A STORM in a teacup or an important debate on a vital part of the lives of every man, woman and child in Worcestershire?

In our view, the disagreement between MPs Peter Luff and Mike Foster over the naming of the new hospital is certainly not trivial.

The mind of Worcester's MP is turned to poor houses by the word "Infirmary", which is one reason why Mr Foster backs The Royal Worcestershire, the name the county's Acute Hospitals Trust has asked the Home Secretary to put to the Queen.

Mid-Worcestershire MP Mr Luff, however, would like the existing name to remain, the symbol of a proud tradition. Ultimately, however, he wants a public referendum to decide, and he's has called on Home Secretary Jack Straw to consider one before advising the Queen that The Royal Worcestershire should prevail.

Many people will see Mr Luff's point, and naturally so. But the fact is that, as soon as the Strategic Health Review stretched the long-awaited District General's reach across the entire county, the focus on Worcester within its name would go.

The other question is whether a referendum should resolve the issue.

We think not, but not because we disagree with Mr Luff's regard for the hospital's heritage.

A referendum would be costly and time-consuming. Far better, we say, to draw up a shortlist, for argument's sake, of five ideas from invited quarters, then ask the Queen to choose her favourite, free from anyone's steering hand.

Far better, in fact. Why not trust to the Queen's own feel for the enticing relationship between old and new, and ask her to name it herself?

What better way to open than with a vital part of its new provenance in place - a much-needed, fondly-regarded focal point of the community which not only has Royal status, but a direct and lasting link with Her Majesty as well.