Sir, You refer (leading article, April 28) to 18 local authorities which have taken what you call the enlightened step of operating high-tech electoral pilot schemes. Would that such measures alone could boost electoral participation to any great degree.

Whilst we welcome moves to make voting more convenient so long as the security of the vote is not compromised, we are disappointed that pilot schemes are limited to these alternative voting methods. The lessons from last year are that e-voting is more convenient but increases overall turnout by only 1 to 3 per cent.

Real improvement is only likely to come if we can start to address the unwillingness to take part. We must make sure that the electorate knows what is being elected, what it does for them and what each party would do if it wins power. At the moment, ignorance of the work of councils is far too high.

In addition, we need to end the ridiculous situation in which most contests are already decided by the electoral system. Most wards are safe seats for one party or another and an individual vote would not make a difference.

Equally, the overall result in most councils is all too predictable thanks to the first-past-the-post system. The Government should accede to the wishes of a growing number of local authorities and allow pilots of a system of proportional representation to test whether that would have an influence on turnout. Scotland and Wales are moving towards PR for local government and Northern Ireland already has it. It is time England did.

Yours faithfully,
KEN RITCHIE,
Chief Executive,
Electoral Reform Society
6 Chancel Street, SE1 0UU.
April 28.

From Mr Jeremy Lefroy

Sir, In the local government elections on May 1, the Conservatives will contest 83.5 per cent of the seats, Labour around 66 per cent and the Liberals just over 63 per cent (graphic, April 28).

Voters are urged by the Government to vote. Yet two of three major parties (one of which forms the Government) cannot even be bothered to field candidates for one third of the seats. It is difficult to accept either party’s claim to be a party for the whole of the nation when they deprive millions of voters of the chance to vote for them.

They may claim — as your leading article states — that they are being selective and only contesting “winnable” seats. They have no right then to complain if a voter is equally selective and chooses not to vote.

Yours faithfully,
JEREMY LEFROY
(Conservative candidate, Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council),
9 Highway Lane,
Keele, Staffordshire ST5 5AN.
africansproducts@btinternet.com
April 29.

From Mr Simon Chapman

Sir, You report today that a leaflet issued by Liberal Democrats in a ward in Luton states: “The Labour Government’s hands are full of Iraqi people’s blood.”

Does Charles Kennedy condone the use of such inflammatory language by his party’s representatives? If not, he should take immediate steps to dissociate himself from those responsible. Mr Kennedy has in the past been quick to condemn other political leaders whose candidates have, in his view, stepped beyond the boundaries of acceptable political debate. Can we now expect a statement from him condemning this leaflet? Will he allow those concerned to remain members of his party?

Or is it, as usual with the Liberal Democrats, do as we say, not as we do?

Yours faithfully,
SIMON CHAPMAN,
Dormer Cottage,
Stainby, Grantham,
Lincolnshire NG33 5QY.
April 28.

Explore Letters

• Feedback