Letters: Corbyn represents true hope for many

These letters were published in the Monday 11th January edition of the Independent

Jeremy Corbyn says the public is 'crying out for a Labour government that can offer a real alternative' (Getty Images)

Jeremy Corbyn is not a problem for the Labour movement, even if he is a challenge for the party. Hundreds of thousands of us out here were sick to death of watching all the blood, sweat and tears of our forefathers being destroyed while our watered-down not-very-left-of-centre party simply wrung its hands or, much worse, colluded with Tory destruction.

Many of us have reached the point of no longer caring about the party, which has given away its principles in order to gain power. We’re reinvigorated by what Corbyn says, and we see the possibility once more of the kind of society men and women dreamed of during the Second World War.

Socialism, despite all the efforts of the selfish, the greedy and the callous, is not a discredited philosophy.

Lawrence Forrester

Dorchester

What on earth are the Labour MPs doing? Members of the Labour party continue to give Jeremy Corbyn huge support. Those I know who think that his views on Trident are sensible include two senior officers in our armed forces, who have seen conventional forces decimated to the extent that they have worries over our security.

Over the monarchy, Corbyn wants a review after the present monarch dies, also of the wretched honours system and the same over our huge and undemocratic Lords. Utterly sensible. He is right also over Palestine and the dreadful states of Saudi Arabia and Israel.

I believe the heavy attacks by the prime minister and Tory press show that they fear that Corbyn is on to something.

Peter Downey

Bath

Jeremy Corbyn and his new shadow defence secretary could undermine those calling them “unsafe” on defence matters at a stroke. If they agreed to put some of the money saved by not renewing the Trident submarines to ensuring our conventional forces were up to scratch – enough ships, planes, soldiers etc – effectively reversing the Tory defence cuts, they would get a lot of approval from the voting public, some Labour MPs and members, both past and present, of the armed forces, including some of the top brass.

The world has moved on from the Cold War days. We now need flexible, rapid-reaction forces and the latest in technology to counter the growing threat from rogue states and fanatics who wish to terrorise us. It is time for smart thinking, not Cold War missile-rattling.

Mike Jenkins

Bromley, Greater London

You note a perceived irony that Jeremy Corbyn expects loyalty from his MPs when he himself has rebelled perhaps more than any other Labour MP over the years.

Mr Corbyn expects a reasonable degree of loyalty from those MPs privileged to occupy positions as shadow ministers. His own rebelling was carried out from a place far removed from such lofty settings. There is no irony.

The Rev Stephen Jones

Carnforth, Lancashire

Too late to go dutch on flood defences

Richard Jorissen, managing director of the Dutch Flood Protection Programme, said: “It’s hard to transfer our network to the UK” (report, 7 January). The one important lesson we could learn from the Dutch is the importance of the Zuider Zee flood protection barrage which was proposed in 1891. The enabling act was passed in 1918 and at every stage there was opposition. It was completed in 1957.

What is needed is a barrage from Spurn Head to Margate. We do not have the same time luxury to save London and York and many towns and cities in between.

R F Stearn

Stowmarket, Suffolk

The great and the good in this country would do well to take heed of the Dutch, not just for their expertise “Lesson from the Dutch on how a low country can avoid flooding” (7 January) but because of their concern for their people.

I have never forgotten an item on the TV news some years ago, when there had been desperate flooding in Holland. The interviewer was talking to someone in a responsible government position, who told him that they would be paying enormous sums in reparation to those whose homes and livelihoods had been lost. Said the interviewer: “But surely that will incur massive costs for your government?” “Yes,” came the reply, “but we have a duty to our citizens.” The contrast in attitudes between the Dutch and us brought tears to my eyes.

Caroline Zvegintzov

Oxford

Cynical rules of the lottery

Peter Kellett asks if he is naive in wondering why there cannot be multiple smaller lottery prizes rather than the current huge jackpots (Letters, 7 January). My late father used to wonder the same thing about football pools prizes. Rather than naive, he was a kind, generous person, as, presumably is Mr Kellett. This has led both gentlemen to the mistaken assumption that lotteries are run for the benefit of prizewinners, whereas the sole aim is to persuade people to buy tickets (or fill in their pools). The proven way achieve this is to gain maximum, preferably free, publicity for eye-watering prizes. The fact that online entry systems become increasingly overloaded as jackpots increase says all that’s necessary about the success of this strategy.

Gerald Haigh

Bedworth, Warwickshire

Fashion that favours the brave

Alexander Fury’s article on the death of André Courrèges (9 January) reminded me of one of Sir Osbert Lancaster’s cartoon creations, Maudie Littlehampton, who constantly shocked her pompous husband, on this occasion by wearing a mini-skirt and shrieking “Courrèges mon brave!”

John Crisp

London SW1

Drink alcohol – and live a longer life?

I have news for those high-minded spoilsports who say that even a very modest alcohol intake gives regular drinkers a one in 100 chance of dying of liver failure. Absolutely every one of us has to die of something eventually, if only of boredom. The one statistic that might give those of us with a mind of our own pause for thought would be if being teetotal increased life expectancy by several years. Would the absence of such information in the latest advice to drinkers have anything to do with the number of published studies that purport to show that drinkers tend to live longer than non-drinkers?

Roger Chapman

Keighley, West Yorkshire

The advice released by the UK’s chief medical officers that no one should drink more than 14 units of alcohol a week is a classic example of the dangers of promulgating half-truths (report, 8 January). Perhaps in a few months’ time the same chief medical officers will be warning people that loneliness is a major risk to health and that visiting public houses can be a way of reducing social isolation.

Alcohol consumption has two critical dimensions: how much people drink and the social context within which such drinking takes place. There are some public houses which any sane person should avoid like the plague. But there are others which play an important role as a source of social cohesion. Loneliness mixed with alcohol is an especially lethal mix.

Ivor Morgan

Lincoln

It seems that Nigel Farage thinks the latest advice on drinking constitutes “nannying”. Does he take the same view of seat belts, anti-smoking legislation etc?

We are extraordinarily tolerant of the harmful effects of alcohol consumption, whose destructive effects include traffic accidents, alcohol-related hospital admissions, pressures on family cohesion and other personal relationships, inability to hold down a job, and numerous health-related consequences.

Dame Sally Davies maintains we are very intelligent about our health: if this extraordinary suggestion were remotely true, GPs’ surgeries and hospitals would be half-empty.

Dr Anthony Ingleton

Sheffield

The chief medical officers’ adjustment of the alcohol guidelines to make the recommended limits the same for men as for women flies in the face of all known science and just about every natural law; it arises from that most insidious social malaise – the insatiable craving for equality.

Sober up and face the facts. The new recommendations infer that men and women can consume equal amounts of alcohol with equal adverse effect on health.

This is a gross disservice to the population they are charged with protecting. In the ultimate irony, it is of particular disservice to women.

David McCabe

Dromore, Co. Down

I was pleased to see that the government is concerned about our wellbeing and so has revised the advice regarding the effects of alcohol on our health. Perhaps we can now return the favour by suggesting they abolish taxpayer-subsidised bars in the House of Westminster?

Vernon Sixsmith

Chelmsford, Essex