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

Letter to the I: Battle of the Atlantic

There has been much debate on this paper’s letters page about whether D Day or the Russian contribution is more significant.  There is one battle that trumps both the Battle of Normandy and the Battle of Stalingrad; the Battle of the Atlantic.  Without the Allied triumph over the German U-Boats the cross-channel invasion would have been impossible.  Without the great efforts of the Merchant Navy and the Royal Navy the Arctic convoys would never have given Soviet forces the means to fight at Stalingrad or many other places thereafter.

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol

Letter to the I: UK-US Trade Deal

The Brexiteer promise of a large and beneficial US free trade deal is a mirage.  First of all leaving aside President Trump’s empty promises, the US Constitution clearly gives US Congress, not the President, the main responsibility for trade and commerce.  That means that the US Congress, including the Democrat controlled House of Representatives, will have to ratify any trade deals negotiated.  Furthermore Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has warned that her support of any such deal will depend on a satisfactory resolution of the Irish border issue. 

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol

Letter to the I: Russian War Contribution

Before praising the Russian World War 2 effort as a whole, Chris Segar would do well to distinguish between the Russian people and it’s leaders.  The former were stoic in the face of harrowing hardship and brave in fighting off the Nazi invaders.  And of course the ,loss of life on their part was appalling.  The Soviet leadership conspired with the Nazis to carve up Eastern Europe until the Nazis betrayed them.  While D Day led to the liberation of Western Europe, it has to be remembered that it also led to the occupation of Eastern Europe.

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol