Letters: Environmental damage of Flower show

Damage done by the Chelsea Flower show is a blooming disgrace

Sir: I must take issue regarding your leading article of 20 May. I fiercely disagree that the Chelsea Flower Show "has done a pretty good job in going green". The truth is that each year the Chelsea Flower Show is responsible for one of the worst environmental disasters in central London.

The historic and once-beautiful grounds and gardens in which the show is held is the only green area in Chelsea, and is protected by three conservation orders. Each time this ever-expanding monstrosity of a flower show is held, it destroys this once-glorious green area for the rest of the year.

In the 37 years I have lived opposite, it has increased in size by at least three times, and the period of time during which the whole operation stays on site has now increased from three weeks to nearly two months. This has resulted in a huge increase in noise, mess, dust, dirt, smell, vermin, pollution and almost unbelievable traffic congestion.

To Chelsea residents, the flower show is the start of the annual trashing of the grounds and gardens. Each spring, it is heartbreaking to watch their workers start preparing for the show. They crush the profusion of cultured and meadow flowers, grass verges and lawns that are still struggling for survival from the year before, beneath their filthy portable buildings, machinery, rubbish-skips, heavy lorries, and gigantic, ugly marquees.

The gardens are described in the Royal Hospital's own literature as "a green retreat with shady walks". Not for a long time has it been like that.

Planning permission is needed to bring the RHS under control so that the whole operation can be reassessed. The entire event must be reduced to an acceptable level and a stop put to the appalling environmental devastation done each year to the flowers, trees and greenery.

Reg Miller

London SW1

Meeting death with dignity

Sir: Dignified end-of-life care is possible on the NHS, and is practised already ("A better death", Sue Royal, 20 May). Recently my mother died. She was being treated in a large teaching hospital in the North-west. When it became obvious that her condition was very poor and she was not responding to treatment, she was transferred to a medical high-dependency unit but, sadly, she showed no signs of improvement.

The staff on the unit implemented the Liverpool Care Pathway. This consisted of administering a battery of tests to assess my mother's prospects and how her final hours could be made as comfortable and dignified as possible. Having made sure there was nothing that could be done medically to improve my mother's condition, they called us, her family, to the hospital.

All invasive treatment had ceased; all tubes had been removed and monitors switched off. A single line into my mother's abdomen allowed the staff to administer pain relief as required. She was in a quiet bay, clean and comfortable. The curtains were drawn, but that was as much for our privacy as much as anything else. The staff attended to us as much as to my mother and did so with tact, honesty and compassion. The hospital chaplains came and went and friends popped in to say goodbye.

My mother lived for one more day, dying almost exactly 24 hours after we had arrived at her bedside. The Liverpool Care Pathway gave us back our mum for those last few hours. My sister and I and our families saw her pain-free and at rest for the first time in weeks, and the comfort that gave us was immeasurable.

Nothing could ever remove the sense of loss we feel, but I would urge families who find themselves in situations similar to ours to find out about the Liverpool Care Pathway and to ask if it is practiced in the hospital treating their loved one.

Robert Hall

Stone, Staffordshire

Sir: Regarding the excellent article by Sue Royal, I too have recently lost my partner to a brain tumour at the age of 47. It was a grade four glioblastoma, the most deadly and aggressive of all brain cancers.

My partner was very definite that he wanted to die as he had lived, with as much dignity as possible. Unfortunately, as we were nearing the end of his life I had enormous and distressing problems trying to get him into a hospice or local community hospital for more than a week's respite care.

The powers that be believed he could live for some time and were not happy that it could be an extended stay. I knew it was impossible for him to live for any length of time. This was not only due to the consultant's prognosis but through the support and information of the Samantha Dixon Brain Tumour Trust, which handles the facts with great honesty and compassion.

I have subsequently discovered that GP practices often know little about brain tumours, because of their rarity, and thus are not always aware as to the rapidity of the disease progression in some types.

Fortunately, Vaughan was allowed to stay in the little community hospital, as it became obvious how quickly the tumour was progressing. He died with the dignity he had asked for, just a couple of weeks after his admission for respite care. We could not have asked for greater kindness or support from the staff, but, like Sue Royal, I am haunted by what could have happened if I had not stood my ground. Very likely he would have died in a standard NHS hospital without the wonderful care we all received.

Katie Deverell

Upper Froyle, Hampshire

Curriculum shift caused problem

Sir: How well Ben Warren (letters, 20 May) illustrates the absurdity of educational expectation today. The problem stems from the introduction of the National Curriculum and the levels of attainment that accompanied it. At the outset, these levels reflected what might be achieved by an average child of a given age.

Over the next few years, this mysteriously shifted from being what an average child might achieve to an expectation of what all children should be able to do. This made school targets impossible to achieve and, as a result, lives of teachers, headteachers and children became more and more stressful as they chased the impossible (political) dream. Add to this an inspection regime that was threatening rather than supportive and you can begin to see why there are now few applications for vacant headships.

The Chief Inspector of Ofsted fails to see this obvious reason for 20 per cent of children failing to achieve their "expected" level, and her solution is to rack up the pressure on schools with more frequent, unannounced inspections.

These children shouldn't be abandoned; schools must help them achieve their full potential. But do they really need to teach them to recognise a subordinate clause or the best way to use an ellipsis in their creative writing? I suspect not.

As long as we fail to recognise the shift that has caused this "problem", as long as we continue to value only purely academic ability, as long as we have an inspection system that most teachers fear rather than respect, education in this country will continue to be troubled.

Like Justin Brodie (letter, 20 May), I also left the profession two years ago after 20 years of headship.

Mick Wright

BURY, Greater Manchester

Calculating defeats defeats Lib Dems

Sir: In Nick Clegg's article bemoaning the state of Parliament ("Democracy? What a great idea", 20 May) he claims that there have been only three defeats in the Commons in the past 11 years, "a feat unknown across the rest of the democratic world".

His figures are wrong. Including the vote on the adjournment held in July 2006 (which Mr Clegg appears to include, given his reference to "a gesture vote on whether we should all go home early"), the figure for the past 11 years is five Commons defeats, not three. More substantively, I would love to know what evidence he can produce for his claim that this situation is somehow unique. What evidence does he have, for example, that defeats are less common at Westminster than in Ireland, given the overwhelming strength of party discipline in the Dail? Or in Germany, where I can think of only two defeats suffered by the government in the Bundestag over the past decade.

Or what about Australia, where party discipline is far stronger than in the UK; it is more than 30 years since a government was last defeated in the Australian House of Representatives. Or do these countries – and the many others I could list – not count as part of the democratic world?

Government defeats are rare in many parliamentary systems. This isn't to doubt that there are lots of ways the House of Commons could be improved. But if we are to make any progress, we have to get our diagnosis right.

Philip Cowley

Professor of Parliamentary Government, University of Nottingham

One Tory party is changed for another

Sir: The Crewe and Nantwich by-election shows that people have learning difficulties when it comes to democracy and social justice. Here, they have merely changed one Tory party for another. Gordon Brown may throw them a few nuts to quieten them but fundamentally nothing will change.

As the world goes through another cycle of capitalist-induced economic, military and environmental catastrophes we persist in electing those who cause them, as though we are on some addictive drug. In spite of "education, education, education", and no matter how many degrees, we still behave like Pavlov's dogs or turkeys voting for Christmas.

Labour and Conservatives are the same, and the Liberals act as an Establishment safety-valve to mop up ditherers who cannot choose either. Socialism doesn't get a look in. The whole system is designed to prevent socialism and democracy ever getting a foothold on control. To be elected, the system requires capitalist support and media control and both are in hands of the Establishment.

But the biggest obstacles to socialism and democracy are the Labour Party and the unions and not until they are obliterated will people start to consider the alternatives to real socialism. Will we ever learn? On the by-election result, the answer is never.

Malcolm Naylor

Otley, Lancashire

Sir: The white working class feels totally abandoned by New Labour. But it's not just the white working class, it's working-class people of all colours and backgrounds, including many ethnic people. They have seen New Labour suck up to the chattering trendy London set, the liberal academics, the hard-hearted rich white feminist, the corporate bosses and middle-class civil servants etc.

The working classes have experienced increasing financial hardship, unable to meet ever-increasing utility and fuel bills. They have been hit by direct and indirect taxes as well as false green taxes. And Labour withdrawing the 10p tax rate was the final straw. It was a clear message that New Labour was no longer the party of ordinary people.

The working classes also traditionally believe in family values and care about the vulnerable in our society. So when they see New Labour's policies give no value to traditional families, no protection to the unborn child and pander to militant minority groups, for example, the obsession with gay rights, is it any wonder they no longer feel represented by this Labour Government?

It's time New Labour started caring about the majority of the indigenous population not just financially but socially. It's also time they remembered that the silent majority have rights too.

Simon Icke

Aston Clinton, Buckinghamshire

Dig this

Sir: Blimey, I've become an anachronism and it happened in the Swinging Sixties. The last time I went potato-picking (letters, 21 May) was in the autumn half-term of 1968. We called it spud-bashing in Staffordshire, and I spent my hard-earned gains on my first pair of Levi's; £3/19/11, since you ask (£3.99).

Lindsay Coleman

Sugnall, Staffordshire

Licence to pester

Sir: The harassment by TV Licensing can be relentless (letter, 21 May). My daughter is on the receiving end of persecution which seemingly relies on "the database", and even after trying to correct it the threats continue, although my daughter holds a valid licence. Linking of databases worries me. I can envisage a scenario. One is queuing for a flight. A tap on the shoulder is followed by, "Excuse me, sir, you do not appear to have a TV licence". How does one correct the database?

Derek J Carr

Bristol

Quis custodiet ... ?

Sir: The proposal that police should have the right to strike would cause two problems. Who would police their picket lines in a dispute? How could police then conscientiously manage the picket lines of fellow trades unionists? For many years, police were rewarded for their loyalty by never striking, with a pay settlement matching blue-collar deals. It did seem to work. Perhaps the formula could be applied to other front-line workers to avoid strikes?

Robert G Beech

Stanford-Le-Hope, Essex

Two problems solved

Sir: We hear of the high price of fuel and soaring NHS costs through alcohol- related illness. There have been calls for Gordon Brown to cut the fuel cost by decreasing its tax, and calls for the drinks industry to raise the price of alcohol to deter drinkers. I have a solution: cut the fuel tax and increase the tax on alcohol by an amount to make this revenue-neutral. This would also cut NHS costs.

Dr Michael Ward

Rutherway, Oxford

Questionable policies

Sir: David Cameron, when asked a question by the Prime Minister this week, pointed out that PMQs are for questioning the Government, not the Opposition. But in view of the Opposition Leader's aspiration to the PM's office, it might be appropriate for parliamentary time to put members' questions to him, so we may better understand Tory policy, or lack of it?

Chris Sexton

Crowthorne, Berkshire

Superman Cooperman

Sir: I accept that Catherine Townsend is real (letters, 23 May) but I am unsure why your correspondent is upset about her meeting the "fictional" Cooper Brown. This encounter was no more or less authentic than the characters that litter her column. I was far more interested about her bumping into the Cooperman than enduring more tripe about "Andy the fireman" or "Pete the executive" who seem to find Ms Townsend irresistible. Meeting "Cooper Brown, the fantasy polemicist" is far more fascinating.

Stan Broadwell

Bristol