Labour, the Lib Dems and electoral reform

Martin Kettle is right when he praises the electoral achievements of Labour and the Liberal Democrats this year ( Working together, Labour and the Lib Dems could exile the Tories for a generation, 19 September ). The scale of success for both parties is even more remarkable given the many ways in which the Conservatives manipulated electoral rules in their favour.

Up to 8 million people legally entitled to vote were kept off the voting registers, with little attempt to enrol them. The introduction of photo ID was a deliberate attempt at voter suppression. Party spending limits were suddenly raised by 80%, allowing the Conservatives to benefit from a total of £20m from Frank Hester.

There is important work to be done now to address these issues, which must be cross-party to avoid the impression that changes are again being made simply to help the governing party. Above all, Keir Starmer must not repeat Tony Blair's biggest mistake and ignore electoral reform. This failure led to 14 years of Tory prime ministers. At the very least, he should include this issue in his next manifesto and legislate for it if re-elected. Chris Rennard Liberal Democrat, House of Lords

Martin Kettle's is inspiring in the way it hints at the possibility of us moving towards the development of a society driven by common aims. In this, can we not envisage a society where political parties might reform, to become a government that not only speaks to community, but listens to it as well? A society formed, say, by the creation of people's assemblies – in place of political parties – that represents the views of their community, their location, their country (their continent, and so on)?

Isn't it an exciting thought that the aim of our government and its constructive opposition, the Lib Dems, could be to imagine putting themselves in a position to govern together? But on our behalf? And might the aims of the Greens be so very different? Or, indeed, the aims of anyone prepared to think about putting our collective community above the conflicting ideologies of one or two or three individuals? Spencer Butler Bridport, Dorset

Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our section.