The public should never have been allowed to vote on Brexit

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

We should outlaw referendums as the obvious populist, malevolent tools they are (PA Archive)

All this talk about disenfranchising elderly people is predicated on one simple fact: we allowed a weak prime minister to unleash unscrupulous politicians to dupe the naive and unknowing into voting against their own best interests.

Frankly, the Brexit referendum would never have happened if such a decision had been left to our elected representatives in parliament. So, instead of withdrawing the vote from senior citizens, we should outlaw referendums as the populist, malevolent tools they have proven to be.

I personally would also reform the election processes that resulted in totally unsuitable party leaders emerging in the first place.

David Smith

Taunton

Starmer’s Brexit strategy is a huge loss for young people

I wasn’t expecting Keir Starmer to start the process of sorting Brexit straight after the election, for fear of “frightening the horses”.

But I am perplexed by his refusal to consider adopting a free movement policy for young people to study and gain work experience, particularly as the EU has signalled that he would be pushing at an open door.

As someone who spent most of my working life in further and higher education, I know how beneficial such free movement can be. In addition, we have two daughters who benefited greatly from the Erasmus scheme. Starmer’s choice is a huge loss for young people.

David Felton

Crewe

The EU could leave us in the lurch

The prime minister’s belief that Britain will not rejoin the EU “during his lifetime” could be one of those “be careful what you wish for” moments if it inadvertently suppresses optimism in the country’s future, our role in the world and ultimately our potential for economic growth.

Recourse to incremental steps and bilateral trade negotiations may repair much of the diplomatic damage the Tories inflicted on UK-EU relations with their hard Brexit. But it can never be a substitute for a comprehensive reset that only re-entering the EU, or at least its single market, would signal.

We currently have strategic leverage in Europe, evidenced by our steadfast support for Ukraine, and may have a window of opportunity and goodwill – one that could quickly disappear,

In that scenario, the prospect of the EU keeping us, like Turkey, in the lurch as our accession is indefinitely delayed or the bar to join repeatedly raised higher (as other new members, including Ukraine, are accepted) becomes a distinct possibility.

Paul Dolan

Northwich

In the future, rail travel will be vital

In his letter to The Independent, Graham Cooper makes some valid points regarding the cost-effectiveness of HS2. This is a failed project, emblematic of a government with wildly unrealistic expectations with regard to what it could deliver. As looks increasingly likely, Britain’s first high-speed rail project will give us trains here in the north that are slower and with less capacity than the existing Pendolinos.

Given the cost of this project, those responsible should hang their heads in shame.

It is a mistake however to conclude from this that rail is an out-of-date concept. Given the inevitable phasing out of the internal combustion engine and the relative expense of modern electric vehicles, it seems likely that in the future fewer of us will own cars.

For this reason, I would argue that in years to come it will be economically vital to have a national public transport system with the same connectivity and ease of use that those in the capital currently enjoy.

What is needed now is a clear-headed, long-term, fully national transport strategy, which is free from the boosterism that characterised previous administrations. If this is to incorporate mass rapid transport, then it must include rail.

Richard Curran

Address Supplied

Investing in local industries helps to secure our future

In a time when the resilience of our economy is being tested, the importance of supporting British jobs and local manufacturing cannot be overstated. It is essential for the economic stability and growth of our communities across the UK.

As we face increasing global competition, protecting these industries and the jobs they provide is more crucial than ever. Supportive policies that promote local manufacturing and job creation are vital. They not only preserve the heritage of skilled craftsmanship, but also ensure the sustainability of our communities.

Investing in local industries means securing a future for our youth, offering them careers that sustain both their personal growth and the health of our local economies. As consumers, choosing locally made products directly supports this initiative, strengthening job security for many and fostering a thriving market for local goods.

Let us advocate for robust policies that bolster British manufacturing and prioritise the training of our future workforce. Now is the time for our government to stand behind British jobs and the industries that sustain our communities.

Alastair Redman

Isle of Islay

We need to restrict private lending

Growth is the percentage increase in the total value of goods and services in one year compared with the previous one. Wealth creation on the other hand is investing in the future by either creating new resources such as investment in manufacturing and infrastructure or improving the productivity of existing resources through investment in training and education.

Keir Starmer is right to make a distinction between the two.

These help the economy to grow in the immediate as well as the long term. If the nation suddenly goes ape on gambling, the ensuing increase in economic activity will be counted as growth, but it adds naught to the wealth of the nation. Investment in, say, new or improved rail links between industrial hubs in the north will improve productivity and help the economy grow year after year.

As for “the broadest shoulders bearing the heaviest burden”, there is no broader shoulder than that of private finance. The Treasury should use its considerable powers to restrict private lending to allow the government to spend money without having to borrow.

Fawzi Ibrahim

London