AS sitting MP for the Huntingdon seat, I thought that your readers would like to know why I am totally opposed to changing our Parliamentary voting system to what I consider to be the ‘fool’s gold’ option of AV.

Importantly, if one's motivation for changing the voting system is to break up so-called 'safe seats', then AV will not work. In fact, in large swing election years the impact of AV can be to increase the majority of the winning party.

The main impact of AV will be in the marginal seats, where, of course, change is most likely to happen under the current system in any event.

But how it can be called fair to allow a candidate who comes second or even third to win under AV, by allowing voters for minority candidates to have multiple votes, is something that I simply fail to understand.

Most worrying will be the temptation, or rather the cold rationale for the front runners, at least in marginal seats, to pander to minority and extremist parties in order to attract their vital second preference votes.

Equality of representation is something that all MPs should extend to all of their constituents. But let me say plainly that, as a Conservative candidate at elections, I wish to stand on a Conservative manifesto and be elected to deliver on it. The best system to provide for this and to clearly hold MPs to account remains the existing first-past-the-post system; which is why I recommend that my constituents vote no to AV on Thursday May 5.

JONATHAN DJANOGLY MP

House of Commons

London SW1