This report should not surprise anybody. The promise of a "review" in both the 2001 and 2005 manifestos was nothing more than a temporising device to give some cover to the cynical abandonment of the PR commitments in the 1997 manifesto.

Even if this "review" had been honest it would still have been completely unnecessary. There is already a huge amount of evidence which would have convinced anyone approaching the subject objectively that FPTP should be superseded by a representative system. There is no perfect electoral system but FPTP is certainly the most imperfect of the lot.In this connexion it is worth noting that the Westminster Government in the early seventies did not require all this "evidence" before reintroducing STV into Norhern Ireland - and incidentally praising STV enthusiastically and by implication condemning FPTP (See the pamphlet issued to Northern Ireland residents and headed "Questions and Answers on Proportional Representation" with a subheading "PR is as easy as 1,2,3..." - perhaps Hazel Blears should obtain a copy)

The nature of the "review" was implied when, in 2004, a Times article dated 12 November reported that the arch-tribalists in the government had stamped on arrangements to set it up.

During the following 3 years it has apparently been undertaken internally, presumably by tame civil servants and without any outside consultation It is safe to assume that the conclusions will in effect have been dictated by Jack Straw a notorious defender of FPTP (and one of the arch-tribalists referred to above).

I think we should recognise this "review" for what is - a phoney pretence - and forget about it. We should instead continue to castigate the government for the abandonment of the 1997 manifesto commitment and seek to extend the choice in the referendum to include STV.