Letter to the I: Democratic Obstruction

There is only one thing I agree with Mark Wallace’s article on, those who want to Remain in the EU, as I do, should be more vocal about it.  That’s why my party, the Liberal Democrats, have said from the start that we should stick with the current deal, since anything else is substandard by comparison. When it comes to using Parliamentary procedure to get to this end it is bizarre that Mark Wallace, who allegedly supports British institutions making laws should protest so much.  He wanted our laws determined by British institutions, so he should stop whining.

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol

Letter to the I: Molly's Article

Molly Scott Cato’s article on flying reveals her privileged life, hostility to innovation and lack of imagination.  How lucky she is to be able to get the time off work for a sea voyage of 18 days.  There goes most of my annual leave!  Sea sickness notwithstanding.  Indeed land journey’s by train are great if you can afford the kings ransom for the fare.  Instead of sneering at innovation prospects, perhaps Molly could propose using the existing aviation tax breaks as an incentive to develop more clean planes.  If the airlines don’t play ball, then their free lunch could be called off.

Regards

Zachary Barker

Letter to the I: The Empire and Hong Kong

Taking Derek Durrington’s point about our colonial past, I do not think that this in itself should stop us acting on the Hong Kong crisis.  Philosophically myself as an individual would set a pretty bad example if I just acted worse in the future, just because I made mistakes in the past.  Facing up to our past is one thing, but using it as an excuse to not save lives is simply unjustifiable.  Why should the people of Hong Kong be punished for our own past crimes?

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol

Letter to the I: Royal Charity Hypocrisy

They say even a stopped clock is right even twice a day.  Well in the case of the crooked clock which is Nigel Farage that seems to be merely for the once only.  He is right insofar that the Royal Family hypocritically adopt causes and charities that they use for their own purposes.  Prince Charles preaches environmentalism while he has pocketed money from developers who cut down hedgerows.  The Duchess of Cambridge has spoken about poverty wearing dresses worth hundreds.  It is a useful reminder that it is not only our elected politicians who are dishonest.

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol

Letter to the I: Royal Unaccountability

I was frustrated and not a little bit infuriated by Roger Hennah’s dismissive response to the taxpayer cost of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s new home.  Trying to erase this waste of taxpayers’ money by raising another is frankly not an adequate answer to the issue of the Royals being unaccountable.  I must thank the editors of this paper who allowed the publishing of a letter critical of the Royal Family.  The first time I wrote a letter in to this paper criticising its editorial line on the Royals, I was emailed back with a very patronising denial.  Hopefully this paper can step away from the self-censorship that other papers practice in their reporting of the Royals.

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol

Letter to the I: Michael Gove and Drugs

It is not Michael Gove’s omission of disclosure about his recreational drugs use before he got elected that I am most concerned about.  What I am more concerned about is that despite his past history he has long, and still does, advocate harsh measures against people merely possessing illegal drugs.  Since he seems to advocate treating himself as someone with a health problem and other users as criminals, he seems to be a liberal when it comes to himself and a conservative when it comes to others.  How can we expect such a man in Number 10 to be fair and just?

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol

Letter to the I: Theresa May and Russia Letter

I take issue with Nathan Hazlett’s praise of Theresa May allegedly standing up to the Russian President Putin in the wake of the Salisbury poisoning.  As Home Secretary Theresa May tried to block a full government inquiry into the poisoning of Russian dissident Alexander Litvinenko citing “international relations” concerns.  As Prime Minister she could of gone much further with sanctions against Russia, given that the financial hub that is London is awash with Russian money.  But just as with the rest of her premiership she preferred empty posturing to effective action.

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol