IN the "good old days", in the post-war era of the late 1940s and early 1950s, we had a traditional Labour Party led by Clement Attlee, which followed the principles of Methodism and Marxism from which the party had originated.

How different is the present regime headed by Blair, Prescott, Straw etc., a party which was supposed to replace the Conservatives with "straight and honest government" yet which is totally misleading most people, including myself.

The traditional Labour mantra was that alcoholism and gambling were evil habits to be avoided, as it was recognised that an excess of either resulted in increased street violence, public disorder and serious debt problems in family households.

We now have Tony Blair misrepresented as leading an updated Labour party, but one invented by him to adopt policies more right-wing and as different as chalk and cheese from real Labour. New Labour, by allowing all-day opening of public houses, and more casinos and betting outlets to be opened, will make public disorder more widespread and family disputes over money more prevalent; they have also encouraged relationships outside of marriage by disadvantaging couples who marry.

On a local level, it concerns me that MPs and councillors can be either New or traditional Labour and, because of the many differences between these labels, it is vital that electors are informed which they are.

Incidentally, is Mr Holden, my fellow Bury Times correspondent, New Labour or traditional Labour? He cannot be both. For his information, I am anti-New Labour.

DEREK RYDER,

Ainsworth Road,

Bury.