Electoral reform

Under true PR, a seat in our 646-member Westminster Parliament could be secured with less than 0.25 per cent of the total vote. Winning one of our 72 (previously 78) European Parliament seats should require just under 1.5 per cent.

Yet the effective threshold for taking any seats is set much higher than this by adjusting for proportionality at a regional rather than a national level. The proposed system for Westminster elections (Alternative Vote Plus) deliberately rigs it to more than ten per cent.

This manipulation is intended to give proportionality among the established parties while keeping smaller, new parties out.

But we have seen, over the expenses affair, how the main parties can collude against the public. We need a system that gives new parties a fair chance to come through.

The excuse for blocking this is the scaremongering suggestion that any win for a party like the BNP would be catastrophic. But having some BNP MEPs would not be a sign that the threshold was set too low. It should be set lower still. This would allow in newer and smaller parties to compete against the BNP.

John Riseley, Harrogate, North Yorkshire.

OUR political system needs a root and branch reform. It needs more than a General Election and new people in charge of an outdated system.

An electoral system that has allowed the Labour Party to govern on just 36 per cent of the vote can only be justified by the most extreme party hack and lover of the two main parties.

Parliament must also take collective responsibility for the allowances scandal, but I cannot help feeling that certain MPs are being unfairly scapegoated.

I was horrified to hear that Phil Willis, the Liberal Democrat MP for Harrogate, had received abuse and threats. Although not a constituent, I have corresponded with him about the subject of special education – a subject that he, as a former special school headmaster, does have expert knowledge about. He is by no means a rotten apple.

Peter J Brown, Middlesbrough.