[Acrylic-bob]

First things first. No one can or should tell you who to vote for. Where you place your vote is a matter for you and your conscience.

Having said that, I agree that it is a difficult decision to make and one that is not made any easier by the adversarial nature of British politics. There are times when the level of political debate barely rises above "Oh yes you did - Oh no I didn't" level of a Christmas pantomime.

A sensible person, with an unlimited amount of free time, would sit down and carefully read through the acres of newsprint that has been and will be devoted to the subject. Opinions and arguments will be carefully wheighed and examined and a conclusion will hopefully be reached before polling day. Sadly, as a member of the wage earning classes, time for the contemplation of the intricacies of political debate is, at best, limited. Given this lamentable state of affairs, perhaps I might suggest a different strategy to adopt as as a solution to the problem.

Some of you may have heard me expound this theory before, but I think it bears repeating and it may be of assistance.

We know from often bitter personal experience that the main parties seldom if ever honour the commitments made in their election manifesto's, or if they do it is seldom in a way that is easily recogniseable and when they fail it is often hard to pinpoint exactly why and even harder to apportion criticism or blame since the target is so diffuse.

Perhaps it might be better to approach the issue from the opposite direction. Choose who to vote for not on national policies, which are vague and amorphous and can be easily manipulated after the event by unscrupulous party machines, but on purely local issues. After all, since you are asked to choose a person to represent the views of the borough in paliament, party politics should be a secondary consideration.

Imagine yourself to be the Director of a company called Hyndburn Plc and you are interviewing candidates for a sales job. The job pays £170,000 p.a. (including expenses, benefits etc.) and is to run for five years.

Naturally, as an astute businessman, you will want to know exactly what credentials and experience the candidates have to offer and how they intend to promote the interests of your company, year on year. You will probably also want to insist on performance targets too!

So here are your two main candidates:

Greg Pope (Lab) Has done the job before. By his own admission he cannot understand a train timetable and has shown a not altogether healthy interest in the individual rights of goldfish. Incidentally, he has voted against the government on only 30 out of over 800 occaisions.

James Mawdsley (Con) Has spent fourteen months in solitary confinement in a Burmese prison. Decided to chuck his degree in favour of travel (It broadens the mind) and appears more concerned with the inequities of Burmese and North Korean politics than anything else.

Which of these is going to give Hyndburn Plc the leg-up it so desperately needs? The choice is yours.