Matt Hancock’s resignation goes far beyond private affairs – he’s flouting the lockdown rules he wrote

Patricia Worthington is appalled at the manner in which people trespass into the private affairs of our public servants.

Why is it that so many like her cannot see that the issue is nothing to do with their private affairs? Under Matt Hancock’s rules, if Ms Worthington had broken lockdown rules she may be liable to a fine of £10,000. If she had broken Hancock’s quarantine rules she may have spent 10 years in jail!

This goes well beyond his private affairs.

Even his own Newmarket constituents recognise this. Does she think he’s going to be ready-elected there? Not in a million years.

Bill Yates

Address supplied

I am surprised that your editorial speaks favourably of the idea of Jeremy Hunt as a replacement for Matt Hancock.

Wasn’t Hunt the health secretary whose ignoring of the recommendations of the report into the needs of the NHS to secure reasonable preparedness for the future was a great contribution to the problems we faced at the onset of the pandemic?

Can he really be the most suitable candidate for the job?

Tony Baker

Thirsk, North Yorkshire

While I do not question Ms Worthington’s conviction in yesterday’s Letters, I think it is important to note for completeness’ sake that Mr Hancock presided over severe shortages of PPE during the early stages of the pandemic, while making claims which were patently untrue; some very questionable decisions on awards of PPE and other contracts; the transfer of untested patients from hospitals to care homes, leading to a high number of deaths; a grotesque level of expenditure on a test and trace system which simply does not work, even a year later; and a 1 per cent pay offer which is a kick in the teeth for NHS staff who have put in Herculean efforts since the start of the pandemic.

It will take the much needed public inquiry to make an objective evaluation of the government’s efforts during the pandemic (and the contributory role played by our prime minister), but when it does so I fear Mr Hancock’s record will be judged as far short of “exemplary”.

Paul Rex

South Warnborough, Hants

I read with great interest the article by Ashley Cowburn regarding Sir Keir Stammer’s unenviable position as opposition leader.

However, the rhetoric – especially by Diane Abbott – seems to have missed the point of the Labour Party’s waning appeal and success to trouble the Tory party entirely.

The major reason why the Labour Party is so unelectable is that they do not have a grasp on the current and future needs of the British people. And therefore their manifesto has little relevance or appeal to either the stoic Labour voters or the thousands of disenfranchised Tory voters. Additionally, their lacklustre engagement with the Tory party only adds to the mix of disillusionment with politics.

We ought not to get caught-up in the “charismatic charming” contingent all the parties use to obfuscate the lack of substance, quality and sincerity of the manifesto. Instead, our leaders, and their party, must be challenged on their ability to provide a safe and financially viable future, which raises horizons and poses challenges for our children to succeed.

In the wake of leaving the EU, Covid-19 and having an eye-watering national debt, any party would find governance of Britain taxing. However, rounding on party leaders as a reason for failure is quite wrong. It is the party that is to blame, not an individual.

The leaders are a mouthpiece for their party. They are the figurehead and not the reason for failure or success of a policy. So those who negate or congratulate their leaders ought really to be less superficial and to look more closely at their party’s ability to provide stimulus for a greater Britain in these trying times.

Keith Poole

Basingstoke

I agree that children in school should not be taught only the good things about the history of our country, while the shameful events are left out. But in a crowded curriculum, should that much time be spent on any history?

Many of the world’s current conflicts are the result of people brooding about ancient grievances and perpetuating them instead of moving into the present.

One of the reasons that we Brits were persuaded to opt for the calamity of Brexit was that we have rested on the laurels of the past “glories” of our empire and share the delusion that we can still be great.

There are, undoubtedly, lessons that we could learn from history. But the one thing that is very obvious is that we doggedly refuse to learn them, and keep repeating the old mistakes. Should we not have realised by now that someone who desperately wants power is the last person who should have it?

Some say that understanding Britain’s past is the key to understanding who we are today. Really? If we want to know who we are today we need to open our eyes and take a hard look at ourselves and the world as it is now. True, we are all inevitably shaped by the significant adults we encounter in our childhood. But characters we’ve never met and who are long dead are, to all intents and purposes, just a story. We can take neither credit nor blame for their actions. We need not and should not be influenced by them. We all need to accept responsibility for the state of our society as it is, not as it was.

There may be some benefits to studying history at school. But they are far outweighed by the drawbacks.

Susan Alexander

Frampton Cotterell, South Gloucestershire

In May 2021, Boris Johnson told the Commons that the inquiry into how his government dealt with the coronavirus pandemic – which will investigate if the government really did “follow the science”, what criteria it used when dispensing expensive PPE contracts to Tory donors, and will look into the disaster that was the £37bn test and trace programme run by Dido Harding – wouldn’t start before spring 2022. This was because, Johnson argued, “We must not inadvertently divert or distract the people on whom we depend in the heat of our struggle against this disease.”

What a contrast with the announcement that the Department of Health is to launch an immediate investigation into who leaked footage showing Matt Hancock in a clinch with his aide, Gina Coladangelo – a leak that forced Hancock’s resignation from his post on Saturday. Announcing the investigation, Northern Ireland secretary Brandon Lewis declared: “We have to understand how that happened and how we deal with that.”

Funny how an investigation into a leak that exposed the hypocrisy of Hancock takes priority to an investigation into the government’s strategy to deal with a pandemic that has killed more than 150,000.

Sasha Simic

London