Monday, April 22, 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.


An American’s tribute to the Queen

Dear Editor

I’ve been watching the lines of British people file past the casket of Queen Elizabeth. I am taken with the fact that as noisy as human beings are, it’s so very quiet in spite of the numbers of people.

The people. Every color, every tongue. They bow, they curtsy, they make the sign of the cross. They salute. They blow her a kiss. The Asian folks bow deeply from the waist – their highest form of deference. Most wipe tears from their cheeks.

Canes, walkers, wheelchairs. Their best clothes, their street clothes. A lady made her little dog bow. They are young, they are old; they understand or are too young yet to understand. No one pays attention to the occasional cries and burbles of babies.

The people are there to say goodbye to their Queen. There will never be another like her.

People here are doing the same as I am – following online through live coverage. Because we want to pay our respects, too. She has been Queen my whole life up until now. Regardless of anything that has gone on around her, there has never been a hint or a whisper about her. Who can that be said about? Very few people in the world. And she is at the top of the list.

You can see the loss on the faces of the people. She was the people and people are her. We’ll not see this again in our lifetimes.

How amazing is this?

It could only happen in England.

Audre Myers



Zombies in the queue

Dear Editor

When the chill of winter arrives together with extortionate heating bills, hyper-inflation and economic recession will the public remember their support for the Queen’s funeral, its exorbitant costs and the cost of the monarchy in general?

Probably not. The Queen’s funeral was funded by the taxpayer and its cost is an undeclared secret and will no doubt be buried under the mountain of cash given to the Royal Family.

The choice of eating or heating doesn’t apply to the richest 1 per cent, of which our monarchy are part, and own half the world’s wealth. Their ‘great reset’ has plundered and profited from the Covid plandemic, climate change, the fraudulent fuel crisis and manufacturing arms for Ukraine.

Also do the public understand the clever transfer of taxation from income tax (which benefits the rich) to local authority council tax which punishes the lower and middle classes? I fear not. After following the Conservative advice by becoming property owners, their apparent wealth will end up paying for privatised health and care fees. A similar scam is being perpetrated with electric cars. Be sure in the end our fuel costs will be even higher. Trust the government at your peril.

For those who don’t know how this tax scam works consider the following.

Council tax bands go to a maximum of H which beyond that point are not progressive. Therefore someone with a ten million pound mansion will pay no more than someone with an average detached house. For example do you know that the monarchy pays only £1,500 council tax for Buckingham Palace and £2,300 for Windsor Castle, both of which are in band H? There are many other means by which they ‘legally’ avoid taxation.

Thanks to multimedia propaganda the public are brainwashed and distracted from such thoughts. I used to think that zombies were a creation of horror fiction but observing those queueing for eight miles to pass the Queen’s coffin makes me think otherwise.

Instead of crying ‘God save the King’ I suggest ‘God save democracy’ is more appropriate.

Bertie Smith


Still masking

Dear Editor 

I’ve just received a hospital letter in which it states: ‘If attending an appointment in person, please ensure that you have a face mask or appropriate face covering before entering the building.’

Why? I thought there was no longer a government legal requirement to do so. Is this just intimidation and coercion?

Jane Dough


Tories must curb the unions

Dear Editor

It is essential that the Conservative Party sorts out the unions that are presently holding the country to ransom. Sustained inflation is by far the biggest threat to our economy and these bullies must not be allowed to have their way. They have a weaker hand now and we must not give in to them.

It is unbelievable that train drivers are earning £59,000 per year before overtime. As a railway driver said recently, these high salaries exist because of the power of the union.

Something has to be done about this or otherwise anarchy will prevail in our country. A government with a huge majority has surely a mandate to act rather than just condemning strikes.

Ian Robertson


Why Net Zero 2050 will not happen

Dear Editor

Someone questioned the need to upgrade the national grid to achieve net zero by 2050. This is my response.

300,000 new houses a year are expected to have heat pumps. 27 years x 300,000 = 8million at around 3kW each by 2050, ie 24,000 MW. Add some top-up electrical heating.

Then we have the charger load for 30million EVs, assuming 7kW each and that the smart grid can spread the load over ten hours, and you get another 21,000 MW.

That is a 75 per cent increase assuming a grid MD of 60,000 MW.

Along with that additional load, we have to replace fossil fuelled power stations – which meet more than 40 per cent of the current grid load – with nukes, solar and wind, plus energy storage.

Not surprisingly National Grid estimates that it will all cost around £3trillion, or £120,000 per household.

Since wind and solar power averages less than 30 per cent of rated MW capacity they must be backed by H2 energy storage and H2 gas turbines to keep the lights on when there is little sun or wind. But the government is planning only 10,000 MW of H2 capacity by 2030.

Then consider the demand for materials. Elon Musk is running up against shortages of the materials needed to support the production of a few million EVs, but there are around 1.4billion cars to be replaced around the world and little hope of mining all of the materials needed.

It seems that making enough wind turbines, solar panels, batteries and electric vehicles to replace fossil fuels will require over 4.5billion tons of copper.

But the world mined only 24million tons of copper in 2019, meaning that it will take 189 years to produce enough copper to go net zero at current rates of production.

To produce enough cobalt at the current rate would take over 1,700 years, most of which would come from Chinese-owned child-labour mines in the Congo.

For lithium it will take almost 10,000 years to produce enough to achieve net zero at current rates of production.

The story continues for many of the other materials needed to achieve net zero.

Roger Arthur

West Sussex


Freezing Europe’s warning to the world

Dear Editor

It is a still winter night in Green-topia.

Wind turbines are idle; solar panels are in darkness; some are covered with snow.

In the rich suburbs, electric cars are being re-charged. Lights, heaters and TV are on, and coffee is percolating.

Where is the electricity coming from? Maybe big batteries? No – they were drained last night re-charging the electric cars. All power tonight is coming from the old reliables – coal, gas, hydro or nuclear. What if it’s cloudy and windless tomorrow and the reliables have a hiccup?

See here for an illustration of our Dark Future.

Watch Europe as its hungry, powerless winter unfolds.

Their peril is our warning.

Viv Forbes




Dear Editor

Whenever anyone mentions a ‘trickle-down’ economic policy, I always think of trouser legs. It’s about as useful. This is apparently the euphemism for the mini-budget strategy: ease up taxation at the top end, and all that excess money will trickle down into the ‘lower’ economy. This is Liz Truss’s definition of growth. It is not supported by recent history. Excess funds at the top stay at the top. If used for ‘investment’, this translates as further acquisition and retention by the global elite. Competition is further destroyed and replaced by more monopolistic, remote control. Taxation (properly applied to those who deserve it) is the only realistic way money has a chance of being fairly redistributed. Instead, they’re borrowing yet more from the future of our grandchildren.

John Drewry



The ruinous cost of EU membership

Dear Editor

Jacob Rees-Mogg’s desire to slash all retained EU laws over the next few years is most welcome. It is, at last,a realisation and an admission by a senior Conservative Minister that being in the EU has been a substantial brake on the UK economy. In fact, the cost has been enormous. Professor Tim Congdon calculated that the cost of being in the EU in 2011 was £150billion, rising to £165/170billion in 2012. It is easy to show, using these figures, that nearly 50 years of EU membership could have cost the UK economy a total of well over £12trillion due to complying with excess EU regulations.

As we are still paying for these useless and unwarranted rules and regulations, sweeping the majority away must improve the UK economy enormously. The only question now is why did the Conservative, Labour and Lib Dem parties persist in staying in the EU? In addition, why did so many politicians, including Liz Truss, vote to remain in the EU in the referendum when the costs of EU membership were so obvious? They usually bleat about trading prospects, but that will not work either. Our trade with the EEC/EU, under total EU control, resulted in our balance of payments going from about zero when we joined the EEC to an enormous deficit, currently costing us a total of well over £2trillion.

Not only were the costs of membership so obviously horrendous, but the fact that they wanted to destroy the UK as a sovereign, democratic and free country and make the UK and its citizens servile members of the EU proves that that the Conservative, Labour and Lib Dem parties were, and still are, totally unfit to run our country. Hopefully we will be able to sweep them all out of government in the next election.

J Wraith


The wind farms protection racket

Dear Editor

The government is sneaking through plans to make it even easier to erect wind farms. If this was the work of gangsters aiming to spoil the countryside and kill millions of birds it would be understandable, as criminals don’t care what damage they cause. However this particular ‘protection racket’ is run on our behalf by the state and apparently for our benefit. Though it seems that the only wind blowing is great gusts of money towards the already wealthy, such as the Royal Family, who naturally think wind farms are a splendid idea.

Kathleen Carr


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.