Why are politicians frightened?

British parties seem to be out of step with their sister parties in Europe where ''zip systems'' (alternating male and female candidates in the regional lists of additional members) have been employed for many years as a means of achieving better representation. Those parties which were initially slow to adopt gender balance mechanisms paid the price in terms of electoral success and were quick to follow the example originally set by the Greens and Socialist parties.

As the parties in Wales and Scotland debate their selection procedures, we hear that Welsh Labour and Scottish Liberal Democrats are using legal arguments to hide behind a reluctance to bring in radical reforms. If the Young SNP have their way, their party may join this inglorious list.

Fair representation of women and men and of ethnic minorities and disabled people strengthens democracy, bringing in a broader range of experience and expertise than can possibly be achieved via the traditional systems, as we see in Westminster. The situation is particularly critical in Wales. If the Welsh Assembly is completely male-dominated, its credibility as an inclusive democratic body will be significantly weakened.

Why are politicians in the UK frightened of gender balance ?

Fiona Forsyth,

Vice Convener, Engender,

13 Gayfield Square, Edinburgh.

May 17.

AM sure that Professor Burrows is correct in maintaining that ''there is nothing in our own or European law to prevent political parties acting in ways that lead to something like equality of representation in the new Parliament'' (May 14). I am less convinced, though, by some of what she claims to follow if, on the contrary, the Sex Discrimination Act and the Equal Treatment Directive are taken to apply to selection processes.

She argues that, in this case, any party using a procedure which it knows will disadvantage women will find itself in trouble. Fair enough, but in the next sentence she states, ''The recently reported Liberal Democrat reliance on secret ballots by party members from mixed shortlists does raise a prima facie case of discrimination''.

As returning officer for such elections in two neighbouring constituencies, it is my duty to ensure that both the shortlisting of the candidates and the conduct of the ballots conform to the best possible practice. I do not immediately see how, in the use of secret postal ballots by party members from mixed shortlists, we can be said to be using a procedure that is discriminatory.

It may be, however, that Professor Burrows is making the very subtle point that, in the case of large-scale secret ballots, it is impossible to ensure that all those voting are doing so according to gender-neutral criteria. The conclusion to which such a requirement would logically lead, however, is that every MP returned at the last General Election was returned illegally from the point of view of sex discrimination legislation.

It is well established in our law that legislation must be construed to avoid any manifest repugnance or absurdity. This serves to reinforce the point that Professor Burrows is correct in her assessment of the ambit of the legislation. It also offers reassurance about the nature of our own procedures.

That said, the Government has just published the Registration of Political Parties Bill. What a pity it has failed to include a provision making it clear that political parties are indeed permitted to select candidates by methods designed to achieve gender balance.

Elspeth Attwooll,

Maryhill Liberal Democrats,

2a Whitton Street, Glasgow.

May 14 .