Boris Johnson’s childish strategy of shouting at the French to take migrants back is pointless

Letters to the editor: our readers share their views. Please send your letters to letters@independent.co.uk

A government minister has said reported comments by Emmanuel Macron branding Boris Johnson a ‘clown’ and a ‘knucklehead’ were ‘unhelpful’ (Alastair Grant/PA) (PA Wire)

Yesterday at PMQs, Boris Johnson was at it again, playing schoolboy games with words. This time he tried to dodge the questions by redefining the meaning of the word “party”, but that quickly fell apart. He won’t learn. Sad thing is we’re used to this.

Unfortunately, as your report shows, the French are also aware of this but are not as relaxed about his attitude to truth and consistency as the British electorate; you quoted the French interior minister Gerald Darmanin calling for “no more double-speak”, and they seem determined to ensure Johnson sticks to his word this time. But don’t hold your breath for a resolution of the migrant issue or an end to the endless Brexit haggling.

Johnson’s childish strategy of shouting at the French to take migrants back is pointless. Even if they did, has he not seen migrants interviewed on beaches in France telling of their unsuccessful Channel crossing attempts, including some who had to swim back to the beaches, and their determination to try again. Returning those who reach the UK to France is far from a deterrent – it will simply return them into the hands of people smugglers and a never-ending money-making cycle of misery.

Johnson would do better to listen to what our neighbours say about us. If he had listened to others and acted quicker, we would have had fewer Covid deaths. It’s time for him to learn from experience and listen, not shout and bluster.

John Simpson

Ross on Wye

Booster confusion

You carried a number of articles regarding the mixed messages emanating from the government on its Covid response. Another example manifested itself as I volunteered at my local vaccination pop-up yesterday.

The prime minister has announced that the gap between second and booster injections is being reduced from six months to three. However, he singularly failed to mention that this is not being implemented immediately.  The NHS needs time to ramp up for what will be a significant increase in its workload, recruit additional volunteers, secure new venues, etc. As a result, many people who had had their second injection more than three months, but less than six months ago, were turning up expecting to be able to “drop in” for a booster. We were obliged to turn them away with predictable results – annoyance, frustration and in a few cases, abuse.

The government really needs to get its PR act together as the booster programme is accelerated and make it much clearer as to when individuals may come forward for their booster.

Rob Ford

Chester

Sensible public

I’ve seen concern that some will be less careful after the revelations of last year’s Christmas revels at No 10. I am less bothered because time and again we, the public, have shown we are better than Boris Johnson and his chums. We have learnt that he is not the leader of the country that we should expect, but rather a self-serving, incompetent, shallow egotist surrounded by clones.

In contrast, the public have generally acted sensibly and with restraint. I hope this continues both in respect of the Covid threat but also when we are finally able to choose a new leader who will actually lead in our best interests and not their own.

Tim Sidaway

Abbots Langley, Hertfordshire

To keep up to speed with all the latest opinions and comment sign up to our free weekly Voices newsletter by clicking here

A powerful weapon against Covid

The government has, rightly, put a lot of emphasis on its vaccination programme as the most effective way of tackling the Covid pandemic. It seems inexplicable, therefore, that it has shown such reluctance to employ some form of vaccination passport system. Such a system would protect vaccinated people from likely carriers, by preventing unvaccinated people from attending mass events, whether indoor or not. It would also protect them from each other.

It seems like a no-brainer. Of course, we know why it will not introduce this measure. It fears its own backbenchers, and it fears the accusation it will be accused of ignoring individual rights. This is clearly nonsense. People still have the right to choose whether or not to have the vaccine. They do not have the right, however, to put other people at risk by that choice.

What could be simpler? And yet the government holds back. It has the single most powerful weapon against the virus in its hands, and yet it is afraid to use it effectively.

What a weedy nation we have become.

Dr Ewan McLeish

Marlow, Buckinghamshire