Boris Johnson has turned us into a nation of lawbreakers

With his proposal to approve legislation which will override parts of the Northern Ireland Protocol (though no doubt only in “a specific and limited way”), Boris Johnson has shown that not only is he personally willing to break the law with casual insouciance, but that he is happy to make lawbreakers of our entire nation.

The problem with the EU border in Ireland, let us not forget, is one entirely of Johnson’s own making. Having repeatedly explicitly denied that leaving the EU would necessitate leaving the single market during the Brexit campaign that he fronted (one of a number – 350 million or so – of mistruths uttered on that trail), it suddenly became “the will of the people” the moment the votes had been counted. Now, thanks to his squirming efforts to overcome the difficulties that he has thus imposed upon us, Britain has become a country that cannot be trusted even to uphold international treaties, and yet still the bloviating blond blusterer holds the office of foremost of our lawmakers.

Given all the myriad issues which leaving it has created, would it be too late now for Britain to rejoin the single market? It increasingly appears as though that may be the only way to make this ill-conceived Brexit even remotely manageable, while the only perceivable benefit to quitting it appears to have been the “freedom” to lower our food standards.

Julian Self

Milton Keynes

The point about a treaty, or any contract, is that the signatories consider the details in the small print. All possible eventualities need to be considered, and plans made to deal with them. Did the Brexit negotiators not understand that?

Now Lord Frost has accused Nancy Pelosi of making an ignorant statement because she suggested that the UK government might unilaterally discard the Northern Ireland Protocol. There is no such plan, he claims. Has he not noticed that planning is not a strength of this government, and it’s not unknown for unplanned events to just happen?

It’s clear that our bumbling PM has spent his life assuming that his wealth and position will ensure that everything will work out well for him, with the minimum of effort on his part. And for him, personally, that is probably the case. But it’s not a successful strategy for the leader of a country. There’s more to leadership than repeating slogans and hoping for the best.  If he were to undermine the Good Friday Agreement the consequences could be horrendous. It will take many years to repair much of the damage he’s already done to the wellbeing and reputation of the UK. The longer Tory MPs  support him, the greater the damage will also be to their party’s reputation. Can they not see that?

Susan Alexander

South Gloucestershire

A ‘listen’ option would be an excellent addition to your revamped online presence… but why does the computer-generated male voice feature in each article? Are there no female versions of the program?

Surely your female writers, including star columnist Cathy Newman, deserve that much gender recognition?

Rick Dillon

St Leonards on Sea

I read Sean O’Grady’s column with interest and complete agreement (Even if Gray exonerates Johnson, the public won’t). This torturously long-awaited report will, I imagine, be pretty damning of Downing Street culture, and even if it isn’t, the rightful conclusion of the public will be that there was a widespread breaking of the rules in this louche environment.

O’Grady is correct: this modus operandi is operating in Downing Street, was basically an abhorrent disregard of the public’s on the whole complete adherence to what were draconian rules – but were sold as a means of keeping us safe, and more importantly protecting the vulnerable members in our communities.

The public will not condone (and neither should it) such rank hypocrisy. Many men and women working at the coal face of this horrendous pandemic did not alleviate their stress with wholesale partying, and that goes for Downing Street as well. The rationale that these rules did not apply to them is completely wrong and the prime minister has to bear responsibility for what was happening on his less-than-vigilant watch.

Judith A. Daniels

Norfolk

Dear, oh dear. John Rentoul really doesn’t like the prospect of a proportional electoral system, does he?

He is, of course, much better informed about the machinations of parliament than most of us outside the bubble, yet he seems able to ignore the gross ineffectiveness of the first past the post (FPTP) arrangement. He describes plenty of possible deals and backroom bargaining aimed at achieving a marginally functional government, but ignores the shocking lack of representation which is inevitable with FPTP.

All voters should be assured of a voice in parliament. A look at the voting patterns in the House of Commons shows how legislation is effectively waved through or rejected with minimal debate. A proportionally representative parliament would make this almost impossible. The current disgraceful gutter politics must end. Proportional representation would help.

Steve Edmondson

Cambridge

Why is “slated” being increasingly used instead of scheduled or planned?

It’s another Americanism creeping into your journalism which bears no relationship to how normal people actually talk!

Steve Antcliff

Address supplied

To keep up to speed with all the latest opinions and comment, sign up to our free weekly Voices Dispatches newsletter by clicking here