(Yesterday, 10:51 am)cainebj wrote Surely the point being made there was the 59 in current form is a County Durham route that pops over the boundary into Hartlepool for a short section, but by sending it to Darlington instead it'd become a route largely beneficial to Tees Valley rather than County Durham, starting and finishing in Tees Valley at both ends and only serving a small section of County Durham where other transport links are largely already available, albeit not directly. It reduces the social necessity value of the route for Durham County Council.
If anything, I think extending the 59 to Darlington would be more beneficial from the Durham end of the route, rather than Hartlepool (Durham - Coxhoe - Trimdon - Aycliffe - Darlington) and instead restore the previous 33 service pre autumn 2012, (Ferryhill - Sedgefield - Trimdon - Hartlepool), the Ferryhill to Sedgefield stretch being the current 113.
Durham was the most requested link for those in the Trimdon Village area in a survey done by the previous MP.
It's also worth noting there's plans to introduce a regular rail service between Darlington and Hartlepool (currently only a handful of journeys on Sunday).