IF R M Tudor-Davies believes that "all we have to vote for are party lackeys and crooks", then why does he/she "hold the right to vote in very high regard -- or indeed in any regard at all? (Citizen

October 4).

If he/she is correct, then the right to vote is hardly worth exercising, let alone the sacrifice of anyone's freedom of life to preserve it for others to enjoy.

If Bill Connoly and R M Tudor-Davies are right, then "anyone who ACTUALLY wants to be a politician should automatically be banned for life from ever becoming one."

Therefore only those who want NOT to be politicians should be allowed to either enter politics or be voted into Parliament or public office! The electorate will then have to conscript the least motivated and the most reluctant into public service! Candidates will then have to convince the electorate of their refusal to serve the public in order to qualify to do so!

Once these hitherto reluctant politicians are encouraged by public support to feel confident enough to do their work and hence to begin to enjoy doing it, then they must be dismissed forthwith and replaced by others who do not wish to succeed them!

Is this the sort of democratic process to encourage electors or elected to hold the right to vote in very high regard?

John Buckle,

Address supplied.