COUNCILLOR Hall advances an irrefutable argument to prove that the latest Your City circular about the level of council tax is not a referendum (Letters, December 28). He says it isn't. This confirmation is, in a way, rather a pity, since a referendum is clearly what everybody wanted.

On the other hand, by calling it an "opinion poll" the councillor is on much shakier ground, and is in danger of giving opinion polls a bad name. Admittedly, there are back street pollsters ready to produce any result their client may wish, but the most reputable provide significant and unbiased information. Their polls have a purpose.

I cannot imagine what purpose the present exercise is intended to have. I did ring up the budget "hot-line", but it isn't even luke-warm yet. Anyway, why should officers be expected to answer questions about what appears to be a political manoeuvre?

What puzzles me is this: why did a party, dedicated to the idea of proportionality when in opposition, fail to provide an option in this case? Now that they have the opportunity to put their principles into practice, what's holding them back?

Moreover, knowing what people would be satisfied with is much more valuable than knowing what they really, really want.

I recall that dear old Robin Cook was also an enthusiast for electoral reform in the days when grim-faced journalists asked: "Is Labour electable?" Once in government, Robin suddenly saw the virtue of "first past the post".

Liberal, Labour, Conservative: can you tell the difference?

William Dixon Smith,

Welland Rise, Acomb, York.

Updated: 10:11 Monday, January 03, 2005