Second, Letts's view is closer to the 13th-century model of Parliament and ignores the fact that as well as scrutinising the executive, MPs also represent their constituents' interests and support their party's programme.
The government's proposals to end the royal prerogative for signing treaties and declaring war and our publication of the draft legislative programme will prove to be far more substantial reforms than his suggestion that we move the furniture around in the Commons.
Helen Goodman
Deputy Leader of the House of Commons
The scope of the parliamentary 'shake-up' suggested by Quentin Letts is too timid and conservative. For a start, it is surely a ludicrous anachronism that an incoming Prime Minister obtains his authority at Buckingham Palace. If this is truly a parliamentary democracy, he or she, together with the new government and its programme, should only take office once they have been explicitly supported by a majority vote of MPs.
Similarly, while senior members of the executive remain members of the legislature as well, they should be accountable to the Commons. Newly nominated secretaries of state ought to be subjected to interrogation by the appropriate departmental select committees.
But it is the dwindling legitimacy of both Houses of Parliament which is at the root of public alienation. At long last, there is a real prospect that the Lords may be replaced by a senate which has some claim to a public mandate. The Commons, though, has become increasingly unrepresentative.
The electoral system, which served the two-party split of 50 years ago, cheats the modern voter of real choice in the very different circumstances of the 21st century.
Paul Tyler
Callington, Cornwall
Quentin Letts should go much further. The whole system of party whips is a contempt of Parliament. The rules of the House of Commons are matters for the House itself through its committee on privileges and procedure, and are not matters to be imposed or controlled by government.
If you or I were to promise a reward to an MP to vote as we wanted, or to impose sanctions if they did not do so, we would be up before the committee in a flash. Yet whips are free to twist MPs' arms by threatening to withhold promotion or to tempt them with places on attractive-sounding trips abroad to investigate this or that.
Where are the bold MPs who will campaign for an end to this practice?
Harvey R Cole
Winchester, Hampshire
Quentin Letts's suggestions don't go nearly far enough. Look at any other comparable 'democracy' (I use the term advisedly in the case of Britain's) and you'll mostly see a hi-tech set-up with each MP having his or her computer screen, with electronic voting, all presenting a much more up-to-date attitude than Britain manages with its ancient version.
The Commons should be turned into a museum, with Speaker Martin forming one of the first exhibits. Later, the 'Jeremy Bentham' treatment could be applied to form a fitting shrine to the 10 years of New Labour. The place? Demolish the dome and build Parliament there.
Michael Mitchell
via email
Write to us
Letters, which may be edited, should include a full name and postal address and be sent to: Letters to the Editor, The Observer, 3-7 Herbal Hill, London EC1R 5EJ (to be received by noon Thursday). Fax: 020 7837 7817. Email: letters@observer.co.uk (please insert Letters to the Editor in subject field).
