According to the presentation to the council, opinion is split down the middle. General users of the pool have called for the retention of a 33 metre pool, but the Amateur Swimming Club have called for a 25 metre pool because “any other size disadvantages swimmers when training for competitions.”

Then you add funding into the mix. Apparently Sport England are prepared to contribute towards a 25 metre pool, but not towards a 33 metre pool. A 33 metre pool by definition costs more so this is an obvious “double whammy”.

Now the User Group have suggested a “compromise arrangement” where there is an 8 lane, 25 metre pool with the 12 metre learner pool attached at one end. The pools would need to be divided by some kind of moveable boom which could be withdrawn at certain times to allow swimmers a longer and bigger pool to swim in. This would allow the 25 metre training facility that the swimming club desire, whilst also enabling a bigger pool to be provided for general swimming at certain times.

If it’s possible, the attraction is obvious. What I’m particularly interested to find out is whether such a facility exists anywhere else and, if it does, what the cost implications are.

As always, I’d be interested in your views and, more especially, any expertise you have in this area.

The long running saga of Glenroyd House and its planning application takes another step as the Development Control Committee’s (DCC) decision to reject its last application has been taken to appeal.

To date:

August 2007 the DCC declined an application to change the whole site to offices, hosted by Derwentside CVS, on the grounds that the only vehicular access, Larch Street, (a very narrow road that runs between Glenroyd House and the terrace of Medomsley Road) was inadequate and dangerous.

Nov 2008: Appeal lodged against the planning refusal.

Jan 2008: Appeal withdrawn and new planning application submitted with car parking at the front and shared access with Rosemount home for the elderly through an enlarged opening at the front.

Application accepted subject to limits on working hours and provision of plans for car-parking.

June 2008: Third Application submitted seeking to vary the terms of the planning approval as Rosemount had declined to share access with CVS/Glenroyd. The application involved creating a completely new access alongside the Rosemount entrance.

Application rejected by DCC on grounds of pedestrian and traffic safety.

Ag 2008: Appeal

Those who wish to make representations would be well advised first to consult the file at Derwentside Civic Centre any day Monday to Friday between 8.30 a.m. and 4.45 p.m.

They should then make their submission by September 9th (sending three copies) to

The Planning Inspectorate, Temple Quay House, 3/19a Eagle Wing, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol BS1 6PN

You must quote ref: APP/V/1315/A/08/2080021/NWF

I looked for it on the planning appeal portal but couldn’t find it, so I guess it will have to be a pen and ink job.

Regular hikers will be familiar with this picture. It shows the right of way going straight ahead. There’s just one problem. Alongside it is the “Bull in field” sign. In other words, there’s a theoretical right of way which is very different from the reality on the ground.

That’s exactly how I felt when I got back from my brief break to my council emails. The Monitoring Officer confirmed to me that, in her opinion, the constitution had not been subverted by the decision that Member Area Panels (MAPs) would not meet.

The constitution may say that that MAPs exist. The bull in the field (aka Labour’s built-in majority) proves otherwise.

And I feel just as protected by the rule book as I did in North Yorkshire.

There’s only one answer in the long run. We’ll have to get rid of the bull.

Just when I’d got the old “Non Urgent” police number stored in my head it’s been changed by one digit.

The 60(seconds)60(minutes)365(days per year) bit has stayed the same. It’s the 0345 bit that’s new. It remains a lo-cost local call rate.

I hope you don’t need the number, but if you do it helps to get it right first time.

Derwentside doesn’t have much longer to exist, but it seems a real pity if it goes down without ever having had a question asked to a member of the executive and answered under this heading: http://www.derwentside.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=4570

Idly looking at the page I thought I’d go to Councillors FAQs - only to find it completely blank.

I just can’t imagine that there’s no-one in Derwentside who wants to know how the decision was made as to who got offered “brown-lidded” garden waste bins, and who didn’t. I can’t believe that no-one is interested in how many people have been fined for dog-fouling or fly-tipping. I can’t believe that no-one has wanted to know why Belle Vue Swim Centre needs to be replaced.

The reason why I can’t believe it is because I’ve heard all these questions asked myself!

So rather than let Derwentside go down with its executive thinking that no-one is interested in what it is, and has been, doing, why not ask the question you’ve always wanted to?

I never used to miss “Have I Got News for you?” - until I became a councillor and stopped having time for TV.

There was always a “Guest Publication” from which they had selected an unlikely headline. My chosen publication this week is Pharmaceuticals Online.

And the headline?

UK Biotech Company Launches New High-Efficiency Disposable Chromatography Column Technology

If you’re wondering about the point of this, it turns out that the headline concerns a local Consett firm which is trialling new high tech products which it has developed here in the town. In my book that’s fantastic. I don’t pretend to understand the precise nature of what they’re doing but I’m delighted to celebrate local success. If you want to know more just log on to http://www.pharmaceuticalonline.com/article.mvc/Disposable-Chromatography-Column-Technology-0001?atc~c=771+s=773+r=001+l=a

Trading Standards have issued reports of a couple of scams, both involving cold callers and difficulties which arose. In their response they added one or two things I didn’t know - so possibly you don’t either - and which may be useful to you or older friends and relatives:

Do not let anyone in you don’t recognise. Do not employ Cold Callers.

Remember anyone over 60 in County Durham or Darlington can get a free door chain from Help the Aged.   Contact Help the Aged HandyVan on 01255 473999.

Also, please remember to tell older/vulnerable adults about our Registered Trader Scheme.  We can send them a full list of Traders on our scheme or specific trader types (ie builders, plumbers) in specific areas if they wish. Simply ring 0191 - 3833589 or contact www.countydurhamrts.org.uk www.countydurhamrts.org.uk

OK, so you probably guessed right that the Labour Group would not suspend normal party politics and so allow my motion for meetings of the Member Area Panels (see below) to be called. I think the vote was something like 65 - 35.

Sure, the constitution goes by the board. Sure, many members voted “against” even though they probably actually favoured the motion for local councillors to have some say in local issues. But no doubt they’re proud to display that “they” have more votes than “us”. It’s just a pity to have good aguments ignored because they come from the “wrong side”.

Just in case you’re not sure what the MAPs were meant to do, here’s their role as defined in the constitution:

• to deliberate issues of a local nature and promote members’ participation and involvement in local community activity;

• to feed back to Cabinet issues of local concern;

• to facilitate partnership working at the local level with other public and voluntary agencies and to provide a political input by local County Councillors into Local Strategic Partnerships on the basis of County Council policy, planning and strategy;

• to maintain an overview of Community Development in the District area and in particular to advise on priorities and provide County Councillor support into local community regeneration partnerships;

• to inform the expenditure of budgets delegated to chief officers for area-based initiatives.

So if you can see that those things aren’t happening in your area, you know who to blame. All the guilty parties will be named in the Council Minute Book. 

The most absurd thing, however, was to watch the Conservatives. I’m beginning to wonder what motivates them since they seem to have abstained on almost every issue raised at council. Fortunately no-one in Derwentside has to worry since none were elected here, but if I had voted for them I’d be worrying about exactly what I was getting for my money. I may be doing them an injustice, of course. Perhaps they really didn’t know whether they supported the constitutional right to local democracy!

I won’t let it rest here. In my book you can only ignore the constitution in a dictatorship - and the people of County Durham won’t stand for that.

You may spot the literary illusion - OK, I used to be an English teacher - but the title of Graham Greene’s book is a fitting description for the current Durham County Council.

For years the Member Area Panels (MAPs for short) have met to give the chance for county councillors from each district to meet together, discuss issues, allocate resources and plan within their districts. It’s been an essential part of keeping the “local” in local government, so important that it’s enshrined in the constitution of the county council.

Since the last county election, however, none of the MAPs have met. There’s been no official announcement, no change to the constitution, just a deafening silence.

That’s why I’m moving a motion at the county council meeting tomorrow for the MAPs to be re-convened. And I’ve taken the unusual step of writing to every county councillor in Derwentside to ask them to support the motion because there are things we need to be doing, important issues to decide, and not the least important of those is the issue of Consett Sports Centre. Wouldn’t it be a good idea for the Derwentside MAP to meet and hammer out any differences we may have in the interests of ensuring decent sports facilities for Consett?

There are other things to decide, too. Road repairs and the programme for the next financial year could be discussed. Car Parking policy will need to be sorted out by the new authority because it’s too late now for the District Council to face up to it, and the sooner we start talking realistically about that future, the better the chance that we get some action before the town centres in Consett and Stanley are finally strangled to death.

That’s why I hope that every councillor in Derwentside will back the re-formation of the member area panels. And by tomorrow night I’ll know if I’m just a born optimist, or whether most councillors are actually in it to achieve the best for their area just as I am.

My recent stories about the danger to trees in Consett have aroused considerable interest, and at least four letters to the council. 

One Focus reader has provided me with some interesting historical information which I reproduce here with acknowledgements to the late lamented Consett Guardian (we didn’t realise how good it was till we lost it!).

The story starts in March 1980 with Primrose Patrol of the 1st Consett Guides who won two silver birches and planted them - you’ve guessed it - opposite Consett Parish Church:

The Consett Guardian takes up the story:

Unfortunately, the best efforts of the girl guides were to be thwarted by Derwentside District Council. Only months later, in August 1980, the guides were rocked by the Guardian’s “Tree chop shock” headline and the following story:

Eagle-eyed readers can supply confirmation of exactly where that site was from ”All’s well that ends well” story when Derwentside made good its gaffe.

Let’s hope that this time there is no chance of a repeat performance by the council. The responses to date should mean that there is no risk of the council again failing to consult people with an interest in the land.

I’ve been contacted by a resident asking my views on the name for the new county.

My response was that on a personal level (rather than any party agreement that we may reach in the future) I prefer County Durham Council because I’d prefer that the new authority doesn’t start with the old name tag.

There’s a real risk of the new council mistakenly thinking it’s “business as usual” – which it isn’t.

The resident then sent back this very interesting response: “Well, its a really interesting argument if you are sad like me. I agree with you actually. All the other councils going through reorganisation have followed the same pattern - the name of the county followed by the word “Council”. So we have Northumberland Council, Wiltshire Council, Shropshire Council and Cornwall Council. Following the same pattern, that would make us County Durham Council.

We are the only county in Egland that use the prefix “County” and I am proud of that so that would rule out one of the choices in the consultation which is Durham Council.

Some of the original county council (Members and Officers) want to keep Durham County Council. They have been putting misinformation about that it would save £2 million if nothing changed. This figure comes from their original bid and like most of the financials in the bid, it is just made up.

Besides, even if they kep the same name, everything arising from the previous district councils will need to be re-branded anyway.

The “old guard” argue that re-branding all county council things would cost a fortune. They cite the 600 buildings that they own. However, nearly 400 of these are schools which are not branded as Durham County Council anyway.

They also argue that Durham County Council is a historical name that we should preserve. Well, it might be, but two things stand out. 1) the new authority will not be a county council and 2) Durham County Council is hardly historical at all. The current boundaries only go back to 1997 when Darlington formed a unitary council. Before 1974, the county council also included Stockton, Hartlepool, Sunderland and Gateshead.

I suppose that, in medieval times, Durham also included large parts of Northumberland too.  So which historical county or county council are they referring to?

The worrying thing is that the misinformation that they are putting out is having an effect on the public, and the larger percentage so far have voted for Durham County Council. However, I suspect that, like you, the new Leader and Chief Executive want to start with a clean sheet and will go for a re-branding anyway.

Please feel free to add your comments.

Last month this blog was heading for a record number of hits - and then the servers went down so I’ll never find out whether it would have made the 6,000 mark.

I got a couple of contacts, however, that made me think, and which led to my three targets.

One was a comment saying that one reason why people wouldn’t make contact was a fear of having political capital made at their expense. That’s a very reasonable comment - a website/blog like this is very one-sided because I control what goes on it and people who comment are therefore at my mercy/discretion. At the same time, however, I’m sure that readers recognise that this is not a forum but a website designed to promote what I and my party are doing, inform people about things which they might otherwise never hear about, and provide some space for debate and contact.

Target One: To achieve a position where people are confident that if they respond with a comment they’ll get a fair hearing/say.

Other contacts I got were were in the nature of “tip-offs” letting me know stuff that I might otherwise not hear, but which it could be useful for the people of Consett if I knew. Obviously people may feel that these need to be anonymous (though I’m bound to treat more cautiously an anonymous contact than a named one where I can check out details) but anyone who choses to contact me using their own name and marks it “confidential” can be sure that I will not disclose anything without their agreement.

Target 2. To achieve a position where people think it’s worth letting me know things they hear that could affect the well-being of where we live, and trust me to keep confidential anything that they tell me in confidence (where it’s legal to do so!).

And the third target? That’s easy

Target 3. 6,000 hits in August