Once again it seems we have to fight for our voices to be heard to retain a local fire service that should be a right.
I have been firmly told by the leader of the County Council that he will only listen to "facts" on this issue.
Mr Hesler, the Chief Fire Officer, has given us his version of the facts and we now have percentages, statistics and "attack" times coming at us from all angles.
Facts, as most things in life, are in the eye of the beholder, but there is some clarity in this morass of "consultation".
In answer to J Short (Letters News Post Leader 1/9/05), the County Council, ie YOU, will never pay for the new stations and planned new headquarters for Mr Hesler at East Sleekburn.
Payments are made for the use of the buildings and "facilities management".
This payment is usually set over 25-30 years, and at a higher rate of interest (sometimes two per cent) than could normally be expected under the Council's own prudential borrowing rules, at the end of which the county council may be offered the buildings at the market rate.
The PFI company, whichever is chosen, usually takes over the stations' support staff, caretakers, cleaners etc.
The county council have put in for planning permission for two new stations - at Pegswood and at East Sleekburn - and as I have already said the East Sleekburn site will incorporate a large headquarters building.
Both sites will, according to the planning application run two full time crews and a retained, part-time crew in each station.
I have been unable to confirm if this is a reduction in full time crews – these facts seem hard to get.
That there will be an increase in the time it takes to get to a fire in Blyth Valley is beyond doubt.
The county will of course seek to wrap this up in attendance times that are within national targets.
Mr Hesler has warned county councillors that they should not listen to the "emotional blackmail" of attendance times.
This however begs the question who exactly is the Fire and Rescue service being run for.
The public in Blyth Valley deserve a service in which they can have confidence, a service in which they can rely on as being local to their needs.
In Blyth Valley we have currently plans for 4,500 new homes, we are a growing area.
Denuding Blyth Valley of its two operational stations is vandalism.
Whilst Blyth Valley Council has welcomed any opportunity to take part in any meaningful consultation, we could never see a reduction of Fire and Rescue facilities as being in the best interests of our residents.
The county council have, however, stated lately that there will be no public meetings only the postcards which residents across the breadth of Northumberland have received to have their say on the closures of our two stations in Blyth Valley.
Oh sorry - there will also be selected focus groups, selected I presume by the county council.
In Holywell I have been told we are fortunate, we can be covered from North Shields.
Apart from the question of who pays I make no further comment.
COUN BOB WATSON
Blyth Valley Council



Public pleading to those same councillors

I READ with interest the recent letters from J Short and MS printed in the News Post Leader on September 1, 2005, regarding the proposed changes to the County Fire Service, and also the letter from William Banks regarding the Seghill landfill site.
Whilst being flippant, I had to laugh at their pleas to local and county councillors to listen to the people of Northumberland's objections to these proposals.
Back in May I had a letter printed regarding the "putting the learner first" proposal, in which I stated that if we couldn't trust the local councillors to listen to the people on this issue, why did people think that they would listen to the public on other issues?
Not three months down the line and here we have the public pleading to those same councillors and believing that they will listen to them.
Why do these people think that these councillors will listen now?
Maybe my advice of not voting for these councillors after they ignored the public back in May should have been heeded.
I am sure that some of the people who are now whinging about councillors not listening, and pleading for them to take notice, voted these councillors back in after watching them ignore the people who pleaded for the "putting the learner first" campaign to be scrapped!
DIANE PRINGLE
Address witheld by agreement



We do not want this extension granted

REGARDING the Seghill tip, more than 13 years ago, photographs were shown at the Seaton Delaval Community Centre when the proposal was to extend the site up to 2008.
They showed a grand new entrance, huge bays built to contain the waste.
This would be the new Seghill tip based on one they already controlled and where the photographs had been taken.
Not even a new gate has been fitted.
All gasses etc were to be burned or piped off. This effort lasted a few months before being stopped.
Stinking wagons have passed through the village over the years on their way to the tip.
I can only imagine the contents came from abattoirs or similar establishments. Last year we learned that dead cattle from the recent farming disaster had been deposited on the Seghill tip.
Obviously delivered after closing time or there would have been an instant angry reaction.
"Only a few" was the reply, when questions were asked.
With huge, well sealed wagons now visiting the site and hundreds of carcasses to be buried or burned on special sites all over the country, do they really think we accepted this reply as the truth of the matter?
Unfortunately this offer did not make us vote yes for their number one Regional Assembly, we couldn't be bribed, so our council vote was cancelled.
Incidentally, who will be paying for the moving of pylons, putting them in the field behind the Barrowburn Estate, building a bridge over the railway, the land and cost of the new road and entrance from Backworth Lane? Nice and handy for slipping anything onto the site from the tunnel road.
We have only one course of action that we can take. We all pay council tax for 2005/06.
£99.71 goes to Blyth Valley Council.
£46.69 goes to the police.
£714.67 from every adult male and female goes to Northumberland County Council.
If we all stopped paying this year, the council would realize that we do not want this extension to be granted.
A re-run of the cancelled council vote should also be demanded.
It really had nothing to do with the Regional Assembly.
W WATSON
Blaketown
Seghill



Upset at state of cemetery

I AM writing because I am very upset about the state of Cowpen Cemetery. I have never seen it in such a state.
The part that is at the back nearest the cut from Malvins Close is so bad, the grass is so long, you can hardly walk through it.
You don't know what your walking on and the paths have tree branches over them.
I drive a disabled scooter and have to get off to move the branches and glass so I can get by. Surely it does not cost that much to cut grass and sweep paths.
I also do not think that people who own dogs should let their dogs fowl loved ones graves and not clean it up. It is very upsetting.
Cowpen Cemetery used to be kept looking so nice.
What has happened? Surely Blyth Valley is not that hard up it can't pay to keep it looking nice and tidy.
MRS M WILLIS
Address witheld by agreement