Will the new Duke of Westminster pay his dues in inheritance tax?

Send your letters to letters@independent.co.uk

The seventh Duke of Westminster. Will he pay tax on his inheritance? (PA)

I note in all the coverage of the new Duke of Westminster’s multi-billion-pound inheritance a distinct lack of comment on how it is that such a vast swathes of land and property – immobile assets – can be passed on from one aristocratic generation to another with no significant tax paid. It seems that our inheritance taxes are designed to capture the middle classes while enabling the silver-spoon brigade, who were fortunate to have ancestors who were “friends of William the Conqueror”, to maintain their holdings of roughly a third of the UK’s land stock. This is as scandalous as the off-shoring of corporate profits and tax havens for the mega-rich. How about some investigative articles exposing these realities?

Will Patching
Bognor

Presumably the late Duke of Westminster's £9bn estate will be liable to inheritance tax? At the prevailing rate of 40 per cent, inheritance tax on this sum would yield £3.6bn – money that the NHS could surely put to good use?

Professor David Sapsford
Kirkby Lonsdale, Cumbria

Guns and drugs

Your leader about gun control fails to mention the now familiar pattern of the lone gunman with a psychiatric history causing murder mayhem. More recently we have depressed adolescent children taking to the gun, and even more recently, the civilian executions by possibly depressed pseudo-terrorists. If judiciary and law enforcement finds it so difficult to resist the powerful gun lobby, why not look instead at who is doing the shooting and why?

A psychiatric history indicates that the shooter may have been (or is) on some kind of psychiatric drugs. It is now well understood that SSRI type anti-depressant and other drugs in some cases cause the taker by causing homicidal ideation as well as morbid self-harm. Why is this aspect of the gun killings not being taken more seriously? Is it fear of litigation by the drug companies?

Anna Thomson
Cheshire

Selection is best

As someone whose main career was in teaching, I have been following the renewed debate on grammar schools with interest. Having taught over the years in practically every kind of secondary, comprehensive, grammar and independent school, I would cautiously support the reintroduction of selection. Cautiously – because not everything under the Butler dispensation was rosy.

The “parity of esteem” that was meant to be accorded to the three kinds of secondary – grammar, technical and secondary modern – was more honoured in the breach than in the observance. That, of course, was not the fault of the legislators. It was the fault of the implementers.

Underlying the debate is the fact that children raise or lower their sights according to the peer group they are in. I well remember coming down with my family from Scotland in 1960 when we made our home in London. During my first few weeks at the excellent Latymer Upper School in Hammersmith I said to myself: “I’m going to have to work hard to keep up with these other chaps.” Of course, in a different kind of school, my mind might have worked the other way.

We all want the very best for our young people and it is absolutely key that, regardless of snobbery or social climbing, each child receives the kind of schooling that is right for them. It is not elitist or right-wing to say that selection, humanely and professionally done, is the best way forward.

Rev Andrew McLuskey
Staines

Olympians can inspire us all

I have never been a sports fan but, less than a week after the start of the Brazilian games, Olympic fever may yet take hold of me. At the time of writing we have already gained more medals than in the same period during the London Olympics four years ago.

In the ensuing interviews with these inspirational young champions what is apparent is that their achievements have been dependent on a number of key factors. There are tales of the personal sacrifices they have made, denying themselves the time to indulge in the simple daily pleasures the rest of us take for granted. This requires an incredible level of dedication; basically putting what the rest of us might consider a "normal" life on hold.

Medal-winners frequently mention the support they have received from those who believe in them, be it friends, family or financial sponsors. The importance of this cannot be underestimated. The fact that others have belief in them and what they are trying to achieve can make all the difference between success and failure.

The physician and father of medicine, Hippocrates, said: “Sport is a preserver of health.” Witnessing these Olympics achievements, there can be no doubt about the benefits of leading a healthy disciplined life. Though I have no right to do so, for the next few weeks I shall enjoy basking in the reflected glory of others’ achievements. Proud to be British? You bet I am. I also believe that those individuals who have the capacity to inspire others have a moral obligation to do so.

Linda Piggott-Vijeh
Combe St Nicholas

I was really cheered by Matt Gatward's piece on the Rio Olympics: brisk, slightly wry, and putting things to rights.

Peter O’Reilly
Address withheld

Brexit means Brexit? Not necessarily

To those who write in saying the Remain campaigners should accept the result of the EU referendum, in that we have lost – well, not necessarily. At the present time we are still members of the European Union, and could be for years. There is no time period to Trigger Article 50, as far as I am aware. I would not be too surprised if the next general election will also act as another referendum, with candidates standing as supporters of the EU or not.

Our country is in limbo and we are in decline as the EU is preparing for us to go. The rest of the world is not pleased with us. If we are not too careful we will end up like Greece, and we won’t have the euro to bail us out.

Leave supporters may have found a majority in June, but it is not a result that is legally binding. Theresa May, meanwhile, won’t keep the position of Prime Minster for long: she has lumbered herself into an impossible position.

Richard Grant
Ringwood

In this period of economic uncertainty following the Brexit vote, the £100m economic stimulus plan unveiled this week by the Scottish First Minister is very welcome. If the objective is to stimulate employment, we investing in housing and smoothing the path for commercial and industrial building projects ought to be the Scottish Government’s first priority.

Over the past 10 years, we have seen a dramatic shift in construction industry output away from housing and commercial and industrial activity towards infrastructure, which accounted for almost 30 per cent of a record Scottish construction output of more than £14bn last year. At the same time, construction employment has declined from more than 235,000 in 2008 to 175,000 in 2015.

For the new plan to have maximum positive impact on business confidence and employment, any additional funding should be targeted towards housing as well as clearing obstacles to getting commercial and industrial building projects off the ground. In terms of policy, a good start here would be to reinstate business rates relief for empty industrial properties.

Vaughan Hart
Managing director, Scottish Building Federation

Never forget the elephants

World Elephant Day (12 August) should serve as an occasion to give elephants our attention and take action for them. For starters, we can stay away from attractions that offer “joyrides” on these magnificent animals and encourage others to do the same.

Most tourists have no idea that elephants who are forced to give rides are sorely abused. They are torn from their mothers as babies; confined to tiny wooden crates; deprived of food, water, and rest; tied down and beaten mercilessly with nail-studded rods – all to prepare them for a life of servitude in one of Asia's many “elephant camps”.

In nature, elephants would stay in the company of family and friends, but those used for trekking will spend most of their lives chained by two legs in captivity. There is no justification for robbing these highly intelligent social animals of everything that is natural and important to them, or for using them in abusive and degrading ways.

Jennifer White
London N1