Monday's Letters: Cameron cannot claim high ground on economic policy

Labour's policies on immigration, PC and traditional family values should concern readers more than their management of the economy.

When things were going well, no prominent politician challenged Mr Brown's policy of using plastic card credit to promote social equality. The impact of this policy on property values became apparent to most property professionals as long ago as 2001. The flaws in the policy were obvious then, and the only reason for surprise is that it took so long for the bubble to burst.

Every other Western country adopted similar policies, and not one of our great political parties challenged it. It was the political consensus, and so it is not morally possible for Mr Cameron to claim the moral high ground on economic policy.

When the Conservatives last came to power in 1979, there was a different kind of economic crisis. Their solution was to withdraw support for British industry north of a line between the Severn and the Wash. The result was three million unemployed and the complete collapse of British heavy manufacturing industry.

The Tory remedy for the present crisis is to introduce an immediate emergency budget after the election with a view to imposing immediate cuts.

This recalls the nasty medicine which Mrs Thatcher said was so necessary in 1979 – only now there are already over two and half million unemployed.

So, if immediate cuts are instantly applied now, shall we be surprised if we soon end up with a total of six million or more unemployed?

Most readers yearn for a government which will heal the social and political divisions within the country. What I fear is coming is the opposite: brutal and divisive policies. We fear the chaos of Greece.

If we're not careful, the tensions which the divisive policies of a Conservative government might unleash could make the riots in Greece look comparatively mild.

From: RC Curry, Adel Grange Close, Leeds.

THE recent election campaign has been marked by a visual media furore varying between frivolity and farce.

We have heard more about the views and opinions of the commentators than the candidates, and the imported idea of grandstanding three of the leaders has removed the last vestige of dignity which should accompany such an important event.

People who normally have little thought of politics from one day to the next are provoked into activity by some phrase or gimmick, rather than by long term and serious thinking and discussion. It would also seem that quite a number of them leave it late to cast their vote, other matters being considered more important, albeit there is no excuse for local authorities not being prepared to cope.

On the other hand, apart from the rather more lurid headlines of the tabloids, the papers have provided more serious and relevant information and discussion, the reporting and commentary in the Yorkshire Post being a classic example.

If it has favourites, at least the others have not been denied their window of opportunity and we have read pieces by many people with widely differing views. The correspondence has also reflected a similarly wide debate, even if a few have merely harked back to past fuelled enmities.

No doubt as the present drama is acted out on stage, and in the following months, you will have more to offer, but for now – congratulations on a job well done.

How the voters could have spoken

From: Dai Woosnam, Woodrow Park, Scartho, Grimsby.

SO the British people have spoken. Or rather, they have singularly failed to speak with a clear voice, at any rate.

Yet, it could have been so different. They could have made a statement that would have resonated around the world, and had their political masters quaking in their boots.

And all they needed to do was write-in a vote for "None of the Above". What an eloquent statement that would have been. As it is, they have played right into the hands of the professional politicians.

I despair of this country. America with a total of circa 540 elected senators or representatives in their two parliamentary houses, has a population exactly five times ours. Therefore, pro rata, we should have a total of 108 members, in our two houses.

Guess what we have? The last time I checked, it was over 1,400. That is over 12 times the American representation, and many Americans already feel that they are over-governed.

There will be another election within a year. Dear fellow Brits: vote for "None of the Above" next time. And "None of the Above" will sweep the country in a landslide. Only then, will these Parliamentary layabouts get the hint. And start to ruthlessly self-prune their numbers.

From: David Loxley, Hartoft, Pickering, North Yorkshire.

WE now have an incumbent Prime Minister attempting to form some kind of coalition, alliance or minority government. Is this, albeit legal, fair? It will be a disaster for this country. Perhaps not in the public eye, but there will certainly be bickering and squabbling.

How many politicians have said "this country needs a strong and stable government"? What makes the PR acolytes think that it can deliver this unless it is formulated (or rigged) to create a majority "party"? It will always be the same party. There are many formulae for PR. Presumably one will be chosen by "them"?

The Representation of the People Act provides for an elector to make a personal choice of a representative.

Winston Churchill is reputed to have said that our first-past-the-post electoral system is not perfect but that it works. Not only that, but it has delivered strong, stable governments in the past. It has also allowed an increasing number of true independent and minority groups to gain seats.

We need real democracy

From: Malcolm Naylor, Grange View, Otley.

NOW the election is over, nothing has changed. We are still left with Establishment control as the egomaniacs fight to share power.

With a 65 per cent turnout, no single party got more than 20 per cent of the electorate's support but they are still determined to continue with the same old system as if nothing has happened. They have learned nothing and ignore what the public is telling them.

We have made it clear we don't want to vote for a party. We want to vote for policies and where better than to start than with referendums on ending the war we are engaged in, bringing the soldiers home, ending immigration, stopping Trident, nuclear power, identity cards, privatisation of essential services and membership of Europe. Let's clear the decks, trust the people and punish the capitalists by taxation to pay for the debt they have imposed upon us.

The party system is dead and should be buried together with the Establishment that controls it and a beginning of real democracy in which people not politicians and bureaucrats make the decisions on how this country is run.

True figures

From: Hilary Andrews, Nursery Lane, Leeds.

HOW ungracious Ed Balls was in his acceptance speech early on Friday morning with his supposedly rallying cry of "We've shown them this constituency can't be bought".

Has he looked at his figures? If the 1,506 people who voted UKIP had voted Conservative (their natural allies), then he would be out of a job and our children's welfare and education could possibly stand a chance of becoming decent again.

Tory danger

From: Terry Duncan, Greame Road, Bridlington, East Yorkshire.

IF David Cameron, through silly pride, allows Gordon Brown to be PM again, then the Conservative Party can say goodbye, for decades ahead, of ever being in a position to be

in government.

If we aren't able to vote, why should we pay taxes?

From: Dave Hansell, Ralph Ellis Drive, Stocksbridge, Sheffield.

IT has been suggested that the debacle of citizens lining up for hours and being denied the vote in last week's elections is a direct result of decisions taken on behalf of the State by unelected and largely unnamed officials to impose "efficiency savings" in resources deployed to administer the process – something we may well see more of if the cuts in spending being demanded by the unelected "markets" are imposed.

Meanwhile, the human rights organisation Liberty announces it is planning to help those denied this basic right to seek and achieve some form of legal redress. Might I suggest that those taking up this offer by Liberty hold out for nothing less than an outcome based on the age old maxim that, having been denied the right of representation, all those affected now have the right to pay no tax of any sort whatever until their rights have been fully restored by re-running the event properly.

Setting such a precedent would no doubt serve in the future to concentrate the officious bureaucratic mind to ensuring the State keeps up its end of the bargain if it seriously expects to maintain the right to tax its citizens.

From: ME Wright, Grove Road, Harrogate.

Have hundreds been disenfranchised by yet more "efficiency savings"? I hope not, but until we have a satisfactory explanation, I trust that we shall not have the temerity to oversee and judge elections in countries where the democratic process is deemed suspect.

From: Austin Holroyd, Dark Lane, Almondbury, Huddersfield.

I DON'T like to criticise paid servants, but this time it's not the politicians but these highly paid chief executives who are to be blamed for citizens of this country not being able to exercise their hard fought right to vote in certain constituencies.

The buck stops at the top, and if they are not capable of organising their vast staff to oversee a simple ballot every few years, then what can they be capable of? Ordinary workers have been sacked for less, and sorry chaps, but if you can earn that kind of money outside local government, then off you go. The missed out voters will share the mega-buck compensation.