THE claim that the Alternative Vote would lead to more coalitions (Tony Williams’ letter, March 8) does not fit the facts. Even David Cameron has acknowledged that.

In his February speech, arguing against AV, Mr. Cameron said ‘The evidence shows that AV would have produced even larger Labour landslides between 1997 and 2005 and larger Conservative ones in the 1980s.’ Australia has used AV since 1918 and has had fewer hung parliaments than UK or Canada which both use first past the post voting.

The most important benefit of AV is that it respects voters’ wishes above those of politicians and above party interests.

After the less popular candidates are eliminated, every voter has the opportunity for their support to go to one of the two front runners.

In constituencies around the country, supporters of any party are likely to see their candidate fail badly. Why should they be denied a say in which of the ‘front runners’ they prefer to represent them.

If that principle is good enough for the Mayor of London, Heads of State in many countries and even party leaders, it should be good enough for ordinary voters in elections to our parliament?

BRIAN CLEMENTS, Palmerston Road, Parkstone