Sir: As an Australian pessimistically into his eighth decade I’ve been dutifully voting since the age of 21. Partly because I didn’t give it a great deal of thought and also to avoid hassle and the inevitable fine. Now we have another federal election coming up. There are no visible nor viable choices. Either way we’re destined to end up with uninspiring ‘leaders’ who have no conception of what leadership truly entails. This time I’ll take the hassle and the fine.
What’s the point?
Sir: Katy Balls asks ‘Will there be an election?’ (16 March). That prompts the question: ‘To what purpose?’ Jeremy Corbyn may be ‘keen for an early election to break the deadlock’, but as the EU has repeatedly emphasised that its withdrawal deal is the only one on the table, how would Labour win a substantively better one than what’s already on offer? Besides, in the 2017 general election, more than 80 per cent of the electorate voted for parties promising to remove Britain not just from the EU, but also from its customs union and single market. Duly returned to the Commons, a majority of these MPs are now openly labouring to renege on their manifesto commitments and to thwart Brexit. What’s the point of an election if parliament has abandoned democracy?
Dr Sean McGlynn
Monkton Farleigh, Bradford on Avon
Changing my mind
Sir: It is rare for an article to change significantly one of my long-held opinions, but Douglas Murray’s uncomfortably forthright piece about the prosecution for murder of a soldier of the Parachute Regiment has done that (‘Bloody liar’, 16 March). For me, as a former reserve soldier and lifelong supporter of our armed services, the Bloody Sunday events have always been an uncomfortable issue. While I still do not accept the IRA’s account of the shootings, nor that they were a planned outrage, Murray’s point that we should hold our soldiers to a higher standard is correct. It is also the case that if Soldier F has engaged in serial lying and perjury, further inquiries are justified.
Who woke us?
Sir: Toby Young’s article ‘The rise of the woke corporation’ (9 March) makes interesting points about diversity and inclusion. However, the notion that political correctness is derived from the left is not entirely convincing. Much of it seems to have come from America and settled in the UK at a time when the political focus has shifted to the right.
The perils of certainty
Sir: Isabel Hardman writes: ‘What a baffling group of people anti-vaxxers are’ (‘A dose of understanding’, 16 March). I find the certainty of the pro-vaccine people equally baffling. I am neither, but wonder a lot where the truth lies. I was persuaded by my GP to have both a shingles vaccination and a flu vaccination four years ago, when I was 72. I was ill for the next six months and in constant pain. Do we really know what this might do to a tiny baby?
When I was a child we had fewer vaccines and the usual childhood diseases. Our generation is living an embarrassingly long time!
Saved from politicians
Sir: Your leading article identifies our current prosperity, seeming to say this is in spite of Brexit (‘The leadership deficit’, 16 March). May I suggest it is because of Brexit: not the impending separation (if that ever happens), but the way it has occupied what pass for minds among politicians, preventing their destructive meddling. Keep it going for another year or two, and the economy will soar.
Let’s hear it for hens
Sir: I completely agree with most of Laura Freeman’s article about hen parties (‘Clucking Hell’, 23 February), but she is wrong about one thing. Branding women as hens is not ‘awful’. Hens are wonderful creatures. They are often exceptionally feisty and are ferocious protectors of their young. They are excellent scavengers and are hardy down to very cold temperatures, yet also able to relax happily into an afternoon of restful sunbathing in a dust bath, with no need for a jacuzzi or a pint of vodka first.
Builth Wells, Powys
Grounds for optimism
Sir: Martin Vander Weyer’s column (Any other business, 16 March) on the UK Optimistic Fund portfolio bears comparison with Robin Oakley’s ‘12 to Follow’. I have often been struck by the comparison between the stock market and betting on horse races.
Unfortunately the regulations governing my SIPP mean that I cannot invest my monies with bookmakers. I will, however, be investing £10,000 in each of MVW’s (or, more accurately, my fellow Spectator readers’) ‘Ten to follow’. I would much rather be influenced by Spectator readers than by the financial press. Watch this space.
You might disagree with half of it, but you’ll enjoy reading all of it. Try your first 10 weeks for just $10