Tuesday, April 23, 2024
HomeNewsLetters 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.

COP26 will be a cop-out

Dear Editor

As COP26 looms, gullible UK politicians want countries to leave fossil fuels in the ground. Reality check. The US, Australia, China and India together have three-quarters of global coal reserves. Middle Eastern states have more than half of the world’s oil reserves and Canada extracts oil from tar sands. Europe has been forced to ask Russia for more coal to survive this winter’s energy crisis. Germany now has more than 40 coal-fired plants fuelled by imports from Russia. China has 1,000 coal-fired plants. India, China, Indonesia, India, Japan and Vietnam are building over 600 new coal-fired electricity plants. America, having shale gas, is now exporting coal and its biggest customer is Europe. Does any sane person think that China and the majority of the rest of the world will stop using fossil fuels? COP26 will certainly be a cop-out.

Clark Cross



What does ‘levelling-up’ mean?

Dear Editor

Boris Johnson is running scared of the doomsday scientists, climate fanatics and the woke brigade, who include in their minority ranks the first lady, Carrie Johnson. He has surrounded himself with a cabinet and advisers who are unwilling to explain that his new suit of clothes is in fact an illusion. Despite his rhetoric to the contrary, he remains London-centric and has no feel for the vast swathe of ordinary people in the United Kingdom who backed him in 2019. These good people rejected the europhiles and the disloyalty of the Jeremy Corbyn ethos; they will just as easily reject him if he continues unchecked down this path.

I have voted Conservative on every possible occasion since 1973 and was delighted in December 2019 to wake up to a fresh Conservative government with a substantial majority, which the prime minister is now intent on squandering. Pandering to the woke community and the climate fanatics will not win him any votes but will undoubtedly damage his wider support.

The pandemic cannot be blamed for the failure of leadership and policy that we are presently experiencing.

The science on climate change and how to tackle it is a long way from being resolved, yet the government is rushing to decisions that are at best reckless or outdated and at worst ineffective. Where is the nuanced, intelligent approach we expect from a Conservative government?

The Home Office appears powerless in the face of illegal immigration, yet this situation was entirely foreseeable following Brexit. Why were the necessary changes to our laws and border controls not implemented immediately upon leaving the EU?

Political misdirection over many successive administrations has led to a police force that is hamstrung by spurious considerations involving ethnicity, sexuality and politics; these issues are for social organisations and politicians to deal with. The danger is that the doctrine of policing by consent will collapse if officers are put in the invidious position of policing the middle ground of the population, the wearing of face masks for instance, whilst ordinary citizens see officers taking the knee, driving LGBT coloured patrol cars and enabling selected groups of protesters. When can we expect the police to be left unhindered to enforce the law?

The prime minister brandishes the concept of ‘levelling up’ as a panacea to fix the country but it is clear that Conservative Members of Parliament do not have a common view on what levelling up actually means. Does the inner circle of Boris Johnson even know what levelling up means?

The expectations of the largely unheard majority are easy to understand when you remove the noise and clutter coming from minorities:

Energy security and affordability comes before green initiatives.

Job security and wages that cover the cost of living and housing.

Personal security in our homes and on the streets.

The elimination of waste in our public services.

The preservation of strategic industries and interests.

A fair tax regime that is effectively enforced.

What is required from the prime minister’s levelling up mantra is not difficult to understand, so why is it so difficult to implement?

Ian Ashworth-Kirkham


The political gangsters’ protection racket

Dear Editor

A lot of the comments on internet forums seem to be made by academics who feel that if the government/scientists/medical world would just look at this new flow diagram they will realise they should have dealt with Covid like Sweden and not ruined the economy. I’m afraid these commentators are too nice. The general political world (which includes media, civil service, judiciary, charity etc) seem to me to be just a load of gangsters and Covid, together with the climate change racket, is just another way of getting protection money out of us. Just like the peasants in days of old had to pay the salt tax or the cider tax to pay for m’lord’s new war/castle/fashion, so we must pay more for our food/fuel and taxes to keep those privileged few in the style to which they have become accustomed.

Kathleen Carr



Security or secrecy?

Dear Editor

I have been a Conservative voter all my life and was particularly relieved when Boris Johnson was elected with such a large majority. I was at the time deeply concerned that Jeremy Corbyn would take the country backwards, be financially inept and not deliver Brexit. Whether you were in favour of Brexit or not, it was clearly damaging to continue in a state of limbo and the country desperately needed strong leadership. I do not regret voting Conservative but am deeply disturbed and disappointed at what has happened under Boris Johnson’s leadership or lack of it and will be unlikely to support the party at the next election.

I have never been someone who believes in conspiracy theories but then again I have never been put under house arrest for months on end, been challenged to prove my shopping is essential or been coerced into having an experimental medical intervention.

In my professional life I am an accountant and in more recent years have been a business analyst. I am used to appraising financial models in order to make robust and quantifiable decisions based on appropriate risk/benefit analysis. Not surprisingly I have taken a great deal of interest in the data appertaining to Covid and also the data produced by the MHRA regarding vaccine adverse effects.
Some of the modelling and predictions produced by this Government’s advisers have been laughable and it amazes me that anyone would still listen to Neil Ferguson, but that’s another story.

With regards to data I have found the Technical Briefing reports produced by Public Health England to be extremely useful, being reliable data accurately presented. Their analysis for example showing that the viral load of vaccinated people was almost identical to the viral load of unvaccinated people was particularly useful given the discussions taking place regarding vaccination passports etc. Also the comparison between vaccinated people versus unvaccinated people regarding deaths and hospitalisations was interesting and concerning. In Technical Briefing 23 the figures showed that out of 2,542 deaths relating to Covid (Delta variant), 1,613 people had been fully vaccinated and only 722 were unvaccinated. These figures were demonstrating a clear pattern that vaccine efficacy was indeed waning and each briefing showed a deteriorating pattern.

Today I looked at Technical Briefing 24 only to find this data was no longer included. Looking more closely, I realised that the Briefing had not been produced by Public Health England but instead was now produced by the UK Health Security Agency. On further research I found that Public Health England no longer exists and has been replaced by the aforementioned agency.

Should we be concerned that the lines between health i.e. doctors, medicine, scientists, are being crossed with security i.e. armed forces, police, enforcement, politicians. Surely the two are not compatible, or am I being over-sensitive? The concept of health has always been ‘First do no harm’ which may not entirely marry up with the principles of security.

It is reported that the Government spent £164million of taxpayers’ funds on advertising in 2020 – and to think I worried about Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell. 

So much for accountability and transparency  – whatever happened to decision-making based on informed opinion and indeed democracy? I look only at official data produced by Government departments and deliberately avoid so-called conspiracy theories, but it is difficult not to worry about the loss of freedom and privacy and, I repeat, democracy.
A lot has to change between now and the next election if I am to vote Conservative again.

John Davis

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.

Edited by Kathy Gyngell

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.