Wednesday, April 17, 2024
HomeReaders CommentsLetters to the Editor

Letters to the Editor


PLEASE send your letters (as short as you like) to and mark them ‘for possible publication’. We need your name and if possible, a county address, eg Yorkshire or London. We will include biographical details if you volunteer them. Letters may be shortened.


Porn in Parliament

Dear Editor

Has anyone asked the politicians condemning MP Neil Parish for watching pornography on his phone in the chamber – which is not illegal – what they think of pornography itself? Have they ever condemned it per se, and/or used their political platform to restrict it? It plays a significant and serious role in sex crime, and yet those best placed to combat it seem to be using it to attack this MP without offering any view on whether it should be banned. If watching pornography is unacceptable, why is pornography not unacceptable?

Mrs Ann Farmer



Ukraine: Nato is to blame

Dear Editor

There is wall to wall reporting by the Western media standing up for Ukraine. Yes, it is simply terrible seeing the innocent Ukrainian civilians suffering, but who is really at fault here?

Putin massed thousands of Russian troops on the Ukrainian border stating publicly that he would invade Ukraine but would stand his troops down if Nato confirmed it would not invite Ukraine to be a member (let’s face it, the Ukraine and Russia have been fighting for decades, nothing new here).

Nato didn’t, so Russia invaded.

Surely Nato is fully responsible for this Russian invasion?

Monima O’Connor

Cardigan, Wales


The Great Covid Conspiracy

Dear Editor,

I would like to say that the biggest conspiracy ever executed on this earth is the great Covid conspiracy.

We have not been allowed the full facts. Some of the goals of the conspiracy, among many, were to aid the green sustainable agenda, restrictions on travel, wealth accumulation and depopulation. A conspiracy is something kept secret – and the Covid design and manipulation has been kept secret. 

Love to a brilliant team. I love your work, TCW provides a breath of fresh and honest air in the Great Covid Conspiracy.

William Durham


In the dark on batteries

Dear Editor

The Telegraph reports that electric car (EV) ranges are extending. But each mile travelled by an EC requires 0.25kWh of charge, assuming the battery is new and that the EC travels at moderate speed. So for a 450-mile range, the battery would need 112 kWh.

That equates to 32 hours from a 3.5kW (13A) domestic charger or 15 hours from a 7kW charger compared with around 1.5 minutes to fill a diesel car for a journey of up to around 700 miles.

An average daily mileage of 25 miles would require around six hours of charge from a 3.5kW charger. So unless domestic supplies are uprated, the EV is only likely to be suitable for local journeys.

One option mooted for those travelling longer distances for business or pleasure would be to lease batteries and exchange them at service stations on strategic routes such as on motorways.

That might be feasible if batteries are re-charged overnight and connections are standardised, perhaps with one manufacturer having a monopoly on their design and perhaps of the chargers.

But around 150 motorway charging stations would each need to manage approaching 2,000 batteries per day, each weighing up to 450kg, no doubt using robotic systems with space to accommodate queues, along with increased substation capacity.

Imagine how the owners of those sites will seek to recover their costs. It will no doubt be included in the tariff charged. EV owners will also have to carry some form of road charge to replace the £16billion pa (around £500 per car pa) which is currently collected by government in the form of petrol and diesel duty.

That is not to mention the cost of upgrading the National Grid to carry the load of EV chargers and the heat pumps which are to replace domestic gas boilers. National Grid estimates that it will cost £3trillion (£120,000 per household) to upgrade the grid. It would be helpful if Mr Johnson could explain how he intends to deal with these challenges.

Roger J Arthur

West Sussex


Climate scientists or charlatans? 

Dear Editor

Last week Earth Day number 52 was recorded. Net Zero Watch, a reputable organisation, has pointed out that none of the eco-doomsday predictions of the first Earth Day on April 22, 1970 have come true. For example: 

‘There would be an ice age since the earth has been cooling since 1950 and the temperature will be 11 degrees cooler by the year 2000. Civilisation will end within 15 or 30 years. Population will outstrip food supplies leading to 100-200 million per year starving to death during the next ten years. By 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching the earth by half.’

More recent eco-doomsday predictions: 

1. 1972: a new Ice Age by 2020.

2. 1988: the Maldives Islands will be underwater by 2018. 

3. In 2005 Al Gore predicted that sea levels would rise by 20 feet ‘in the very near future’. When can we expect the other 19 feet 11 and three-quarter inches?

Yet the climate scientists continue to screech ‘the science is settled’. Climate scientists or charlatans? 

Clark Cross 



The reality of nuclear war

Dear Editor

Over the last two decades we have been bombarded with claims about how we have to save the planet by reducing CO2. Meanwhile the possibility of nuclear war has been ignored almost completely. But nuclear war could end all human and animal life and leave the planet a frozen uninhabitable irradiated horror.

There are 12,700 nuclear weapons in nine nuclear states, most of these in US and Russian arsenals. The International Atomic Energy Agency has modelled what would happen in a nuclear war between Russia (population 146million) and the Nato alliance (population 944million) in the ten months after a nuclear exchange. In the first 24 hours 86million Russians would die, and 92million in Nato countries. In 30 days 548million would have died. The fallout would condemn hundreds of millions more to die a lingering painful death before the nuclear winter set in. The fallout dust would block the sun and temperatures would plunge to Antarctic levels even in the tropics. It would be -76C in Britain.

This is not scaremongering. It’s what nuclear scientists have demonstrated will happen should the use of a ‘tactical’ nuclear bomb escalate to all-out nuclear war. This could happen if the unhinged President of the Russian Federation thinks he is losing in Ukraine.

Meanwhile Greenpeace – which originally wanted the Peace part of its name to work for a non-nuclear world – and the rest of the Net Zero Industry continue to alarm us about the temperature possibly rising by 1.5C. You couldn’t make it up.

William Loneskie


If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.

Sign up for TCW Daily

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.