I really hope we are not funding the royal wedding while our NHS is starved of cash

Prince Harry has got engaged to... er, I haven’t got the foggiest… Angela Merkel? (I thought she was married). The first man ever to have achieved such a feat, apparently.

I just hope he and his new bride have enough cash to cover their lavish honeymoon, or do the staggeringly rich royal family need even more money from the British taxpayer – at the expense of vital public services, whose budgets are being savagely cut?

If you, or a loved one, are ever informed by a doctor that the NHS cannot afford your vital operation or specialist drugs, your heart will be warmed by the fact that at least an absurd, millionaire family are living comfortably in luxury – whose colossal income is unnecessarily supplemented by millions of pounds of taxes that would have paid for you or your loved one’s treatment.

It is sobering to think that while many people in Britain have become very ill, or have even died, for lack of “expensive” treatment, cosseted royals, such as the catastrophically pointless Prince Andrew, will squander thousands, such as the £3,000 he wasted last year on just one helicopter trip from London to Norfolk.

If subsidising an exceedingly rich family with desperately needed public money were a brand new concept, the person proposing the idea would be rightly condemned as a complete idiot.

Howard Henry Smith
Penarth

Will Gore makes the point that those of a republican persuasion will groan at the cost of a royal wedding. As Prince Harry apparently followed tradition by going down on one knee when he proposed to Meghan Markle, shouldn’t tradition be further followed by the bride’s father paying for the wedding? Problem solved.

Patrick Cleary
Honiton

John Rentoul says Theresa May has “handled Brexit about as well as it could be handled”.

How about a scenario in which Theresa May, on taking power had said: “The country is almost evenly split over Brexit. As this is an issue which is so important for the country’s future, and one which transcends party politics, I am establishing a cross-party group, which I shall chair, to handle Brexit. The group will be peopled with those favouring leaving and remaining from all parties and, once it has established the type of country the United Kingdom wishes to be once it has left the EU, I will ask Parliament for authority to issue the EU with an Article 50 notification of our leaving.”

Those who voted Leave would be satisfied that they will be leaving. Those who voted Remain would know that their views would be taken into account. Theresa May would not be held to ransom by foolish doctrinaire, and I think dishonest bigots like Johnson, Davies and Fox, who would be marginalised. The UK’s carefully thought out position would immeasurably strengthen its hand in negotiating.

But, of course, Theresa May did what David Cameron did, and sacrificed the country’s future on the altar of saving the Tory party.

John Harvey
Bristol

With more defence cuts on the horizon, Tories predictably churn out the adage about it being the “first duty of Government above all others”, and “open rebellion” apparently on the cards (Theresa May’s proposed army number cuts face “very substantial rebellion” from Tory backbenchers). What a shame the same Tories didn’t say they were “prepared to hold the Government’s feet to the fire”, when its cuts to local authorities mean the defence against food contamination and the security of the nation’s health is weakened because of the reduced number of food inspectors.

Why are there no protests when the continued lack of regulation in the City brings another financial crash ever nearer? Shouldn’t the security of taxpayers’ money be a priority? Defending children from the ravages of poverty has to be a top priority for any government seriously concerned about its duties, but the number of children living in poverty has increased hugely.

Safeguarding the right of every child to a decent education should also be one of the Government’s first responsibilities, but that doesn’t prevent schools being underfunded, and the teacher recruitment problem reaching epidemic proportions. Defending the population against criminals should be another priority, but cuts in police numbers continue without a murmur of protest. What about the Government’s responsibilities to protect people against Rachman-like landlords, greedy banks, cowboy builders and such like? How many more disasters have to take place before politicians realise priorities have to change?

Yet, defence against an enemy which apparently can only be stopped with nuclear weapons launched from new submarines costing around £50bn, is a real priority. The Tories are right: defence of the people is the Government’s duty “above all others”, but not always simply against exaggerated threats from foreign powers. For centuries British governments have wasted billions on military spending to justify the country’s position as a so-called great power, all the while denying the necessary resources to close the poverty gap and reduce inequality. Nothing has changed!

Bernie Evans
Liverpool

Whilst I agree with much of Matthew Norman’s excellent article (Rumour has it that Jeremy Corbyn has changed his mind about Brexit – just in time for Kezia Dugdale’s jungle outburst), I believe there is much to hope for in a change of attitude from Corbyn in a few months’ time.

At a point shortly after Christmas, there is the likelihood that more will be known about the paucity of the Government’s attempts at Brexit negotiations, and the adverse reactions from the EU negotiating team. We are likely to find that our negotiators have very effectively closed off all possible opportunities for any kind of a soft Brexit, leaving us all in much less doubt about our future place in the world. From this sorry position, Corbyn will have the best possible opportunity to declare that, given circumstances, he now believes Brexit to be a wholly dangerous exercise and launch a campaign to get his party supporters and the general electorate to rally around a call for a second referendum before all is lost.

Although I fully understand the damage which is being done to our economy and our international reputation by the Brexit process and wish there really was a quicker escape route, I believe it is more important to get the timing right, and now is not (yet) that time.

David Curran
Feltham

I thought that I must repeat an interesting recent quote from Turkish Prime Minister, Binali Yildirim: “Once the UK moves out of the EU, the UK will belong to the same club as Turkey.”

It does not take a genius to work out that once in this “club” along with I would conjecture, among others, India, the price of deals will include easier travel for work or pleasure for citizens of said countries.

Rather ironic when one remembers Nigel Farage’s poster! Watch out for increased steam from Ukip ears.

Robert Boston
Kent

Why is there so much controversy in Ireland about border issues when the UK leaves the EU when there are already 12 existing members of the EU which have borders with countries which are not EU members.

David Browning
Huddersfield