Letters: This vicious government will breed extremists

Pamela Guyatt (letter, 5 February) can foresee fascism looming on the horizon of this country – now in the clutches of the most brazenly vicious government I have experienced since I was a child in Nazi Germany. But there are also likely to be other and equally ominous consequences of that distorted vision of “the Big Society”, and in particular on the young and the unqualified.

In France, 35 per cent of the country’s estimated jihadists are converts – young Europeans who have become totally embittered and enraged by that far from equitable society in which they have no stake. And our government too, in so ruthlessly slashing essential funds, crippling and destroying institutions that were set up to deal with Britain’s indecent inequalities, will inevitably drive those it disinherits into the arms of any body that will offer them a welcome and a purpose.

David Cameron’s canny political manipulation in changing Britain’s method of voter registration in order to deprive huge numbers of our citizens of a vote that would most probably have gone to one or other of opposition parties, might win this shameless government a stay of much deserved execution. It is also likely to bring about what Pamela Guyatt fears, and I foresee: the descent of this much-vaunted mother of democracy into an abyss if civil strife.

Carla M Wartenberg

London NW3

Matthew Norman (3 February) is incredibly depressed “that no one gives a damn” that the PM and Chancellor are out to destroy Labour for good and assure unbroken Tory rule.

I, for one, do care and recently tried to raise the issue at a local meeting with our MP, suggesting that constitutional changes should be subject to cross-party agreement and to a referral to the whole electorate. What is currently happening is not only undemocratic but also dangerous, especially when one considers the Tories’ strange bedfellows in Europe, the proposed scrapping and replacement of the Human Rights Act, the spotlight being increasingly shone on immigration and the threat of jail for peaceful environmental protesters (report, 3 February).

The incumbents for the time being may seem benign to some but, without a written constitution or reasonable checks and balances on manipulation by any one political party, there is no guarantee that this will always be the case. Germany’s history in the 1930s is a good example of how quickly things can change.

Neil Kobish

Barnet, Hertfordshire

Lord Rennard boasts that the Liberal Democrats were central in trying to block changes to electoral laws (letter, 4 February). He clearly has a short memory, as his party promised to support reforming constituency boundaries when in coalition, even if it subsequently ratted on this after the Tories kept their side of the bargain and held a referendum on changing the voting system.

Under the electoral system endorsed in that referendum by a big majority of those of the electorate who voted, what is wrong with the constituencies as much as possible being the same population size? Yes, the Tories have a slim majority after winning less than 37 per cent of the vote. Yet they did not cry foul in 2005 when the Labour Party won a healthy overall majority with under 36 per cent of the vote in an election where the Tories actually won slightly more votes than Labour in England. They merely suggested boundary changes in the future.

Incidentally, as Lord Rennard feels so strongly about fair representation and reform of the House of Lords, which became his party’s justification for pulling the plug on boundary changes, what has he to say about the gross over-representation of his party in the Upper House? Will he be a man of principle, and call for a sharp reduction in their numbers and far more peers for Ukip?

Rupert Fast

Esher, Surrey

Lord Rennard is right but the situation is even worse than he states. The 37 per cent of votes cast for the Tories was less than 25 per cent of the whole electorate. I was among the 75 per cent who no doubt feel like me – disenfranchised by a system that, dangerously, produced a majority government. Nowadays 75 per cent is a minority, it seems. Newspeak?

Fear cuts both ways in Europe vote

David Harvey (letter, 6 February) says fear is a rational response to the “Leave” option in the forthcoming European Union referendum, since we have “no real idea of what an independent UK would look like”. Actually, we do know because we have been there before. Our natural allies and trading partners among the democratic nations of the world, outside the narrow confines of the EU, are already there.

The real problem is that we do not know how politicians would choose to interpret a vote to “Remain” in the EU. Would it be a green light for a magical mystery tour leading, ultimately, to a dysfunctional, federal European super-state? We do not know, but, based on current evidence, we can only speculate.

Fear, you see, cuts both ways, whether, in the end, one votes to leave or remain in the EU.

Paul Wilder

London SE11

It is unsurprising that the national mood seems to be shifting in favour of Brexit despite David Cameron’s efforts. The approach of EU leaders seems to take the UK’s remaining for granted.

It is not just the UK’s financial contribution to the organisation that is at stake for them but the livelihoods of many of their citizens. The case of Donald Tusk’s Poland is glaring but other EU members such as France also depend on the UK’s inclusion to provide a workplace for their citizens. They seem to be sleepwalking to financial ruin.

Carole Lewis

Solihull, West Midlands

Isabel Hardman pities those Tory MPs, torn between leader and local party (Voices, 5 February); she should not. Politicians and political parties trade on the faith and goodwill of their members and supporters. The time has come for Tory MPs to honour that trust and campaign for Britain to leave the EU.

Otto Inglis

Edinburgh

In your letters page on 5 February, a reader speculated whether offshore wind farms could be endangering whales in the North Sea.

Wind farms are not the problem. The wind industry undertakes extensive environmental assessments to anticipate and lessen any potential impacts wind farms may have on local wildlife long before they are constructed. Tragic as they are, cases of beached whales in the North Sea’s shallow waters are not uncommon.

Maf Smith

Deputy chief executive

RenewableUK, London SW1

City lawyers don’t act for small business (“A legal extortion racket”, 5 February); they act for large banks and major companies. High-street firms such as mine act for small businesses and we certainly do not charge anything like the rates you report.

In fact, our rates are less than one-fifth of those you refer to for a senior lawyer. We also offer fixed fees for smaller claims. The rates you refer are also no doubt charged for commercial work and not litigation.

High-street firms are fast falling by the wayside and these are the same people who provide excellent advice in the areas of family, criminal and probate law, which City firms do not. Hence any more ill-judged reforms drafted by overpaid Court of Appeal judges who have no experience of high-street firms could well lead to less access to justice.

Peter Stafford

Cartmel, Cumbria

Richard Garner’s exposé “The great university admissions charade (4 February), comes as no surprise.

This hugely expensive casino serves universities and students badly. That teachers should be obliged to give predicted grades after what is, in effect, no more three-fifths of the course can, despite their best efforts, be neither trustworthy nor reliable. It is hard to imagine a more stupid system than one where students apply to university before their results are known.

The universities claim that to change would mean an adjustment of their term dates. So what? The existing arrangements are a huge waste of time, talent and resources. The Government needs to knock heads together.

David McKaigue

Wirral

Old bankers linked to RBS now running new “challenger” banks was both predictable and avoidable (“Meet the new bankers, same as the old bankers”, 6 February). If bankers were required to be in a formal, registered profession similar to law, medicine, religion, architecture and teaching, they could be “struck off”.

Bill Summers

Sturminster Newton, Dorset