Madam, You were good enough to print a letter from me last week on this topic.

I do not wish to take more space than I should, but since it appeared under the letter from Jesse Norman MP, I would not like the facts that I expressed bluntly to be taken as a rejection of his actions.

His absenting himself from voting was about as good a course as I could hope for.

An argument he did not use and cannot (even if he had thought of it for a moment) is "Why waste a vote on a patently lost cause when my bigger duty is not to waste my promising career? I must attempt to reach a position where I can have an influence on those in the party who seem to have lost the vision of what is good for our society."

That line may seem a bit jesuitical to some, but with politics dominated by parties and PR that's about as good as it gets in our democracy-manque.

Michael Bushell, Ross

MADAM, May I be permitted a brief response to Jesse Norman's letter, 'reasons behind the decision not to vote'. Clearly he is referring to the speech made by Edmund Burke to the constituents of Bristol on November 3rd 1774 which has stood ever since as a definition of an MP's responsibilities. And that still holds good. Mr. Norman then goes on to explain the quandary in which he found himself. But surely in such a case, having decided there is no decisive justification for the Bill, and acknowledging it might have 'negative effects on the Church of England and other institutions', then one has a duty to oppose. Abstinence is not an option, for to invoke the words of Sir Thomas More, when attempting to defend himself against the agents of Henry viii, 'Silence betokens assent!' Is this what Mr. Norman intended? Attempting to perch on the rail of a fence makes for very uncomfortable seating and convinces neither side.

Brian Jackson, Ross