Clik here to view.
Here are some ground rules for manifestos in an age of coalition (Editorial, 21 March): 1) Manifestos should mean what they say. 2) Coalitions are only possible around points of common ground. 3) All other points should be the subject of a free vote. 4) If there is not enough common ground to form a coalition, there should be a minority government. 5) A minority government would then have to argue its case on any given issue. 6) Manifestos should cover all known policy positions. Keeping things from the electorate and only bringing them forward after an election should be recognised for what it is, deception, and voted out as inadmissible and without a mandate. 7) Minority governments are preferable to coalitions that act outside their manifestos and do not have a mandate. 8) Minority governments should use referendums to achieve a mandate for new and substantive issues. We need a debate on ground rules, otherwise manifestos and electoral integrity become meaningless.
Roger Read
Troon, Ayrshire
• As one who has written too many manifestos and policy documents for comfort, the whole concept of a manifesto conferring a mandate is deeply flawed. Quite apart from there being only a minority of electors who vote for any party, so that manifestos inevitably lack an arithmetical mandate, a much greater flaw is that a manifesto is obsolescent the moment it is written. The context within which policy is determined can change dramatically. All any of us had written for 45 years on east-west relations was cast aside by the advent of Gorbachev to the leadership of the Soviet Union. Similarly, policy on South Africa was rendered null and void by De Klerk's February 1990 speech.
Manifestos are important in making parties think and debate, but they can only be a snapshot of their policies. Far more important is the expression of the values and principles on which a party is based and which indicate how the party will approach present and future issues.
Michael Meadowcroft
Leeds
