Could Boris Johnson be accused of criminal negligence if Covid deaths rise sharply after ‘freedom day’?

Our prime minister, for whatever political reasons, not to suggest showmanship, is hellbent on removing most Covid restrictions. His acolytes and adoring Brexit fans will be ecstatic.

As the police have already warned, however, this will unlock a summer of endless parties. NHS doctors have warned of a “Covid explosion” when lockdown restrictions will be lifted, inevitably putting the NHS under severe stress. More than 1,200 scientists from around the world have condemned the prime minister’s decision to forge ahead with the so-called “freedom day”, describing it as “unscientific and unethical”. The UK is seen as a potential super-spreader for the rest of the world, as it already is for the Delta variant by having allowed flights to arrive from India when the door should have been closed much earlier.

Some experts have gone as far as calling it a “murderous” policy. In view of this, could our prime minister be accused of criminal intent? Or, to take this one step further, if our Covid related death rate rises uncontrollably, will there be any legal grounds for taking our prime minister to court for criminal negligence? He apparently has already previously said, one assumes in an unguarded moment, that he does not care if the “bodies pile high”.

If so, his legal council will need to be very creative to come up with a credible line of defence to convince a jury that he, as prime minister, has made his decision in the best interests of the people of this country.

Gunter Straub

London NW3

So-called “freedom day” is going to be “condemnation day”. Why can’t the government listen to the rest of the world and the scientists, and not lift restrictions?

Jade Bandit

Address supplied

The notion that 40 per cent of world vaccines have been used in high-income countries while low-income countries have only 1 per cent speaks volumes about discrimination, injustice and unfairness. All people should have equitable and affordable access to medicines and vaccinations without encountering any financial hurdles. All nations should unequivocally commit themselves to achieve the vision of Universal Health Coverage as the first and foremost goal of the 2030 agenda of sustainable development goals and as a path towards building a peaceful and inclusive societies free of hunger, health threats, lethal pandemics and extreme poverty.

Dr Munjed Farid Al Qutob

London NW2

Rhineland floods are far from rare. What made the recent one so devastating has much less to do with global warming than a ludicrous failure of the warning system. The first signs of catastrophe were detected nine days ago by a satellite but the resulting forecasts of “extreme” flooding, along the Erft and Ahr rivers, and in towns such as Hagen and Altena, were ignored.

A sophisticated flood prediction model was built after central and eastern Europe’s cataclysmic floods in 2002 and this worked well the 2014 Balkan inundations. But it appears the constant drumbeat of climate alarmism has dulled the senses and danger zones were not evacuated. People must realise such deluges have always happened in Europe and be ready to react.

Dr John Cameron

St Andrews

Robert Llewellyn has a good article on electric cars (Three things you might not know about electric vehicles – and why you should really consider getting one, 28 June), but he lists the potential costs (apart from power supply) as wipers, washer fluid and tyres.

He has omitted something essential – brake pads. Electric cars go very fast indeed and many vehicles today already approach roundabouts far too fast in the knowledge that their brakes are super-efficient. That won’t change with electric vehicles much as we might like it to (especially as we are cyclists).

Electric cars are heavy and very fast. It will be very easy to wear out brake pads unless drivers moderate their speed and slow down in good time using deceleration and then their brakes. There will be no running down through the gears. There aren’t any.

David Riley

Frome, Somerset

Disgusting behaviour by members of parliament seems to be the norm these days, but for the chairman of the Parliamentary Cross Party Group on Eating Disorders to publicly “fat shame” a nurse for eating a pasty (News, 17 July) is far beyond the pale of acceptable behaviour.

Not only does this man obviously have no concept of the constraints on a nurse’s time, particularly in the current crisis, which often means snatching a meal when you can, rather that spending the leisurely hours an MP can take fine dining in silver service restaurants, he quite obviously does not have the faintest shred of understanding of the extremely complex issue of obesity, and the medical issues that affect it.

His chairmanship and public comments demean and devalue the entire committee, not to mention parliament. He should resign. Now.

Ian McNicholas

Ebbw Vale