We’d do well to listen to the King at this time of year

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

King Charles has delivered a personal Easter message (The Royal Family)

In his Maundy message to the nation, the King reminded us to follow Jesus in caring for each other. Unfortunately, many do not know the example of Jesus. Many people know the example of Jesus and choose to ignore it.

Either way, this nation loses out because too many people do not follow Jesus and do not live lives in line with biblical teaching. The King reminded us we are blessed by all the different services that exist for our welfare, but over and above these organisations – many of which were set up by the Christian Church and their selfless staff – we need and benefit greatly from those who extend the hand of friendship to us, especially in a time of need.

This time of Easter reminds us of the love that God has for all people and the extent to which he went to help us with our problems. We all fail from time to time, but the Bible teaches the benefit of Easter, and that there is scope for forgiveness and a new start even if we do fail. All would do well to listen to the advice from the King.

Jonathan Longstaff

Buxted, E Sussex

Knight-mare

When I was but a lad it seemed that the bestowing of a knighthood was a great honour and that those holding the title were to be respected accordingly. I was probably young and naive.

Nevertheless, after the recent batch erupted, I am left wondering whether any members of the Conservative parliamentary party are not knighted. They can’t all have done wonderful things, surely.

Pete Thackeray

Bristol

Profitisation

In future when we talk of “privatisation”, can we please call it what it is, which is “profitisation”? Perhaps then we’ll realise that in certain industries and the NHS, it should never exist.

Ken Twiss

Cleveland

Don’t stop with water – nationalise gas and electricity, too

Following on from the letter by Sasha Simic, it should be remembered that when water companies were privatised in 1989, there had been strident protests against it as water is essential to life, compared to telephones or gas – which had been previously privatised under Margaret Thatcher.

In addition, unlike gas and telephones, there was no option of switching companies to get a better deal. They had a complete monopoly on local supply. The government’s justification was that water privatisation would allow investment in new infrastructure to replace or upgrade the ageing Victorian system. This reason was used by the companies to substantially increase water charges – and as privatisation was now a fait accompli, the long-suffering public just accepted it.

Of course, the water companies focused their efforts on increasing dividends and executive bonuses rather than investing in infrastructure. Now they are saying that the necessary infrastructure will have to be paid for by price increases to the consumer. But this was the reason originally used to increase water charges in the first instance!

I totally agree with Sasha that water should be renationalised without compensation and would further suggest the same applied to gas and electricity.

Patrick Cleary

Gloucestershire

A guide to help us approach the ‘culture wars’

Robin Moira White writes an interesting article summarising recent employment law cases on discrimination. I agree with the conclusion of the article that competing beliefs should be allowed as long as they do not infringe on others. John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice sets out a blueprint and explains the logic for such an idea that everyone should be given the greatest possible freedom, consistent with a like freedom for all.

That is to say, people should be able to disagree with me, but it shouldn’t affect the way I live, nor should my beliefs infringe on others. At times, that might create a difference between holding a view privately and publicly. Rawls’s theory was written more than 50 years ago, yet it seems most applicable today to regulate our politics, social media and modern interactions.

Paul Kelly

Chesham