PLEASE send your letters (as short as you like) to info@conservativewoman.co.uk and mark them ‘Letter to the Editor’.
We need your name and a county address, e.g. Yorkshire or London. Letters may be shortened. There is no guarantee of publication.
Letter of the week
Dear Editor
It is brave of you to speak on behalf of Tommy Robinson, Kathy. The world is such a frightening place now that we have to think about what we say and do before we do it, as we know the consequences of not abiding by what the PC brigade dictates.
Paul Wright
Devon
Hasn’t Tommy Robinson caused his own predicament?
Dear Editor
Sorry, Kathy. I do so admire your continuing fight for freedom and all your great work at TCW. You are brave, forthright.
However, Tommy Robinson, other than his exposing of rape gangs, along with many others TCW included, is serving time justly and appropriately for repeating the same offence on three occasions.
He knows he has a target on his back – as do you, I feel sure – but Tommy painted his own and invited the ‘slings and arrows’, something sensible people like yourself go to great lengths to avoid, and in doing so do not compromise themselves or their beliefs and convictions.
Tommy earns his living this way. I am sorry that so many great patriots are seemingly bedazzled by him.
This is my first occasion to consider you are wrong.
Reform’s leadership have also considered it wrong to embrace Tommy, for very good reasons.
Their record of being right is good enough for me.
You are a hero of mine, Kathy.
Michael Bennett
Starmer and the EU: the trainwreck to spark a revolution
Dear Editor
I think the best chance of getting rid of the uniparty is if Starmer does a deal with the EU, and Trump puts a tariff on our exports to the US. This would cause the economy to crash and a widespread revolt; hopefully, a quick crash and a quicker turnaround.
Roger B
The climate cranks are getting their ‘sustainabilities’ in a muddle
Dear Editor
The Chancellor says that aviation is becoming greener, citing sustainable fuels. If these can be used in aviation, they can be used in current vehicles. Why the push for electric vehicles?
Miliband needs to go. The Zero Emission Mandate needs to go, too, before the ruination of a whole industry. Or is that the plan?
Michael Hill
Northumberland
An inspiration to us all (unlike the Macclesfield MP)
Dear Editor
I am writing to let you know how inspirational you are. I love your writing, and it makes me feel better to know that someone feels as I do. I was impressed that you spoke at the recent rally for Tommy Robinson. I missed your speech but caught some of it later. It made me cry (again) that our country has turned into this!
I did write to our new (useless) Labour MP in Macclesfield and attach his response for your information.
Why are they treating Tommy like this?
Jackie Butler
Macclesfield
The Response
Hi Jackie,
The choice of prison for any prisoner is not something I am involved with, and would not investigate or intervene on unless they were my constituent – which Yaxley Lennon is not. This is a matter of longstanding practice for MPs.
His lawyers will be aware of the mechanisms by which to review the choice, and make any representations they feel they need to.
Thank you for your email,
Tim
Tim Roca MP
Member of Parliament for Macclesfield
House of Commons, London, SW1A 0AA
Islamofacism soon to be a protected characteristic!
Dear Editor
If Starmer gets this Islamophobia law through, we may as well pack our bags. It is terrifying. If Islam becomes a protected faith, there is nothing to stop them from dominating the UK. Any objections to Sharia compliance will be swept away, leading to Sharia Law becoming the de facto standard.
There are whole groups of British people who have not resisted and remain supine.
I live near a huge Muslim area in Bradford and its surroundings. In my local internet paper, these people are almost model citizens. They are conservative with a small ‘c’, and possibly a large one if given the chance. They worry about crime, grass not being mowed etc., but as someone so succinctly put it, they ‘are the grass in which the extremist snakes hide’. They are scared stiff of protesting about Islamofascists – I love this word, but it will soon be illegal under Starmer!
Roger Cook
Reliable and cheaper? Pull the other one
Dear Editor
For years, we have been told by the renewables industry that electricity from wind and solar would be reliable and cheaper. ‘Reliable’ is a laugh. Cheaper? Never in the history of the world have electricity prices gone down. Well, that is not quite correct. Fracking in the US abruptly lowered energy prices and strengthened US energy security.
Why are we, in the UK, subsidising the foreign wind turbine owners with £1.65billion to turn off their turbines when their electricity is not needed. No wonder our electricity bills are so high. Why do we not penalise wind turbine owners when they are unable to supply electricity when the wind does not blow and we have to rely on gas, nuclear, wood and the interconnectors. UK electricity prices are now the highest of all European countries. The renewables industry makes unfulfilled promises; other forms of generating electricity provide reliability.
Clark Cross
Linlithgow
Inequality in the name of equality
Dear Editor,
I am inclined to think that the European Convention on Human Rights isn’t worth the paper it is written on. Most ‘rights’ or ‘articles’ in the Convention outline a right in a first paragraph then promptly give the State leave to set it aside in a second paragraph.
There are some exceptions, like Article 14, Prohibition of discrimination:
‘The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.’
There is no second paragraph to Article 14, so countries such as the UK, which have incorporated the Convention into law, do not have leave to set it aside.
However, the Equality Act 2010, Section 4 says:
‘The following characteristics are protected characteristics—
age;
disability;
gender reassignment;
marriage and civil partnership;
pregnancy and maternity;
race;
religion or belief;
sex;
sexual orientation.’
This act has been used to discriminate in favour of minority groups and against the majority, using criteria that Article 14 specifically prohibits.
Shouldn’t the UK Supreme Court therefore strike down the Equality Act 2010?
Jim Shaw
Somerset
