IN a document distributed in Worcester recently, Mike Foster made great play of his voting record in the Commons (89 per cent), compared with those of his parliamentary neighbours such as Peter Luff (75 per cent).

Anyone who really understands Parliament knows that voting records are a very misleading indicator of an MP's effectiveness, as the Prime Minister's record (only 7 per cent) shows.

Anyhow, I am surprised that Mr Foster should think it a matter for congratulations that he has voted blindly for such unwelcome government proposals as the abolition of our Community Health Council, huge stealth taxes or the regulations that are driving local care homes out of business.

Isn't the job of MPs to speak up for their constituents and to hold the Government to account?

So aren't the figures that really matter the ones that show how often they've done that?

Mike Foster has made three speeches and interventions in the Commons since the election and his neighbour Peter Luff has made 25.

Mike Foster has asked seven oral questions and Peter Luff has asked 10. And Mike Foster has asked 19 written questions while Peter Luff has asked 252.

It's not very hard to see who is really working harder for his constituents.

PETER A E JEWELL, Droitwich.