THERE were obvious flaws in the system of postal voting used for the Euro and local government elections in June.

The ballots papers were confusing and the process of actually putting completed papers in envelopes was an unnecessary rigmarole.

It was perhaps inevitable that the introduction of postal voting on such a scale would encounter difficulties. However, none of the problems seem insurmountable and it is too early to abandon the experiment.

The potential for fraud remains the major concern, and it is to be hope that improved security measures can be adopted.

The principal asset of postal voting is that it improved participation in the electoral process.

Where postal voting took place, the turn-out at the Euro elections was double what it had been previously.

At a time when concerns are growing about how politics and politicians are becoming detached from ordinary people, it is important to take measures to re-engage the public.

We fail to see any substantive reason to object to a postal ballot being used in the referendum on whether or not to create a regional assembly for the North-East.

The referendum, after all, is attempting to gauge public opinion rather than elect individuals to high office.

Indeed it is vital that, on an issue of such great importance to our region, no effort is spared in getting the views of as many people as possible.

Surely, there are benefits in a system of voting which discourages apathy?