There might be a way we can forge a US-UK trade deal that is environmentally friendly

Free trade between nations helps prevent wars, certainly, but it is also disastrous for the environment. The environmental impact of vast quantities of products being transported around the globe by air, sea and road to countries that already have, or could produce, a range of very similar homegrown products at comparable prices is underreported.

I am sure there are many environmentally minded people for whom there is a difficult tension between the need to support international relationships through trade and a desire to reduce the associated CO2 emissions. Reluctantly, therefore, I find myself half-seduced by an argument for selective imposition of tariffs, wondering if there is a case for their application where the quality and variety of homegrown goods clearly obviates the need for imports.

The thorny question, of course, is how to reach agreement on the precise criteria for applying tariffs selectively. Here, then, by championing the environment, is Trump’s opportunity to unite left and right. Let’s dream on.

Patrick Cosgrove
Shropshire

People keep saying that it’s 28 years since England made a semi-final. May I point out that it is, in fact, three years since this happened – it was the women’s team.

Sexism is alive and well in football.

T Maunder
Leeds

Bob Vasey (Letters) complains that Brexiteers are “held up as stupid, arrogant and misguided”. Lazy labelling (on either side) does nothing to advance intelligent debate.

As for “respecting the view of the people and the prime minister’s speeches”, there is an argument to be made for challenging those also. A 52-48 per cent split does not represent a majority view by any stretch of the imagination. So, just about half of what we (and Vasey) now call “the people” are being ignored.

Theresa May spending her prime ministerial career telling us she has “always been clear” on Brexit really does not make it so. Far from it. We have a divided nation, sacrificed on the shabby, self-serving altar of Toryism. They really don’t care about the country, Mr Vasey. Unlike that 48 per cent.

Beryl Wall
London W4

The latest report by Charities Aid Foundation shows that there has been more than a 50 per cent annual rise in donations to charity with over £1bn being given in Scotland.

This reflects a trend that we regularly see for wealthy individuals who want to give something back to the community to ensure that their hard work and good fortune can make a positive difference to the lives of others.

When someone is considering a sizeable donation to charity, it is important that they fully understand the requirements of the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (Oscr). In addition to needing to pass Oscr’s “charities test” to show that the organisation will support good causes and provide a benefit to the public, there are ongoing monitoring and compliance duties and it is important to understand these at the outset.

Once Oscr has approved the formation of the charity, then registration is also required with HM Revenue & Customs in order to ensure that it also qualifies for the tax reliefs and exemptions available.

We are also seeing an increasing trend of charities looking to use their funds in more imaginative ways. Traditionally charities would provide funding for projects; however, many charities now prefer to provide loans, seed funding or social impact investment where they think that the particular investment, albeit commercial, may assist in furthering their charitable purposes.

This may be the influence of donors who have corporate experience and are commercially sophisticated. It can be a complex area to get right, but where it works it can pay literal and social dividends for the charity.

The fact that Scotland has donated £1bn in a year is a real credit to the country. In times of austerity the need out there is great, so it is essential to ensure that any donations are as tax efficient and as targeted as possible, allowing the funds to make a greater impact at the coalface.

Lianne Lodge, head of charities, Gillespie Macandrew
Edinburgh

In the May elections, the Haringey electorate of the majority Labour Party, and of the minority Liberal Democrat and Green parties overwhelmingly supported the manifesto commitments to dump the decision of the outgoing council cabinet to pass £2bn worth of council land to the Haringey Development Vehicle (HDV) in partnership with the international property developer Lend Lease.

Some of the land in question supports the homes of the most deprived households in England, which would have been demolished. In a fit of extreme free market hubris, Lend Lease has now threatened to sue the new Haringey cabinet if they dump the HDV at their meeting on the 17 July. What right does a powerful international property developer have to overthrow the overwhelming decisions of the local electorate? We shall see.

Paul Nicolson, Taxpayers Against Poverty
Address supplied

First Boris Johnson announced that anyone defending Theresa May’s Brexit plan would be “polishing a turd”, then he decided that he would back it after all, and now he’s jumped ship in a last-minute about-about-turn. It rather appears that he himself is the polished turd.

Julian Self
Milton Keynes