Readers' letters - September 4

Put past behind us for sake of stability

By The Newsroom
Tuesday, 5th September 2017, 6:50 pm
Updated Monday, 11th September 2017, 12:29 pm

Now that the 20th anniversary of the tragic death of Diana Princess of Wales is over, perhaps we may consider in great detail the monarchy and how events will materialise after the passing of Her Majesty the Queen.

As a nation has observed in recent months, the two princes, William and Harry, have conducted themselves with dignity and decorum.

Their mother Diana would have been proud of them.

Sign up to our daily newsletter

Having said that, we must take into account the role of their father, the heir to the throne, Prince Charles, in their upbringing.

In this life, many of us do or say things that seem inappropriate to others, but for the sake of stability we have to put the past behind us.

The constitution of this country declares that Princes Charles, on the sad death of the Queen, will be our next king.

Having married Camilla Duchess of Cornwall, in 
my opinion she should become Queen Consort.

I know that feelings are running somewhat alien to my way of thinking, but for the sake of a strong and stable monarchy and for the benefit of the British nation as a whole, we should move on and take into consideration what best course to take for the wellbeing of this national of ours to take in the years to come.

Since becoming the Duchess of Cornwall, Camilla hasn’t put a foot wrong and I say to those who yearn for William and Catherine, Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, their time will come and I’m confident they will make a splendid job of a secure future for the country and monarchy,

Tom Penman

Address supplied


Remainers, why accept Brexit?

If there is one group of people I cannot understand, it is ‘accepting Remainers’, those who now seem to be backing Brexit, even though they didn’t vote for it and don’t believe in it. While I might disagree with those who campaigned for Brexit, they have as much right to their opinions as I have to mine and they do, at least, have the strength of their convictions.

Why is the 2016 referendum result, which produced only a small simple majority win of less than four per cent for leave and was based upon a myth of about £350m a week (that never went to the EU) being invested in the NHS, being regarded as sacrosanct, in a way in which the outcome of a General Election would not be?

Do these parties, and their supporters, who failed to attract sufficient votes in this summer’s national Parliamentary poll, have to “accept” Government policy as “the will of the people” and go along with it?

Of course they don’t.

Without any credible opposition to those in power, we would not have a functioning democratic system. And democracy in this nation did not end on June 23, 2016.

Since the referendum, the pound has declined significantly in value, increasing the price of imports and holidays, thereby making British families comparatively worse off.

The Governor of the Bank of England recently predicted lower living standards in the UK than would otherwise have been the case for the foreseeable future.

This will mostly affect the younger generation, including those who were under 18 and therefore unable to vote in 2016.

So much for “taking back control”. There is nothing patriotic about imposing unnecessary hardship on your fellow countrymen, including your own kith and kin, in pursuit of some misplaced ideology.

Apparently, some 61 per cent of Brexit voters would be prepared to see the UK take a major economic hit, so long as it means leaving Europe. I am not so sure. Will they be wrapping themselves in a Union Jack and singing Rule Britannia when the bailiffs come to evict them from their homes after they have lost their jobs? I suspect not.

To quote Brexit Secretary David Davis in 2012: “If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy.” Well said, Mr Davis.

NP Johnson

via email


Lives at risk

I am writing in support of the letter, Why Should We Walk on the Road (LP Letters, August 24)?

Nowhere is this more prevalent than in Plungington Road.

On a daily basis, I have observed motorists park fully on the pavement or half on the road and pavement.

This bad and lazy motoring practice puts people’s lives at great risk.

This includes mothers and babies, the elderly and people in disabled scooters.

There is often ample parking spaces in the car parks so motorists have no excuses.

The council has a token gesture – it has erected one bollard to curb this practice outside of the GPO.

Mr A Gleeson



Punish these reckless actions

Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson offering £9m to Libya to counter terrorism and mass migration is quite a surprise when, not long ago, the then Prime Minister David Cameron couldn’t bomb Colonel Gaddafi into oblivion fast enough, estimated at £300m.

Far from celebrating democracy, as David Cameron boasted of in a photo shoot, Libya is now gripped by civil war as rival factions, from the former three areas making up the country, fight over its oil, wealth and so on.

It is now like Iraq after Tony Blair’s similar intervention.

In other words, hell on earth.

Whatever Colonel Gaddafi did or did not do right, Libya was an orderly society with no problem of hundreds of thousands of migrants setting sail across the Mediterranean.

Why we allow our political leaders to repeatedly go on such ego trips, spending millions of pounds, with serious repercussions here – as in Manchester and London – causing an even greater human cost is a complete mystery.

Why aren’t such reckless actions ever punished as the war crimes they are?

D S Boyes

Address supplied