Is first-past-the-post the fairest system?

ONE party in the General Election got 13 per cent of the vote, but fewer than 0.2 per cent of the seats. That party had about four million votes with only one seat, while the SNP had about two million votes for 56 seats. Meanwhile, in many constituencies some people changed their vote from the party they support to another party to stop a third party from winning. Under the present electoral system, the House of Commons is not a true representation of the people’s wishes. If our parliament is truly to observe the wishes of the people, the electoral system needs to change — probably to that of proportional representation. Had PR been in force for this election, UKIP would have 83 seats, not one, but the Conservatives would still be the major party.

MALCOLM BOUCHIER, Louth, Lincs.

Alex SALMOND’s claim that the ‘Scottish lion has roared’ is inaccurate — only half of Scots voted SnP. So only half the Scottish lion has roared and we can make up our own minds as to whether it was the end with the brain or not. But this indicates just how bankrupt the first-past-the-post system is when the SnP can take almost all the Scottish seats with only half the votes. The need to have a system that accurately reflects the percentage of votes cast per party is now urgent.

ANDREW BROWN, Allestree, Derbys. DESPITE calls from members of the electorate who feel disenfranchised at a lack of representation due to our voting system, I believe it’s still the best for our country. A coalition of two had its work cut out to get the job done; imagine how much more difficult it would be if we had four or five parties fighting their corner in a government. It might be far from perfect, but first-past-the-post at least provides strong, stable government.

BRIAN LIVING, West Moors, Dorset.