Amen! "Politicians are the servants of the people and not their masters. We should redouble our efforts to make services which are delivered within communities more accountable to those communities." I'm really hoping you will stand by your words by helping home educators protect their right to choose their child's curriculum, and by helping to protect them from the proposed infringement upon their human rights and those of their children where it comes to interviewing children without evidential cause, without parents present or the child's or parent's permission being required. If this is seen to be justified because home educated children cannot be scrutinized in school, then this would also apply to all preschool children and all school children during school holidays. It is a ludicrous and defaming assertion, unsubstantiated by any evidence. It will prove expensive and unwieldy and draw important resources away from already overstretched and often failing child protection teams. Not only is it dangerous to democracy, but it will disadvantage children who need protection from abuse and neglect rather than help to detect and prevent abuse. I suspect the current focus on child protection and home education comes from a new climate brought about by your government's decision to merge local education authorities with the children's section of social services. However, the process by which this concern has arisen in parliament seems not unlike one of the email spam letters I occasionally get. They warn of a new scam we should be aware of, but when I look into them they are based on urban myths and someone's unsubstantiated supposition and the police will confirm that they should be ignored. There are lots of things that 'could' be happening in society. That doesn't mean they are happening and that we should rush to regulate every possibility of abuse, infringement or risk with the ensuing cost of our liberty and individuality.

I have seen nothing over the last few days to make me feel anything is being done to restore trust in politics. I read about bullying of backbenchers by Brown and his henchmen, and the appointment of the unelected Glenys Kinnock (amongst others)to the role of Minister for Europe.All I can see is continuing contempt for both democracy and the British public by Gordon Brown. I note you say 'Politicians are the servants of the people and not their masters' This is something that has been lost sight of, and our politicians, in their arrogance, are still not listening. The expenses scandal has been kicked into the long grass and it seems only one or two of the most serious offenders will face police enquiry. This is a government to be feared, determined to cling on at all costs, never mind the damage to the country. It is hard not to feel total despair.

I agree that AV is the best way of voting for all the reasons you state.

You repeatedly make mention of 'being open and transparent'. When were you going to publicise the meeting about expenses you propose to hold this Friday in Chapel? It's not on this website and it's does not appear to be information that is in the public domain other then in a few emails doing the rounds from your office?

In the interests of openness and transparency I am reluctant to respond at all to those who hide behind a cloak of anonymity! The meeting in Chapel tomorrow (7pm, Pack Horse) has been widely publicised by email (including all those who have contacted me, pro and anti) and by posters in Chapel. Who are you, Marty?

Mr Levitt, I'm one of your disenfranchised constituents who despises the behaviour and attitude of contempt displayed by our elected representatives towards the people - that's who I am Mr Levitt.

Never mind all this - make sure you sign that letter doing the rounds and email it back to signonnow@hotmail.co.uk That would be a start.

"where the law has been broken or rules disobeyed then appropriate punishment should follow." That's all well and good, but what happens to people who don't break the rules, just exploit them to the limit for personal enrichment. I don't want to pay for your food and solid oak floors, Mr Levitt and really don't see why I should. Neither do I want to pay and undisclosed salary to your wife for unspecified work. Exploiting the rules to the limit may not be illegal, but it makes you unfit for the office you hold. Roll on the election.

Mr Levitt, I am self employed. Do you think HM Customs and Revenue will accept me listing a hairdryer as a legitimate business expense against my profits on my next tax return? All readers know the answer to that, so why is it a legitimate expense for a public servant? I use the phrase public servant reluctantly because MP's appear to have lost all notion of this phrase.