RE: my last letter regarding Mark Harper's betrayal of Forest constituents: now, I don't want to harp on about this (sorry, that was a dreadful pun and totally untrue... I obviously do want to harp on about it.... hence this letter), but we shouldn't take this lying down and we can address this without waiting for the next election.

We may choose which MP to vote for on the strength of that party's manifesto or the promises issued by the candidate and these vary from candidate to candidate and party to party. However, the primary role of every MP, regardless of other promises or manifesto pledges, is to represent the interests of the voting constituency in Parliament. This role goes beyond the personal opinions of the MP or the interests of the government. This is an inviolable contract that is assumed by default when a candidate stands for election.

Other pledges and promises may or may not come to fruition and there may be some dispute over whether MPs should be held to account for this. But there is no dispute about the primary duty of an MP. This is what all voters have a right to expect.

When an MP promotes the interests of the government or his own views and opposes the overwhelming views of his constituents, he has unambiguously failed in that primary role and, therefore, constitutes a breech of contract. We have employed him to promote our interests in Parliament. We pay his salary. He has accepted that appointment and he has accepted the salary we pay him... and he has effectively refused to represent our interests in an issue that couldn't possibly be more important to his constituents: the sale of land they have always felt was theirs. The sale of our home.

This is the most blatant and cowardly betrayal of the people who voted for him in good faith. It renders the role of an MP meaningless and has brought the already plummeting respect for politics to a new low. If the constituents were equally divided on the issue, there might be some justification for taking one side over another. But the constituents are overwhelmingly against the proposal that he cannot justify supporting it.

I, Ron Tocknell, hereby declare that I have no confidence in my MP, Mark Harper's ability or willingness to fulfill the primary role for which he was elected. I withdraw any implied consent for Mark Harper to represent this constituency in Parliament. I wish to exercise my right to appoint another representative to replace him.

However, maybe I have low esteem issues but I don't think my declaration is quite enough. If I am sharing the views of over 50 per cent of the constituents, then let's hear about it and maybe get this matter addressed.

Alternatively, of course, we can spend the next four years muttering: "He betrayed us... he betrayed us... he betrayed us..." in case we forget. Then, come the day of the election, say: "He betrayed us.... he betrayed....... AAAAAAAAAAAW! Look at his lovely smile!"

– Ron Tocknell, Lydney.