REGARDING the"Greater Manchester Strategy."

Why on earth is Bolton involved in continuing to prop up this 1970s aberration? Virtually all of the strategy's aims duplicate those of the regional assembly. The added mancuniocentric twist does nothing for Bolton.

It is not at all clear why Manchester should be more significant for Boltonians than it is for the residents of, say, Warrington or Wilmslow, as travel-to-work data will testify. The term "Greater Manchester" is offensive and misleading, as the North-west, unlike the South-east, have never been dominated by one city. It is also economic nonsense. Why effectively advertise ourselves as peripheral and second-class?

Manchester has for too long got away with having the region viewed in the context of that city, and has fought hard against doing things the other way round. Would that Bolton were as proactive. Now that we have the chance to restore some balance, we ought not to throw it away. We ought to talk, as we used to, of the South Lancashire conurbation -- Liverpool is hardly further away than Manchester Airport. Remember that Bolton would have had neither the Market Place nor Shipgates, nor a pedestrianised Deansgate if the Manchester-inspired GMC had had its way in the 1980s.

By all means let Bolton take its place in the wider context of the true region -- as it always used to. The last thing we need is a "sub-region" that actually militates against Bolton's interests.

Mr Andrew Bowyer

Fallowfield Way

Atherton