It’s time to halt Brexit and stop our trade deal with the US going through – or we’ll all be eating chlorinated chicken

I have just read John Roberts’ letter on how the British public have, on voting for Brexit, once again saved the country.

He calls the EU a “behemoth” but he doesn’t put forward a single evidence-based reason for leaving the EU. Instead, he says we should leave because Tony Benn thought we should. Well Hillary Benn, Tony Benn’s own son, strongly disagrees.

John, if you want to sacrifice British jobs and eat chlorinated chicken, good luck to you. I don’t!

Joe Hennessy
Faversham

We now know why Liam Fox thought our post-Brexit trade would be so easy to arrange: there is nothing difficult about rolling onto one’s back and saying, “Yes, sir, president. Anything you want, sir.”

Joe Morison
London NW6

John Roberts offers us his “cogent argument” for Brexit and says he has never heard a cogent argument for Remain. I have read his letter several times and still failed to find his cogent argument, which seems mainly to consist of hyperbole about “self-serving rigid technocrats” and the fact that he took his view from the “dissident left”.

I fear that the thinking of many people who voted Brexit could be at this level. A cogent argument would look at the evidence supporting each of the two options and come to a conclusion. Perhaps I can help him with the outline of a cogent argument for Remain.

The EU is a democratic organisation (arguably more democratic than the UK) that has overseen an unprecedented period of peace and prosperity in Europe, following centuries of strife. On top of this, there are large, threatening forces, economic, political and natural, at work in the world. Think of the rise of Chinese political and economic influence, the current stance of the USA and Russia, North Korea, the self-serving, tax-avoiding behaviour of large multinational companies, worldwide environmental issues, global warming and much more.

The fact is that a small country like ours has little influence with these big players and we need to join forces in the closest possible collaboration with our neighbours in order to deal with these issues. It seems to me that the EU is still a relatively young organisation and has evolved over the years and will continue to do so.

The leading nations within the EU are not stupid and, especially with the likes of Emmanuel Macron now involved, this evolution will continue to benefit all members. Our continued intense involvement with the EU would help greatly to guide and foster this.

Ian Quayle
Fownhope

I too am extremely interested to read cogent arguments for leaving the EU. Unfortunately I found John Roberts’ letter vague, concentrating as it did on the negativity of Remainers rather than positive core reasons for Brexit. Please could he, or someone else, write again with a much clearer view of what exactly we will gain from this momentous decision?

Rachel Greenwood
Bewdley

As safeguarding lead at a comprehensive school I was staggered to read the article on sex and relationships education (SRE) in yesterday’s edition. I recently had to train with a colleague to deliver SRE ourselves because the local authority no longer has the resources to come in as they used to. We then “cascaded” this down to a team of dedicated and caring teachers whose responsibility it now is.

I can assure your readers that the anecdotes the article quoted are indeed rare. Girls sending nude selfies are, far from being punished, supported sensitively and recipients who distribute them are isolated and spoken to by the safe schools police officer and by their parents about the breach of trust and decency. As for being raped by a school counsellor, I trust that this was reported to police and a prosecution brought, as it most certainly would be in my school.

To say, based on these anecdotes, that schools cannot be trusted with this important area of education is too sweeping. Yes, more thought may be needed, but as schools we are doing the very best we can – and to good effect.

Sylvia Haddrell
Bournemouth

In response to Colin Bower’s letter defending a pensioner’s right to defend his home – I agree in principle, except that is not quite why he was arrested.

Regardless of the circumstance or motive, he did kill a man – understandably and, yes, I’m sure I would have responded to such a threat in the same way. I am glad that having been arrested the man was then promptly released without prosecution, and I hope he was treated respectfully and sensitively, but a non-arrest would have been unlawful. Even the burglar, like it or not, has the right to have his death duly investigated, just as a man acting in self-defence has the right to have his innocence officially ratified.

Perhaps, like many of the reporters of this story, Bower is conflating “arrest” with “prosecution”.

Chris Smith
Bishop Auckland

Johnson has labelled Corbyn Moscow’s “useful idiot”. He need have no fear. That role is still very much his own.

Beryl Wall
London W4

The real mystery concerning the BBC production of the Agatha Christie story, Ordeal By Innocence, is not who is the murderer, but why did the Agatha Christie Estate allow Sara Phelps to change the ending?

Colin Bower
Sherwood