PLEASE send your letters (as short as you like) to info@conservativewoman.co.uk 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.
***
No end to the jab mania
Dear Editor
There have been hundreds of deaths apparently caused by the mRNA injections and many of the deaths have been of young healthy people; so why do ‘they’ want to continue to inflict these injections on the elderly and vulnerable? Surely the elderly and vulnerable should not be encouraged to have the experimental injection? Are the elderly and vulnerable more likely to suffer ill-effects from the injections more than the young and healthy?
Daphne MacOwan
Isle of Man
***
Biden’s special relationship with Sinn Fein
This letter was sent to the Wall Street Journal.
Dear Editor
Your readers may be interested in the reaction of many in Britain to your President’s decision to meet Sinn Fein (in pursuit of a United Ireland) but not to attend the Coronation of King Charles.
Every year Americans celebrate Independence Day and no President would ever allow part of the US to come under foreign jurisdiction, but Mr Biden wants us to leave Northern Ireland (NI) under ECJ jurisdiction, which is inexplicable.
Any move to turn the NI population into citizens of the Irish Republic without their consent is far more likely to lead to violence. So Mr Biden might better spend his time on driving down the murder rate in the US, which must be amongst the highest in the free world.
Churchill noted that America always gets it right – after it has tried everything else. Sadly it has been experimenting for too long with failed so-called ‘Democrats’.
So it is time to stop pretending that there is a special relationship between Britain and the US. That has been replaced now by a relationship between Biden and Sinn Fein – and a country which contributes nothing to Nato – and the EU with its unelected rulers. Some Democrat!
Roger J Arthur
West Sussex
***
We won’t be here for ever
Dear Editor,
A recent national newspaper showed that 91 per cent of those polled wished to abandon the pursuit of Net Zero. This is a classic example of how politicians are pursuing policies against public opinion, all for our own good of course.
An alternative view is that the human race will have its time on our planet, as other creatures have had before becoming extinct for various reasons. So we should utilise the planet’s resources to the full while we are here, just as our predecessors did, and those resources are plentiful. Government’s duty is to people who are here now, not to those in some distant future when circumstances may be totally different.
Also, those who consider that setting a climate example will persuade others to follow should be aware that nobody else cares about climate change, which in any event is an invention designed to cripple Western economies.
Indeed, the entire climate mantra makes life difficult and expensive for motives that are highly suspect.
Malcolm Parkin
Kinross
***
The futility of Net Zero
Dear Editor
It will be remembered that talks continued after the scheduled finish of COP26 in 2021 because China, India and others refused to sign the agreement to ‘phase out’ coal and insisted on ‘phase down’ coal. A recent meeting of the Group of Seven energy and environmental ministers failed to set a deadline for the phase-out of coal. India is planning a new coal boom to meet soaring demand. State-run NTPC Ltd, India’s largest electricity producer, is to build more coal plants this year and boost output from its own coal mines to 34million tons this fiscal year. The US, Japan and the EU have reservations about a proposal by the UK to set a firm 2030 deadline to end coal-fired power generation. It is certain that China, India and others will kick this into the long grass. Coal generates over 56 per cent of China’s electricity. China has, in the last year, on average granted building permits for two coal-fired plants a week. To misquote Mark Twain. Reports of the Death of Old King Coal are greatly exaggerated.
Clark Cross
Linlithgow
***
‘Climate change’ is a cover for ‘revolutionary change’
Madam
The debate over global warming and dealing with builders have something in common. In both cases, we have to assess the claims of people who know much more than we do ourselves. With tradesmen, we manage to do it. There is no reason why the same can’t apply to the scientists and others active in the climate debate.
The greens were prophesying doom and demanding that we live a much poorer life before global warming was threatened. The 1972 book Limits to Growth predicted worldwide famine, catastrophic environmental degradation and population collapse. The book was based on computer models developed at MIT, then as now one of the world’s top ten universities.
When the claims of Limits to Growth proved to be bunk, the greens looked around for a new catastrophe to scare us with and settled on anthropogenic global warming. They and bandwagoning politicians repeatedly gave us deadlines to change our behaviour or catastrophe would ensue. Deadline after deadline passed and the world went on much as before.
So they changed the name from AGW to climate change. The beauty of the new name is that greens can point to any weather that is an outlier from average and sagely claim it as evidence of climate change. The threat is so vague and general that it is not a scientific theory capable of testing.
We, who contribute only a very modest part of human carbon dioxide output, are to decarbonise our society, while the Chinese, the Indians and others build thousands of new coal-fired power stations. The inevitable conclusion is that the purpose of ‘zero carbon’ is to effect revolutionary change in Western societies rather than to ‘save the planet’.
Otto Inglis
Fife
