Crime stoppers

Sir: If the Tories’ reputation on crime lies in the hands of these innovative supercops, then it will be sadly doomed, no matter how enterprising they may be (‘Rise of the supercops’, 5 August). Whether we like to believe it or dismiss it as woolly liberalism, the police and courts have a limited impact upon crime. The reality is that crime is driven by powerful social and economic forces, not the effectiveness of the local constabulary. In a liberal democracy, leaving the police to deal with any complex social problem, particularly one as diverse and intractable as crime, is fraught with danger. The police do have an important role to play but so do many others. This was well understood by New Labour, whose ‘tough on the causes of crime’ approach succeeded in stripping the Conservative party of its law-and-order credentials.

The effective answer is to ensure all of our public agencies, from education to health and local government, work together. The police should ‘bring policing to the table’ (i.e. the basics of arrest, search and patrol) rather than becoming part of an indistinguishable blob committed to ‘public safety’. Bringing these rigid, often self-serving hierarchies together with a sharp and single focus is a lot less appealing to politicians than talking tough and reminiscing about the apparent success of a US police chief more than 30 years ago. It is, however, the only way to manage crime in the long term.

Richard List

Aylesbury, Bucks 

Northern lights

Sir: I was pleased that Katy Balls recognises that we have some first-class chief constables in the north of England. However, their qualities first have to be identified by the police and crime commissioner for the area when he or she appoints them, and they have to be backed up as they take whatever decisions are necessary to get their force out of special measures. The task of the police and crime commissioner is to set the force’s priorities and both hold it to account and be supportive. It’s when the PCC and chief constable can work together in this way that real progress can be made and sustained. 

Dr Alan Billings, Police and Crime Commissioner for South Yorkshire

Sheffield 

Don’t forget the driver

Sir: Mark Mason writing about the 1963 Great Train Robbery (Notes on, 5 August) says that perhaps the ‘saddest story’ was the suicide of one of the gang more than 30 years after the robbery. The family of Jack Mills, the train driver, might disagree. Hit on the head with an iron bar, he was forced to drive the train, blood streaming from the wound. He was never able to go fully back to work and died seven years later.

John Murphy

Holytown, Motherwell

Wild claims

Sir: I wholeheartedly agree with Jamie Blackett’s observations (‘Pitch battles’, 5 August) on the ‘no boundaries’ culture of today. Like many, I began camping in my parents’ garden and have enjoyed its challenges throughout Europe and Africa, down to the Okovango – surviving an early morning hippo stampede as part of the fun. But I detest prefixing the activity with ‘wild’ when it’s no such thing. It reminded me of a lady I overheard informing her neighbour that she was going ‘Wild camping in the motor home’. When asked where, she replied: ‘A lay-by somewhere on the A303.’

Steve Chilvers

Lowestoft, Suffolk

Slippery arguments

Sir: Dr Meirion Thomas (Letters, 29 July) rehearses the usual arguments in favour of assisted dying ‘for patients with terminal diseases’. First, ‘good legislation’ can prevent any ‘slippery slope’. It would be difficult to name a single state where this has proved possible; hence the spread of ‘assisted’ dying to the depressed, and to infants and children in Canada, the Netherlands and Belgium. The fact is that a slippery slope is not accidental but inevitable. Once a law has been introduced establishing a ‘right’ to assisted suicide for certain individuals, it becomes impossible to deny that ‘right’ to other groups. 

Second, ‘palliative/terminal care is not as widely available as would be ideal’. In other words, the NHS is failing, so let’s reduce its workload. No one has ever established whether Jacques Attali, French economist and ex-president of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, was being ironic when he said the over-65s ‘cost society a lot of money… euthanasia will be one of the essential instruments of our future societies’. But an unarguable economic case is not the same as justification.

And third, it is wrong to deny competent patients this ‘choice’ when they suffer from ‘intractable pain… or the indignities of [some] neurodegenerative diseases’. But it is right to deny competent individuals some ‘choices’ – ranging from seatbelts to crack cocaine. We do so when there are serious adverse consequences for society. To legalise assisted dying is to normalise it, creating no small pressure – real or perceived – on the frail and the sick to take this ‘choice’. It is no coincidence that support for assisted dying is consistently lowest among the elderly and the disabled.

Emeritus Professor Neil Scolding, FRCP

Keynsham, Bristol

To Victor the spoils

Sir: Joel Morris (Books, 22 July) is rightly dismissive of David Stubbs’s claim that music and comedy are opposing forces, and he presents an impressive array of comedians in support of his case: expert instrumentalists who have used their musical talents to further their art. There is one startling omission – arguably the funniest act ever seen on stage, a magnetic personality who provoked uncontrollable giggles before he even engaged with an instrument which was, nevertheless, absolutely integral to his humour. The instrument was the piano, and the performer was of course Victor Borge.

Philip Barber

Manchester