The horror of immigration detention

Please send your letters to letters@independent.co.uk

Yarl’s Wood near Bedford, where many are held solely under immigration powers ( (Getty)

Britain is famously an open society that is based on a belief in freedom and respect for the individual, tolerance, human rights, a fair legal system open to all, etc. This belief has been the “operating system” of our nation for generations and is something we can all be rightly proud of and that is admired around the world. It is one of the cornerstones of the nation's success, peace and prosperity for centuries.

As a result, we expect our politicians to govern and legislate in accordance with these beliefs and we also expect our public servants to administer them in the same way. We do not believe that the end justifies the means.

It is therefore of deep concern that the current government appears less interested in acting in accordance with these beliefs. The recent guidelines on how to treat asylum seekers and migrants in detention are a classic example and are more concerned to make the lives of public servants easier rather than respecting the rights of the individuals.

More worrying still is the government's lack of sensitivity in issuing such guidelines at a time when they can only serve to legitimise the recent upsurge in xenophobic racism.

Jerry Wallwork

Leicester

Another shocking report (Immigration centre staff told: Put 'disobedient' detainees in solitary confinement - even if it could kill them, 3 August) about abuse of power. This report from an independent body is about people who have not committed a crime; and who are locked up on the say-so of civil servants, not the judiciary, and with no time limit.

If the Government was following the recommendations of the Shaw Report (that it commissioned), those with mental illnesses should not be detained anyway. Also the Shaw Report and All Party Parliamentary Group on Immigration Detention recommend that there is an end to indefinite detention. How many more times does the Government need to be told that it needs to end this inhumane, useless and expensive process?

Suzanne Fletcher

Chair, Liberal Democrats for Seekers of Sanctuary

Stockton on Tees

Hinkley Point

I wonder why, with concerns regarding costs, security and, of course, the long term storage, disposal and decommissioning issues of nuclear energy, more attention hasn't been given to biomass power generation, in particular that involving wood pellets? These are created from sustainable forests and often from the waste of the timber industry. There are arguments as to whether this method is completely carbon neutral and the length of time it takes for the carbon generated to be reabsorbed. However, it is certainly far greener than using either coal or gas and uses proven technology with the possibility of current coal-fired plants being converted.

Currently a subsidy would be required, but I suspect the cost of the subsidy would be far less than the additional costs that are being contemplated in respect of Hinkley Point. As more biomass plants were developed, no doubt costs and therefore the subsidies required would reduce.

Richard Colla

Hertfordshire

Lizzie Armitstead

After reading Ian Herbert's article on why Lizzie Armitstead should not be allowed to compete in Rio, I am trying to remember the event that she won gold for in London in 2012, as stated in the article.

If Mr Herbert is going to criticise her over her reasons for missing three drugs tests, I should have thought he would at least get his facts right.

John Ellis

Address supplied

Pornography

Lee Williams’s article on sexual dysfunction resulting from excessive exposure to pornography reminded me of the excellent cartoon series “Grimbledon Down” by Bill Tidy that appeared in the New Scientist magazine up to the 1990s. This parody of the government research institute Porton Down had the researchers creating pornographic films to generate boredom with sex in the watchers, with the intent of stemming overpopulation. It would seem that Tidy was prescient in this respect and that life truly follows art.

Patrick Cleary

Devon

Pensions

Hugh Woodhouse is right when he says “....that my National Insurance (NI) deductions did not go to provide for my state pension?” State pensions are an “unfunded scheme”. This is unlike a private pension where payment made as a pension contribution is applied to a fund and, assuming that the fund grows through continued contribution and investment activity, the monies are paid out eventually as pension income of some sort. State pensions are paid from the Exchequer's current, not historic, income and are dependent on those presently in work contributing their NICs to pay present-day pensioners. Those of us no longer in the workforce paid for previous generations to have state retirement income as we now hope others will do for us. What we bought with our NICs was entitlement to our state pension and, according to the history of our contributions, a determination of what amount of state pension we should be paid.

Hilary Tearle

Harrogate

Surely one approach that could help is to make it routine for the sale of property to be a contribution to retirees' pension savings. It would reflect the reality that their home is many people's only large investment. Encouraging trading down could both release properties onto the market and boost private pensions. Making this a normal option on retirement at the age of 60 to 70, rather than later to cover care or boost a low income, might reduce the trauma of leaving the family home.

Peter Holland

Hampshire

Solutions to the housing crisis

The first action to take on the housing price escalation is to stop the sale of houses to multi-home owners, these people use their collateral to purchase to the detriment of first time buyers. The multi-home owners are responsible for the rise of the rented market.

M.G.Shew

Wells