IT seems that whenever political reform is mentioned, some people insist that a coalition government will be unstable (‘PR Problem’, Postbag, August 12).

I’d point out that one of the most successful governments this country has ever seen was during WW2, and that was a government of national unity; in other words, a coalition.

And over the last few hundred years, we’ve seen numerous majority governments formed from a single party that were unstable from the very beginning. The problem is not with the concept of coalition.

Leadership is a key requirement within any form of government, and good leaders make use of people with expertise and are always prepared to listen to alternative proposals.

I believe that it was Harry S Truman who said ,“It’s surprising what you can achieve if you don’t mind who gets the credit”.

But all too often we see those in leadership positions surround themselves with sycophants, refusing to listen to proficient advice, that keep heading doggedly towards ambiguous or impractical goals, guided purely by egotism and ideology.

In the letter, the author suggests that people might feel that “nobody is listening”. Certainly that might be true for the two thirds of Somerset voters that opted for the two unitary authority option, only for the minister to ignore their wishes and insist upon a single authority!

READ MORE: LETTER: 'This is our chance to take back Somerset'
READ MORE: LETTER: 'Our current voting system is grossly unfair'
WANT TO WRITE?: Click here to submit your letter

We should never be afraid to listen to those with different views no matter how radical; sometimes, they can offer options and insight that help us move forward as individuals and as a society; and ideally, democratic governance at all levels should try to represent the views of everyone within the constituent boundaries.

But that can not be achieved under our present system, which actively excludes a diversity of views being made a part of the executive administration; and rewards those individuals that place personal ambition or blind loyalty to a party leader, above that of the national interest.