Leave we must Sir: It is interesting that as the Brexit process drags, people become more distanced from what was a simple decision made at the referendum. The question was stay or leave, and the decision was leave. In last week’s letters, Mark Pender writes that it is a mystery to him why MPs continue
Crisis in Hong Kong Sir: It was inspiring to see Hong Kong protesters raising the British flag as a symbol of freedom and liberation — a vivid image of the fondness in which it is held, even more than two decades after our surrender of the territory (‘A question of liberty’, 6 July). However, raising
Support for stop and search Sir: Mary Wakefield is rightly exasperated by fatuous comments over police use of stop and search (‘Stop posturing over stop and search’, 29 June). Perhaps this year there will be 200 murders of children by other children. Swamping areas with police is obviously a visible response to the problem, but
Appeasement? Sir: Your editorial (‘Plan B’, 22 June) refers to the need for Boris Johnson, as prospective PM, to have ‘warm words for our European allies — even if we end up without a deal’. The use of the word ‘allies’ troubles me. The dictionary defines the word in context: ‘Any time there’s a disagreement
Eco opportunity Sir: As a North Sea oil engineer now working on the UK’s ‘green’ energy transition, I believe Ross Clark (‘Greener than thou’, 15 June) raised many valid points but missed out on the major opportunities for the UK economy. Irrespective of what we believe to be the extent of climate change, other key
The benefits of indecision Sir: Belgium has often been without a government for months on end without suffering any economic collapse. In Britain in recent decades governments with large majorities and led by ideologically driven prime ministers have made disastrous decisions on welfare reform, foreign policy and selling off social housing. Isabel Hardman is correct
Trump and Brexit Sir: Your leading article (‘The Trump card’, 1 June) states that ‘May’s successor should seek to capitalise on Team Trump’s enthusiasm for Brexit’. President Trump — the leader of by far our most important political, economic and military ally — has always respected what most British MPs have chosen to ignore: that
Leavers only, please Sir: Your leading article (‘The end of May’, 25 May) correctly calls for the Conservative party to establish itself as ‘unequivocally the party of Brexit’. The meltdown at the EU elections confirmed this is now the only course of action open to it, if it wishes to survive. Conservative MPs should show
Nigel’s nakedness Sir: Rod Liddle is right to be wary of the hubris that Nigel Farage, the Brexit party leader, is beginning to show (‘The Brexit party delusion’, 18 May). His wish to smash the mould of British politics clearly shows that he expects his disciples to follow him into the promised land. The Andrew
Labour’s fence-sitting Sir: James Forsyth writes that Mrs May and Mr Corbyn are ‘not, in fact, that far apart’ (‘May’s compromising position’, 11 May). To many, the Labour left is simply playing its very old game of sitting on the fence over the EU. The electorate have spotted it, and Labour paid for it in
Scrutinising charities Sir: Toby Young was right to raise questions about War on Want’s links to the Stop Trump campaign (4 May). The public rightly hold charities to high standards of behaviour, and charities are required to follow clear rules around political activity. We will be scrutinising the charity’s activities, and the issues raised by
The last straw Sir: In his vindication of Sir Roger Scruton, Douglas Murray quite rightly refers to the affair as ‘a biopsy of a society’ (‘The Scruton tapes’, 27 April). It was also a biopsy of the Conservative party in particular, and a dispiriting one at that. It is notable that while a good slice of
Not an island Sir: I and those with whom I live and work are all within coughing distance of Sam Leith’s ‘threshold of death’ and we need no reminders that your body is your own, because we wish to God it wasn’t (‘Last rights’, 20 April). But as it is, we owe it to that
Moaning minnie MPs Sir: I was recently quoted in the Sun newspaper in a story about how MPs were reacting to the Brexit drama in the House of Commons. I said: ‘It feels like the Commons is having a collective breakdown — a cross between Lord of the Flies and One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s
All Cameron’s fault Sir: In this time of febrile political speculation, there can have been few more arresting subject headings on your Letters page than ‘Not Cameron’s fault’ (6 April). Your correspondent Mike Jeffes added to the sense of unreality by writing that ‘Cameron did nothing wrong’. You need to be neither a Remainer nor
About the Bible Sir: I was confirmed by Richard Holloway as a schoolboy at Fettes College, and then taught by John Barton while an Anglican ordinand at Oxford University. So I was intrigued to read Holloway’s review of Barton’s latest book, A History of the Bible (30 March), and disturbed by their conclusions. Indeed, both
Still better than Cameron Sir: I disagree with your editorial (‘Agony prolonged’, 23 March) that Theresa May is the worst prime minister in our history. Unlike her predecessor, Mrs May — for all the flaws that have been ruthlessly exposed by the Brexit process — did not fail to learn the readily accessible lessons from the
What’s the point? Sir: Katy Balls asks ‘Will there be an election?’ (16 March). That prompts the question: ‘To what purpose?’ Jeremy Corbyn may be ‘keen for an early election to break the deadlock’, but as the EU has repeatedly emphasised that its withdrawal deal is the only one on the table, how would Labour
Turn it off and on again Sir: The conclusion of your leading article of 9 March (‘Close the deal’) that MPs should ‘hold their noses and vote for May’s deal’ is understandable, but deeply disappointing that this seems to be the best choice left. It occurs to me, however, that there is another solution which
The point of Article 50 Sir: I read Paul Collier’s article in your 23 February issue, which has just reached me in la France profonde, with interest. The principal author of Article 50 was John Kerr, aka Lord Kerr of Kinlochard. I have known John for quite a long time, and enjoyed his company: when