It’s time for Labour’s hard left to go quietly

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

Jeremy Corbyn with Faiza Shaheen, who has been deselected as a Labour candidate (PA)

While it’s regrettable that the Labour Party is getting in a tangle over Diane Abbott, I think it’s a bit rich for people to complain about a “left-wing cull”.

During Jeremy Corbyn’s tenure, those members who were more centrist were labelled “Blairites”, as if it were a filthy word.

Corbyn and his acolytes had their chance to win the country’s trust in 2019 and they failed abysmally. Keir Starmer has done a remarkable job at turning the party’s fortunes around and, if the polls are correct, is within easy reach of taking over No 10.

Instead of trying to put a bomb under his campaign, the party’s hard left should now shut up. Unless Starmer wins the election, there is no hope of achieving the kinds of social justice that the whole membership wants to see, including those dastardly Blairites.

Jane Mogford

Cirencester

Stop the boasts…

The Conservative Party’s enthusiasm for the “stop the boats” policy is disappointing and self-defeating. A significant percentage of the voting public is dismayed at the politicisation of a very serious topic requiring cross-party and international agreement to have any chance of being equitable, fair and responsible.

The “stop the boats” mantra – and the subsequent threat of possible deportation to Rwanda for those that arrive on UK shores by irregular means – is obviously not acting as any form of serious deterrent. With the impending initiation of the strategy, the figures of those making the crossing in unworthy vessels show little change.

Furthermore, Sunak’s repeated claims that it is an effective strategy – even though, when he was chancellor, he showed no enthusiasm for it – reveals another flawed policy, based on manipulation of the data, promoted by deeply flawed thinking by key individuals on the right of his party.

I wonder if there are other dyslexics like me, who just wish that Sunak and his ilk, would “stop the boasts”.

Nigel Plevin

Somerset

The trouble with tax

Taxing the super-rich to revive our country is not as simple as many think (“John Rentoul: Don’t bash the global rich, Starmer – tax them instead”, Wednesday 29 May).

Many of the super-rich earn their incomes from overseas investments. Many have threatened to leave the UK – one already has, vowing not to return if taxes are hiked.

If they are British nationals, the money they invested overseas was initially sterling, but they argue that the interest/profit is not earned in the UK and that the initial investment has already been subject to tax.

If they are not UK nationals and their income is earned overseas, we have no right to tax such money, it is only open for taxation by the government in the country where it is earned.

We need entrepreneurs – but I agree with Rentoul that the wealthier ones should pay more tax.

My maternal grandparents paid a top rate in excess of 90 per cent, which didn’t stop them from developing and diversifying a successful business, they were still wealthy enough and never considered leaving the country.

By that example, investment is needed in the UK, not overseas. One possibility is to tax goods and services more heavily and reduce income taxes for those on lower pay.

That also has the effect of getting tax out of foreign industry without disadvantaging the UK-owned businesses.

Graham Cooper

Address supplied

Why travel to the ends of the earth?

Climate change will make air travel more risky. The recent incident involving Singapore Airlines flight SQ321 from London, caught in exceptionally strong turbulence, which left one dead and 30 injured, should give many pause.

Given the sheer amount of pollution and carbon emissions given off by commercial air travel, it is rather ironic if the fear of being injured or, worse, dying on a plane now discourages some people from buying tickets.

We must change our deadly habits in this century to prevent our descendants from living miserably in the next. Why travel to the ends of the earth when we don’t even know our part of the country?

Sylvio Le Blanc

Montreal

A benefit for young people

Sunak’s plan for 18-year-olds to be enrolled in national service should certainly not be mandatory – but a national scheme of community service could well be included for children of secondary school age during the statutory period of full-time education.

Such a scheme would benefit young people, help them develop a sense of social responsibility, provide a sense of adventure and deter them from getting into trouble with the law. 

Angela Croft

London