Polly Toynbee (Tory sleaze proves that British politics needs cleaning up. Labour must do it, 9 November) calls for a written constitution as part of an anti-corruption charter. Even a superficial examination of US politics shows that this is not a panacea: it seems that politicians will game any system if vast financial rewards are in question.
The problem in both countries is that rightwing political parties, which exist basically to preserve existing privileges (and expand them), are unscrupulous in their methods in proportion to the size of those rewards, which in turn depends on the levels of inequality that exist in their societies. The real solution for UK politics is to return to the relative equality of the postwar years, and the only way to achieve this is by a revolution in the way we tax income and – especially – wealth.
Jeremy Cushing
Exeter
• Polly Toynbee’s notion of a charter-based constitutional alliance may be more of a runner than the much-touted progressive alliance. The latter is a term so vague and slippery that it cuts little ice in serious political arguments. However, obeying the law is a relatively straightforward concept, even when people in high office show contempt for the rules. Apart from the Boris Johnson faction that captured the parliamentary Conservative party, most elected politicians, from parish councillors upwards, understand what a constitution is supposed to do.
During Monday’s Commons debate, Chris Bryant made the interesting point that universal suffrage was established less than a century ago. The extension of the franchise to that point was achieved through very specific demands, often expressed through charters.
Geoff Reid
Bradford
• Have an opinion on anything you’ve read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication.
