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

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

Letter to the I: Left Wing Brexiters Letter

With regards to Jack Wheatley’s letter, the extreme left has long had a tradition of being against the EU.  This tradition is riddled with contradictions.  The first one is their belief that EU regulations prevent Member States from creating more equitable and fulfilling societies.  This naturally ignores Member States who have better quality of life ratings than we do (ie Netherlands and Sweden).  Furthermore the Extreme Left see the EU as a mothership for unfettered capitalism while the hard right see it as the same for ‘strangling’ government regulation.  The problem is that they can’t both be right.

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol

Letter to the I: Royal Exploitation of Charities

Mary Hopkins' letter completely missed the point with regards to Prince Harry's apparent advocacy of the cause of treating mental illnesses.  She takes it for granted that the Royal's relationships with charities are one way supportive relationships.  It is not since Royals need the charities more than the charities need them.  Royal support often does not go beyond a visit to the charities, which imposes a cost on them, and brief supportive mentions and photo opportunities.  Would it be too much to ask for Royals instead of collecting charities, to actually sustain support in terms of time and  money into one of them?  Would it also be asking too much for Prince Harry to consider what credibility he has in talking about strained public services, while he lives a taxpayer funded lavish lifestyle?

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol

Letter to the I: Style Over Substance

With regards to Geoff Chapman's letter regarding differences in rhetoric styles between Jacob Rees Mogg MP and David Lammy MP I refer him to the words of late PM Margaret Thatcher.  She implored the political opposition to not listen to how she said something but what she said.  David Lammy often speaks with the power of an extremist, but his position is clear, truthful and frankly courageous given the political climate.  Jacob Rees Mogg on the other hand is cool, calculated and uses complex language to further his questionable cause.  This cause is especially questionable since he has presented false research and has made statements that contradict each other to further it.  Presentation is one thing, but a truthful message is what is important.

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol

Letter to the I: Referendum Lies

I second Richard Addington's comments with regards to Brexiteers attitudes to the prospect of a second referendum.  I find it very interesting how while their consciences rest easy now they had their first referendum, they all of a sudden presume that all hell will break loose after a second one.  Not that they very much mind the sharp divisions created in our country by the first one.  Prominent Brexiteers themselves such as Jacob Rees Mogg MP once advocated two referendums once a negotiated deal has emerged.  His justification for this was that the referendums would be asking two different questions to the British electorate.  For once I agree with him.

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol

Letter to the I: Brexit Pain Letter

I am frankly astounded at Anne Benninger's commentary on Mark Wallace's article.  The 'we have had it worse' argument is baffling, nonsensical and hardly a convincingly enthusiastic endorsement of Brexit.  How far back must we go into the horrors of British history in order to keep our chins up?  Am I right to understand that Brexit won't be as bad as a civil war or a light sprinkling of plague?  What a relief!  It is incredible how easily the narrative of enduring pain has come into the pro-Brexit play book.  I could of sworn we were promised a utopia.  A utopia with pain sounds a little bit ominous.

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol

Letter to the I: Learning from Europe Letter

Mark Wallace has spent months preaching about how allegedly Remain voters were fixated on negative campaigning.  But given that now it seems his winning argument is that other European  countries are worse than our own, he should eat some humble pie.  Instead of indulging in his toxic nationalism I would say that it is more constructive to reflect on what our neighbours do well, that we can learn from.  The Netherlands and Germany do better than us in terms of labour and manager relations.  The Norwegians did better to invest their North Sea oil money into a fund that covers much of their social spending.  Or perhaps it is too painful to our national pride to look at paths we perhaps should have taken.

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol

Letter to the I: Trump Supporters in the UK Letter

It is one thing to celebrate the US Democrats taking the US House of Representatives, but we have to confront the Trump supporters in our own country.  The longer his presidency goes on the more they feel empowered.  They incite hatred against liberal democracy for problems and grievances that they are too angry and ignorant to properly understand or address.  Their cause uses the worst instincts of human nature to promote an ideology that makes no sense.  Since it does not make any sense all we need to do is stay brave in front of their anger, and calmly demonstrate that they are wrong.

Regards

Wat Tyler

Bristol

Letter to the I: Prince Charles Letter

What does Prince Charles expect from us when he says that he will keep quiet as king?  Are we supposed to be relieved?  This neatly encapsulates the silliness of our constitutional set up.  The Monarch is meant to represent the state and as such is meant to pretend to have no opinions, or risk a constitutional crisis if they have any.  Anyone with a pulse has an opinion.  The Irish election clearly shows that the sensible alternative is to have a democratic mandate for a Head of State with modest powers.  If we don't like what they do or don't say, then we can just vote them out.

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol

Letter to the I: Green Air Travel

While Jack Noel says we shouldn't be so "joyful" about people jetting off because of the environmental damage, I say he should not be so judgmental of them.  It is unrealistic and deeply morally folly to expect people to turn their back on flying.  We should be happy for people who use the opportunity presented by low cost air travel to see more of the world.  We should also accept the fact that such travel is an integral part of the world economy.  Since flying is here to stay we need to focus our energies away from judgment and towards innovation.  As one of the pioneering countries of aviation, surely we can task our industries with making air travel more friendly to the Earth?

Regards

Wat Tyler

Bristol

Letter to the I: Response to Mark Wallace's Article

Mark Wallace's article dripped with self justification and fantasy.  I heard hardly anyone talk about being worried about being governed by "structures" and "quangos".  They did however talk about how their public services are failing and their government feels remote, which Mr. Wallace's own party is responsible for.  It is very comforting to blame it all on structures.  But who voted in the referendum while admitting a lack of knowledge on the EU?  Who can't decide on what kind of Brexit deal they would like?  Who voted by 52% to lead us into this confusion?  After his big words will Mark Wallace have the courage confront the electorate with these questions?

Regards

Zachary Barker

Bristol