RSGOLD-RUNESCAPEGOLD

But some form of coalition is essential for democratic leadership. The old Labour Party of Attlee and Gaitskell was a coalition of liberal social democrats and industrially responsible trade unionists. As the numbers voting for those parties, and, perhaps even more dramatically, those enthusiastically working for them, has fallen, so this argument has collapsed. Second was the "what we have, we hold" approach by the parties This has never been very creditable. It was made more respectable by the third argument: that it avoided the weakness of incompatible coalitions between parties, and made our system the envy of the world; and that this was more important than abstract equity.But do we really believe that we have been more effectively governed over the past 20 years than the Germans, with their very sensible system of proportional representation?The avoidance of incompatible coalitions? Do we really believe that the last Labour government was not a coalition, in fact if not in name, and a pretty incompatible one at that? I served in it for half of its life, and you could not convince me of anything else.Coalitions got a bad name in England because of a superficial aphorism by Disraeli, and because the word became associated with the worst phase of Lloyd George's career, and with the "hard-faced men" who supported him. And as it becomes more indefensible, so the alienation feeds upon itself. Traditionally, the obvious case in equity was, in Britain, defeated by three considerations.

First, it could be said that it was only a little inequity, because the overwhelming majority seemed happy voting for and working with one or other of the big parties. It is clearly a fairer system, accepted as such by the great majority of democratic countries. The onus of proof must be upon those who wish to defend the existing system, under which you give only a handful of parliamentary seats to 20 per cent, or even 25 per cent, of the electorate. And, as there is a greater alienation from the two big parties, it has become more indefensible. I BELIEVE that the case for proportional representation is overwhelming. The ruling has extracted the governments of both Spain and Britain from a tight corner, and probably helped avoid problems in Chile. But how can we forget his crimes and leave his victims without redress?.

Pinochet may have won the legal battle, but morally he has not escaped scot-free. Nothing will be the same again, not for Chile, nor for dictators. The former dictator will not be tried in Chile, where he is protected by the military, but he will never again be able to travel the world freely.El PaisSpainMANY HEADS and former heads of state accused of various crimes will now sleep more soundly. But evidently it represents a decisive legal victory for Pinochet - it was what he had hoped for It seems to close the case. European countries have been queuing up in recent days to condemn him.