We can’t tackle class discrimination in the UK when most of us can barely define it

The TUC has called for legal measures to tackle discrimination based on class at work. They have stated that they do not wish to “ignite a lengthy debate about class”. I agree that we need to tackle the persistent class inequality in our country, but we have to find a definition in law of what class is. Otherwise no law can be passed.

My family of five went up in the world when we went from an overcrowded 1 bedroom flat in post-war London, to a council house. We had no car. My father taught in a secondary modern school and then a comprehensive. My mother had worked in the Post Office before having children. I was educated in state schools, the last being an excellent grammar school from where I went to medical school. As a junior hospital doctor I worked 110 hours a week, with no absolute entitlement to time off, the caveat in the contract being “if the needs of patients allow”. My hourly rate of pay was less than the advertised rate for a night cleaner. I knew that the Labour Party would not describe me as working class.

My husband’s parents, a carpenter and a school canteen assistant can be described as working class. Through thrift and hard work they owned their own house (two up, two down terrace) and had a car. My husband was educated in state schools, the latter being another excellent grammar school, and from there went to Oxford University. After university, he spent 2 years working for CMS in Iran, and returned to become an articled clerk in accountancy. Was he more working class than me?

Audrey Boucher
Oakley

We are not in the grip of a US-style opioid crisis. But the warning signs are there.

Half a million people currently rely on opioids as a long-term painkiller, according to research published yesterday by Public Health England. And six out of 10 people with a musculoskeletal condition have been prescribed an opioid painkiller in the last year.

Despite persistent pain affecting up to half of the UK population, the understanding of it and provision of effective treatment is woeful. For many, opioids can be the answer, so shouldn’t be demonised. But they’re not a silver bullet and can cause harmful side effects like addiction.

We need to transform the way we approach persistent pain in the UK. More people need greater access to non-drug options like physio, exercise plans or talking therapies. They also need clearer information and to have the opportunity to participate in their care and support planning. Healthcare professionals need greater levels of training and support. This week we announced the biggest single investment in pain research in the UK, potentially Europe, to better understand the complex causes and treatments of pain. But we need more and sustained investment.

Let’s make changes now so people in persistent pain get the care and support they desperately need and deserve.

Liam O’Toole, CEO Versus Arthritis

I read with interest reports on Public Health England’s study of prescriptions.

Important though this review is, I must ask: how can it possibly be helpful for commentators to frame the debate in this way – as the usage of these medicines being some sort of social evil? Surely this will cause a panic that will put yet more strain on GPs and prevent people from seeking the help they need. And it ignores the inconvenient truth that some people do need these medicines for their conditions and to use them long term.

While I don’t dispute that these drugs have risks – and some people have suffered dearly because of them – I’d contend that the conditions they treat cause the same, if not far more, damage and misery. With a government agency spreading such alarmist headlines as “one in four on addictive drugs”, I fear many more people will be put off seeking treatment for these painful conditions.

Sam Buckley
Address supplied

A general election is coming. The Conservative and Labour parties remain split on Brexit and fear defections to the Brexit Party. The prime minister says he wants a deal. There is a strong opposition alliance to prevent no deal backed up by legislation. Surely, the best way to resolve this is to have two questions on the ballot paper: “Which party do you wish to see in power?” and “Would you prefer to remain in the EU or continue to pursue a deal?” The first question would obviously relate to the voters’ constituencies. The second would provide a binding national referendum.

Patrick Cosgrove
Shropshire

So universities like Cambridge and Goldsmiths are removing red meat from menus to reduce their carbon footprint. But have they ever considered that the business model of the modern UK university – one that relies on importing large numbers of foreign students from far-away countries – is ecologically unsustainable?

If you take into account the aggregated carbon footprint created by the flights undertaken by students – many long haul – along with the impact of the international junkets enjoyed by so many academics, the university sector looks a whole lot less clean than it perhaps likes to think.

David Stocker
Lancaster

The outrage expressed by Boris Johnson’s aides (including, no doubt, Dominic Cummings) at the motion in parliament that they hand over all communications, including private ones, in order to test the true motives behind the decision to prorogue parliament at such a critical time, is wholly hypocritical.

They are threatening legal action to prevent this happening, yet no such legal representation or protection appeared to be afforded to Sonia Khan (adviser to Sajid Javid) when Dominic Cummings forced her to hand over her office and private phones before frog marching her out of her office accompanied by armed police. I am looking forward, with relish, to the same treatment being meted out to Johnson, Cummings and whoever else makes up the vile cabal currently occupying Downing Street if they fail to comply.

Kate Hall
Leeds