Sir, there was a wholly unacceptable anti-Tory bias in the audience which the BBC invited to the televised general election debate on Wednesday. The left-wing audience clapped and cheered every time Jeremy Corbyn spoke but booed and jeered at all the other party leaders. These constant interruptions completely slanted the debate. The BBC’s pledge to be independent, impartial and honest was disregarded.
Kay Bagon
Radlett, Herts
Sir, The BBC has been accused of bias regarding the general election debate after the audience saved its biggest cheers for “left-wing” policies.
Has anyone considered that it might be because they actually preferred them? I don’t know anyone in favour of having to sell their homes to pay the dementia tax, or slashing funding to the police service, NHS and schools, or who wants more cuts, low wages and zero-hour contracts.
Advertisement
Julie Partridge
London SE15
Sir, I had applied numerous times to be in the audience for Question Time, but on applying had never even had an acknowledgment. I had the suspicion that as a middle-aged, middle-class professional who has voted Conservative all my life, I was always going to be disappointed.
When the programme returned to Peterborough earlier this year, as a little experiment I embellished my application to state that I was a militant trade unionist train driver who wanted fracking banned and supported Brexit. Much to my amusement and annoyance I received an email inviting me to attend, which was followed up with phone calls.
Without applying, I was then invited to another BBC debate on the Cambridgeshire mayoral contest.
Advertisement
David Stoneman
Huntingdon, Cambs
Sir, I have wasted 90 minutes of my life watching six party leaders and a home secretary supposedly debating, in an adult manner, questions put by members of the public.
Their conduct was appalling: interrupting, talking across the allocated speaker, not addressing the question. The only surprise was that one of them did not say, “ . . . and my dad’s bigger than your dad.”
Robert Henderson Smith
Advertisement
Manchester
Sir, “Squabble”? Did Theresa May, in declining to attend the debate, really say that a debate is a squabble? Her remark demonstrates a contempt for the very basis of parliament, for other politicians, for party leaders, for anyone with a differing point of view, and for the electorate.
Simon Ainley
Rugby, Warks
Sir, The election debate was a disgrace to national politics and a vindication of the prime minister’s refusal to take part in it — and if she had done so she would probably have been accused of doing a U-turn. I saw a set of squabbling and ill-mannered children, out of control.
Advertisement
Moreover, if the audience was a fair reflection of the electorate, Labour should win on June 8 with a large majority.
Leslie Watmore
Beckenham, Kent
Sir, Theresa May has made this election almost entirely about the relative strength of her leadership qualities, and strives to avoid substantive examination of Conservative policies.
However, her decision to stay away from the debate, and her wrong-footing by Jeremy Corbyn, who decided to attend, showed tactical gullibility on her part and strategic nous on his.
Advertisement
Ven Gavin Collins
Fareham, Hants
REFUGEE STRATEGY
Sir, The refugee camps across the world were there before the election was called and they will be there after June 8. A new parliament cannot be allowed to move on from the refugee crisis. Rather than crowding out our response to the global refugee crisis, discussions around Brexit should compel us to ensure that a post-Brexit Britain will be a welcoming and compassionate place.
The recent report from the All Party Parliamentary Group for Refugees, “Refugees Welcome”, provides a helpful blueprint as to what the next government can do. There are politicians in all major political parties who care deeply about the plight of refugees, but refugees need an advocate around the cabinet table. We join calls for the appointment of a minister for refugees. We need a national integration strategy which extends the transition period for asylum seekers given refugee status from 28 days to 50.
We hope that faith communities will use this election to build partnerships so that the whole of society can be involved in the welcome offered to refugees. The community sponsorship scheme is a real opportunity for faith communities to contribute to this welcome. We ask those seeking to represent us to commit to working with local and national government, and communities to ensure we take full advantage of the scheme.
Rt Rev Paul Butler, Bishop of Durham, I, Bishop of Croydon and chairman of Churches’ Refugee Network, I, Territorial Commander for the Salvation Army UK Territory with the Republic of Ireland
AGE-RELATED DRUGS
Sir, The plan to reward GPs for stopping unnecessary medication shows the naivety of some clinical commissioning groups (“GPs will get ‘bribes’ for taking drugs from elderly”, News, June 1). Those surgeries running high-quality services which regularly review the medicines of their patients are more likely to have identified treatments no longer required than those that have not.
Currently I have an annual medicines review and an annual asthma review in which each prescription is checked. Also, no mention is made of GPs using cheaper, but equally effective, generic medicines. GPs with high levels of non-generic prescribing should be identified and helped to move away from the more expensive branded products.
Prof Keith Neal
Emeritus professor, Public Health
Derby
Sir, I am a member of our GP practice’s patient participation group. Recently the practice employed a pharmacist part-time to assess patients on multiple (more than eight) repeat prescriptions. By combining, replacing, eliminating and generally spring-cleaning these combinations, the practice saved an estimated £30,000.
Obviously the revised prescriptions had to be issued by the GPs, but only on the basis of expert recommendation.
Frederic Edgar
Leamington Spa, Warwicks
Sir, The idea of encouraging GPs to reduce medication to elderly patients in return for a “commission” equal to half the money saved would be the start of a slippery slope. GPs, along with other prescribers, should make their decisions solely on the grounds of clinical need.
George Garside
Anglesey
VISA-FREE RUSSIANS
Sir, The “hard-edged, rational” policy noted by Roger Boyes (“A Franco-German axis won’t thwart Putin”, Comment, May 31) is only part of the solution to the seemingly intractable Russia problem facing the EU. Soft power is also needed. Here the EU has considerable heft.
The simplest and most elegant way to nudge Russia back towards its European roots would be for the EU (and UK for that matter) to introduce visa-free travel for Russian nationals, initially on a limited basis for, say, tourism and study.
The opportunity to experience Europe easily and cheaply at first hand would go a long way towards undermining the effect on ordinary Russians of the Kremlin’s often vicious portrayals of the West, particularly among the younger generation, which is in significant part well-educated and outward-looking. In time, this would lay the groundwork for a shift in political sentiment.
Peter Morley
London SE26
DIGITAL PAINTINGS
Sir, The debate over how much ancillary material and equipment should be provided alongside paintings and historical artefacts is not an either/or (“Museum visitors seek refuge from digital world”, News, May 31, and letter, June 1).
In the Gemäldegalerie in Berlin, Pieter Breughel the Elder’s famous Netherlandish Proverbs is displayed on its own, without extras in one room, while next door there is a computerised version which can be analysed and deconstructed at will, displaying the painting layer by layer, for instance, inserting different lines of sight, highlighting the arrangements of different elements.
Visitors are free to explore the picture either way, or as in my case, both ways.
Dr Steve Mills
Manchester
MONEY TREES
Sir, The four major problems facing this country are the balance of payments deficit, the NHS, funding education and coping with the social care of an increasingly ageing population. Amber Rudd laments the fact that there is no “money tree” to cope with these demands (News, June 1). She is wrong – there is, and it is called income tax. The quicker politicians realise this and grasp the income tax nettle the more likely these problems will be solved.
Eric Ickinger
Felixstowe, Suffolk
SAVING SALMON
Sir, Mark Lloyd, chief executive of the Angling Trust, is right to identify three issues threatening the survival of wild salmon — commercial netting, agricultural pollution and predation by cormorants and goosanders (Letters, June 1). However, there is a fourth threat, and that is seals. Seals have no natural predators in British waters and the population has exploded in recent years. Culling is the answer, but the public outcry would make the badger cull look like a walk in the park.
Sandy Pratt
Dormansland, Surrey
WATCH WORDS
Sir, James Crane refers to the word “pollywash”— “a reflection from a watch face or other shiny object on a wall or ceiling” (Letters, June 1). My father, born and bred in Plymouth, always called this a “Johnny Noddy”.
Claire Cart
Comberton, Cambridge
Sir, A “pollywash” was known in our household when I was a child, and indeed to my own children, as a “jackadandy”.
Sarah Dodwell
Ipswich, Suffolk
Sir, Apropos evocative words, could anything be more topical than “bafflegab”? Chambers defines it as the “logorrhoea of many politicians, officials and salespeople, characterised by prolix abstract circumlocution and/or a profusion of abstruse technical terminology, used as a means of persuasion, pacification or obfuscation”.
Tony Phillips
Chalfont St Giles, Bucks
GOLDFISH FLOTATION
Sir, I note that the “water wings” that allowed Gordon the Goldfish to float, consisted of a halved wine cork (News, June 1). I trust this was from a muscadet sur lie, a sauvignon blanc or, perhaps, a chablis — something that goes well with fish.
Grahame Solway
Portchester, Hants
Letters to the Editor should be sent to letters@thetimes.co.uk