PLEASE send your letters (as short as you like) to info@conservativewoman.co.uk and mark them ‘Letter to the Editor’.
We need your name and a county address, e.g. Yorkshire or London. Letters may be shortened. There is no guarantee of publication.
Letter of the week
Dear Editor
I feel sure that I’m not the only one who has found it impossible this last week or so to dance to the shallow and politically opportunistic misappropriation of the Allied victory in WW2 back in 1945. The King’s own speech last night spoke of it quite shamelessly as having been a victory for ‘unity and diversity over tyranny’. Not a compliment paid to Joseph Stalin very often.
The coldest, cruellest fact of all is that in the eight decades since that victory over Hitler and his allies, the very people now standing to attention with those earnest, respectful expressions on their faces, have done their best to portray the very people who risked, and in many cases, sacrificed their lives for their country as narrow-minded, racist, class-ridden and snobbish. In that time, even Winston Churchill’s own reputation as the saviour of this country has been mercilessly ridiculed and dismissed as a mixture of vanity and exaggeration.
My own father wore his medals with pride as he attended every Remembrance Sunday thanksgiving service held at the memorial gates in Rugby, right up until the year when he entered hospital for the final time. But I know he would have been insulted to see the posturing and virtue-signalling by the very people who dismissed the conservatives of his generation as bigoted and consequently irrelevant ‘yesterday’s men’.
My father died in 2001, so I guess it’s on his behalf that I write this letter.
Brian Meredith
Fewer inquiries, more action
Dear Editor
If your home was on fire, you would phone the fire brigade now and worry about your insurance later. If a ship hit a rock and was sinking, you would rescue the crew and any passengers; questions of why it hit the rock, you would save for later.
So why do our better politicians keep calling for a public inquiry into the ethnic grooming gangs, rather than demanding that the Government, the police and social services move heaven and earth to end these vile crimes and protect our most vulnerable children?
I say ‘our better politicians’, because more than a decade after the Jay Report, which revealed that there were over 1,400 child victims in Rotherham alone, most of our political class still wants to brush this under the carpet. For example, only the other day on Any Questions, leading Labour MP Lucy Powell was using the phrase ‘dog whistle’ to refer to discussion of the rape gangs.
Is it any wonder that our police remain focused on ‘woke’ obsessions rather than real policing, when our political class give them such an appalling lead?
How long must we wait before our most vulnerable children are protected from these racist brutes?
Otto English
Fife
Tents on Dartmoor for Channel-hoppers
Dear Editor
Asylum accommodation is costing taxpayers £4million every day. This is for 110,000 people who have no right to be here, since most crossed the Channel in small boats. If they were genuine refugees, they would have claimed ‘safe haven’ in the first European country they entered. Once in the UK, migrant lawyers grow rich preventing them from being deported. Legal aid for migrants should be stopped. Migrant charities are vocal in their support for these illegal trespassers. Their charitable status allows them to claim money from the taxpayers and so should be rescinded. The UK is far too soft and instead of hotels, migrants should be housed in tents on Dartmoor and other inhospitable locations. That would stop the flood.
Clark Cross
Linlithgow
The weaponisation of anti-racism laws
Dear Editor
This article is the perfect example of how our laws are being used to protect anyone who complains of racism even when they deserve to be fired.
But also, why was he employed in the first place?
John Wightman
Reform on a roll
Dear Editor
The BBC meant to insult Andrea Jenkyns by calling her a ‘former Greggs worker’ (bless their snobby, upper-middle-class hearts). However, compared to Reform, the other parties did look half-baked.
Kathleen Carr
Sheffield
Net Zero, sadly, is not about pollution
Dear Editor
There seems to be much confusion in the minds of many people about ‘net zero’. Many confuse pollution with attempts to influence the variations in the climate.
The former is important and was the reason that the Clean Air Act was introduced in the 1950s. This was a pivotal piece of legislation aimed at addressing air pollution in the UK, particularly after the Great Smog of 1952. The primary goal was to reduce smoke, grit, and dust emissions from domestic and industrial sources. The Act, enacted in 1956 and later amended in 1968, laid the foundation for modern air pollution control and was a landmark moment in environmental protection. Recent developments such as the introduction of electric or hybrid back cabs in London is another example of reducing pollution.
The latter is simply not feasible, yet this is the basis of the net zero religion by Ed Milliband and his cohorts that is costing billions and seriously damaging the county and countryside.
The question is, when will this reality be accepted by our rulers.
John Beswick
Leicester
Renaming the crackpot Climate Change Committee
Dear Editor
Following Paul Homewood’s article on the Climate Change Committee on Friday, I think it should be renamed to ‘Committee Looking At Possible Trends Regarding Atmospheric Pollution’.
I know its a bit of a mouthfull but I’m sure someone can think of an acronym for it.
Yours sincerely,
Geoff Truscott
Cornwall
