THE Electoral Commission will shortly give its verdict on the recent all-out postal ballots in the North West for the local and European election and Mr Reynolds's description (LET, July 10) of them as a "shambles" is to say the least premature.

How much direct experience of the ballot did he have? My experience as a councillor in Bury, campaigning on the doorstep and, on June 10 watching the count, led me to completely different conclusions.

Firstly, the number of people who voted was nearly double that of the previous year, both in Bury as a whole and in my ward. I cam across no evidence of any fraud and, contrary to the gloomy predictions, nearly everyone seemed to have mastered the multi-stage routine for completing and sending off their vote.

That was despite having three votes for local elections in Bury and a fourth vote for the party lists of MEPs.

By way of contrast, the referendum for an elected regional assembly will pose much simpler questions: Either yes or no to the main question and which alternative do you prefer for local government for those areas where that is an issue.

Mr Reynolds says the government is "hell-bent" on having a ballot for the elected regional assembly. Does that mean he would prefer it if the people of the North West didn't get to choose? And do his strictures on all-out postal voting not also apply to the large numbers of postal votes which would be case anyway in a ballot conducted using polling stations?

Does he want to go back to the day when anyone requiring a postal vote had to get a doctor or someone in a similar position to vouch for them and relatively few people actually applied?

The impression I get is that some people would like to reinstate the obstacles in the way of people voting instead of making it easier to vote to demonstrate to people that it is their right and duty to do so.

DEREK BODEN, North West Regional Assembly, c/o Members Services, Bury Town Hall.