Whether it’s Labour or the Conservatives, a general election won’t save us

Judith A Daniels, in her recent letter, fervently looks forward to an election which would “cleanse and refresh” the muddied waters and allow our legitimate, democratic voice to be heard. While I’m in agreement with a need to clear the muddy waters does anyone really believe with our current political system that a “first past the post” electoral result will unite us and clarify that murky water?

With two parties who both hold vaguely similar Brexit and immigration policies, we’ll be back in the same old fandango no matter what the nation’s “democratic voice” says.

Clinging to an idealistic dream that an election will allow us to slough off to our current Wild West form of governance is a forlorn hope and while negativity and cynicism may not be a healthy or positive way to see the world, I suggest it’ll prepare many of us for more of the same whichever party manages to wobble past the post next year.

Steve Mackinder

Denver, Norfolk

Why on earth are MPs allowed to work for business entities instead of solely looking after their constituents without distraction? It seems to me that their election to Westminster enables far too many to become employed by and lobby for certain industries and companies.

MPs are paid for improving the lives of the electorate, governing the country and aiding in ties to other countries. That should be their only concern. Those MPs who do not work full-time and tirelessly for their constituents are not doing the job for which they are employed.

Either they do their job or work elsewhere. It is the constituents that suffer but the MP still rakes in £80,000+ per year for doing nothing and the country suffers also. Both the Commons and Lords have their share of those who do little or nothing for the country, these nondescripts ought to be sacked making way for politicians that actually want to contribute to the wellbeing of the country.

Keith Poole

Basingstoke

The Independent’s Sean O’Grady predicts that the “nasty party” is coming back after the next Tory leadership contest. But how suicidal would the Conservatives, with their current composition and with their historic instinct for survival, need to be to choose a candidate who would take the party further to the right after an election defeat?

A nasty party led by either Suella Braverman or Kemi Badenoch might, however, follow from a party split. This could certainly happen if Net Zero 2050 comes to dominate a bitterly fought general election campaign. Labour, despite Sir Keir’s current caution about hugging trees, appears to be in favour to win.

However, it wouldn’t be a surprise in my opinion if both the main political parties split – each into “nice” and “nasty” sections. The “nasty” Tories welcome the likes of Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage. The anti-Starmer Labour faction welcomes back Jeremy Corbyn and his followers.

Steven Fogel

London

In response to the government’s increasingly inflammatory rhetoric on new oil and gas in the North Sea, I believe they are not only grandstanding but also polarising, which is a great shame.

But here’s the thing, it will probably lead to them flunking the next general election, because the last time the Conservatives were this polarising was probably in 1945, when they suggested that Labour were communists. This backfired, and Churchill, the most popular prime minister ever, managed, with inflammatory rhetoric at that election, to squander an open goal and contributed to an unexpected historic Labour landslide.

To properly address the climate crisis we currently face we need to overcome such divisiveness, and if the Tories want to win the next election they need to change their rhetoric.

Dr Rupert Read

Co-director of the Climate Majority Project

It seems that Robert Jenrick still believes he made the correct decision by removing pre-existing murals from a migrant centre for young people, despite a massive public outcry. The fact that this boorish and spiteful decision cost the taxpayers £1,500 makes this decision even more disgraceful.

Can we expect that Mr Jenrick will now be made to pay for this waste of taxpayers’ money by having this cost deducted from his salary?

Ian McNicholas

Ebbw Vale