Even though I have never voted for Gordon Brown or the Labour Party, I feel this is absolutely the wrong time to hold a General Election election ("Brown braced in wake of Euro poll", The Herald, June 8). There are several problems which need to be fixed first.

Even though I have never voted for Gordon Brown or the Labour Party, I feel this is absolutely the wrong time to hold a General Election election ("Brown braced in wake of Euro poll", The Herald, June 8). There are several problems which need to be fixed first.

MPs' expenses. We need to know the full extent of the expenses claimed. The full list of every MP's expenses is to be placed on the web and individual constituents will need time to asses the expenses claimed by their MP. Only after that can they make valid decisions. Decisions will have to be made about how future misuse of the system can be prevented. If that cannot be agreed before an election, it could possibly be incorporated into the party manifestos.

Voting arrangements. The present first-past-the-post system is grossly unfair since large majorities can be produced on a minority of votes, as happened with the Conservatives under Margaret Thatcher and Labour under Tony Blair. This leaves the majority of voters disenfranchised. Pure proportional representation is also unsatisfactory since the voters can only vote for the party and not individuals. Also, there is a loss of local accountability. A better solution would be to adopt the system used for the Scottish Parliament. There will have to be a decision about how English needs are catered for. At present, the Commons looks after English needs but also UK national needs. These two purposes should be separated.

England could have a single separate chamber or, since the needs of the different regions are so varied, there could be regional parliaments. The choice would be up to the English, and, again, if there is no agreement this could for part of the party manifestos. There should be a separate body looking after purely UK interests. This could be smaller but whether this would require separate elections or representatives from the national and regional assemblies is something which the parties might put to the electorate.

The House of Lords should be totally elected. This would avoid any issues about cash for peerages or amendments. Such a model would provide a more robust check on legislation coming from the lower house.

Should there be a separate election for the Prime Minister, who would then be able to select ministers from all parties? Individual MPs would have far more power to scrutinise legislation, possibly doing away with the need for party whips. In the case of a Prime Minister losing the confidence of the country, there could be an election purely for the PM. National elections would be for set periods, possibly every four years, with the Lords chamber being elected every two years.

The present parliament has enough to do to fill the time to the next, planned election.

Dr Evan L Lloyd, Edinburgh.

William Hague for the Tories and a series of Labour politicians have attempted to pin the blame for the BNP's and UKIP's increased representation on the proportional voting system for European elections. This is arrant nonsense.

The traditional UK parties are reaping the whirlwind of an outmoded first-past-the-post system at Westminster, together with an unreformed Commons and Lords that has allowed them to operate until now in a world of their own. None of the UK parties commands a majority yet each still operates with pomp and circumstance in the flummery of Westminster. That serves only to alienate voters; hence protest votes for the parties of despair.

Part of the reason for the contrast with Scotland is, indeed, our proportional voting system and modernised way of operating at Holyrood, leading to less of a sense of alienation.

This should serve as a clarion call for further voting reform at Westminster. It is a new form of politics, making new connection with the people, that will kill off the BNP, not a harking back to the UK system of voting that has helped bring about the problem.

Dr Douglas Chalmers, Renfrew.

It is good that leading figures in the major parties have been quick to express the horror that many of us felt at the thought that two members of an avowedly racist party had been elected as British Euro MPs. David Dimbleby's persistent questioning of Nick Griffin, the BNP leader, revealed, as if we did not already know, the real policies behind the aura of "sweet reasonableness" which formed the early part of his interview.

For some of us, one of the most offensive claims in that interview was that the BNP represented "Christian values". Institutional racism has not been eradicated from our society, "anti-terrorist" action comes sometimes uncomfortably close to Islamophobia, and the treatment of refugees and asylum-seekers all too often seems to take its direction from xenophobic headlines. The success of the BNP in parts of the north of England should act as a wake-up call to us all, politicians and public alike, to work harder for a tolerant and compassionate society which values the contribution members of all ethnic and faith communities can make. These are values that stand in direct opposition to those of the BNP.

Rev Dr Iain Whyte, North Queensferry, Fife.

The Prime Minister has continued his strategy of allying with the Blairite right against the left wing of the Labour Party, no matter how many times his allies stab him in the back. He would be wiser to ally with the left, which would back him on the 50p tax rate on earned income over £150,000 a year. Blairites such as Stephen Byers have attacked this tax on the grounds that it breaks a manifesto commitment.

By contrast, increasing taxes on the lowest earners and sending troops to kill and be killed in an unnecessary war have both had the support of most Blairites, Brownites and Conservatives. If Brown also reintroduced and extended the 10p tax rate for low earners, he could be seen doing something right and popular.

The current jockeying for position inside the Labour Party also shows that shoddy deals done among politicians are as much a feature of politics in a first-past-the-post electoral system as under proportional representation. The only difference is that they are within parties instead of between them.

Duncan McFarlane, Braidwood, Carluke.