Where are the ‘brave defenders’ of free speech now?

Having read the news that the High Court has decided that Michaela Community School’s prayer ban was valid, we must consider the larger implications. While I understand that the school prides itself on being a non-faith school – a perfectly understandable and reasonable expectation for such a place – I do think a ban on students praying during their break or lunchtime is a dangerous step towards curtailing students’ freedoms when it comes to both freedom of belief and conscience.

The question of freedom of conscience and freedom of speech are really not that far from the concept of freedom of religion. After all, they all intend to allow a diversity of thought and worldviews, which of all places, a school should be encouraging. In a climate where people seem to be increasingly worried about “free speech”, I would have thought that those who had been “brave defenders of free speech” would be more vocal about this ban.

Schools ought to remember that learning does not only happen inside the classroom, but peers are always learning from each other and engaging in meaningful and intelligent discussions outside also. I am grateful that during my time in school, I learnt from my peers about their backgrounds and beliefs in detail, and there was respect for other beliefs and cultures among our students. This could only happen if the school management allowed such diversity. I fear this ban is just one step towards greater restrictions on freedoms.

Iffat Mirza

London

Liz Truss is a lost soul. She seems to live in another, utopian world where her thoughts and deeds go unchallenged, where she believes she is always right.

As PM, for about six weeks, she wrecked our economy, further diminished the reputation of Britain, and ushered in a long period of suffering for our already impoverished population.

Since her demise, she has been nothing but a thorn in the side of the government and mischievous towards her party. Much of what Truss says is unbelievable and, her reasoning for the decisions she made while in office is stranger than fiction.

Truss seems to blame “others” for being ousted from office and the failure of her mini-Budget. The truth is that the financial future of Britain was severely compromised by flawed financial acumen, lack of scrutiny, and misplaced dogma.

As a result of Covid-19, failing infrastructure, national utilities, healthcare, education, the cost of living, etc, the workers of Britain have now been worn down and exhausted. There are millions of disenfranchised people not working due to illness, lack of skills, redundancy, or early retirement.

It would be very satisfying for all if Truss were to vanish back into the ether. Her continued presence in the public eye is an assault on the senses. It’s unfair to the public that quirky organisations roll her out to attract attention to their particular stance. She adds no value to our political system, but merely uses her tarnished reputation to blight any hope for better governance.

Please, would someone stop the rollout of failed MPs to influence our future prosperity?

Keith Poole

Basingstoke

With many desperate to paint Labour as fiscally irresponsible in the run-up to the next election, the accusations that Gordon Brown “sold off all our gold” seem to be resurfacing.

Yes, the price of gold has increased manyfold since the early 2000s, when the former PM decided to sell most of the UK’s reserves. However, it’s only natural that gold, with its fixed supply, appreciates over time relative to paper currencies.

But this begs the question – what should have been done instead? If we had kept the gold until now, and only just sold it, then no doubt in 2040 we would be looking back and rueing the day we ever sold it. The only logical conclusion of this argument is that the government should hoard its gold forever – but what purpose would this serve, aside from incurring storage costs?

Also, for anyone now attacking Brown, what was stopping them from buying some of it themselves? Unless of course they are just using the benefit of hindsight to distract from the economic malaise brought about over the past 14 years...

Miles Black

Colchester

Brilliant! Not only have we got the world’s toughest anti-tobacco laws, but we now have a PM as popular as the plague, determined to sow as much division as possible amongst people determined to save their own seat!

I am indifferent to this parody of legislation, but I am not indifferent to life choices being imposed on people without mandated consent.

Boris Johnson has described the matter as “bonkers”, and when it comes down to it, is there a better example of “bonkership” than the PM himself? Not even the breakers’ yard would entertain these shoddy “representatives” of the people.

Collin Rossini

Essex

The smoking ban – as reported in The Independent – may be Rishi Sunak’s only decent policy. I understand libertarians claiming such an imposition restricts freedom, for the ban does indeed limit liberty and individual choice, and there’s no getting away from that.

However, the fact is that smoking is a highly addictive habit that massively decreases one’s life expectancy by making cancers far more likely to materialise. As a consequence, it also strains health resources. In my view, then, it is wholly responsible, fair, and just to create a smoke-free Britain by bringing this policy into fruition.

Smoking has killed far too many – often in the most ghastly circumstances – for us to be concerned about a minor infringement on the liberty of future generations to purchase what is, after all, a dangerous drug. The truly significant loss of liberty and freedom comes about not through a smoking ban, but in the form of human addiction to nicotine, for it is that addiction that kills – and there is no freedom in death.

Sebastian Monblat

London