Letter: Election law depends on secure party names

Sir: Your leading article of 21 June ('Poor Tories, poor democracy') contradicts the leading article of 17 June ('Caveat elector] The name means nothing'). In the latest, you call, rightly, for both state funding of our democracy and restrictions on national political advertising, but in the earlier one you were against registration of political party names and titles.

It simply is not possible to operate the latter proposals without the former. Last month I published the Parliamentary Elections (No 2) Bill, which in its 23 clauses sets out in legislative form the proposals of a Labour Party working group on election law and administration.

Registration of parties would protect name and title. It would not prevent any individual standing, but an independent Electoral Commission could withhold registration, which would be the gateway to state funding. The same commission would limit national advertising - the sanction being an overspend added to candidates' expenses with the threat of disqualification. For these ideas to be workable you need to be clear about what and which party you are dealing with, hence the need to act on names.

My modest Bill also sets out the framework for voting at weekends on both Saturday and Sunday as well as the introduction of a four-year fixed-term parliament with provision in clearly defined circumstances for a mid-term dissolution. It introduced early voting and modernised the electoral registration process.

Last year Labour's ruling National Executive Committee recommended the proposals to the annual conference with a commitment to immediate legislation, which is why I have begun the process of practical law-making.

Yours faithfully,

JEFF ROOKER

MP for Birmingham, Perry (Lab)

House of Commons

London, SW1

21 June