It’s about time Thames Water was flushed away

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

The idea that Thames Water’s customers should pay extra because the company’s shareholders are unwilling to shoulder the cost of building the required infrastructure and restructuring is abhorrent ("What happens if Thames Water goes bankrupt?" Friday 24 January).

If the customers have to pay, they should end up owning the company!

The government should not be afraid to let the company go bust. It can always support a cooperative owned by the customers to bid for the assets, the surcharge can then repay the government.

The shareholders deserve nothing – and the banks must face the risks they took.

Jon Hawksley

France

Unwanted emissions

I must take issue with your correspondent on whether our energy savings can make a difference (Letters: “A drop in the ocean...”, Wednesday 22 January).

If our emissions are 1 per cent of the global total, we are already exceeding our share of the world population; according to the latest data, the UK’s population represents approximately 0.84 per cent of the global total.

If every major European country had the same attitude, our "just 1 per cent” with theirs would be a significant amount.

Every little bit helps.

Angus Cameron

London W8

---

I agree with your correspondents who argue that we have a moral obligation to reduce our carbon footprint (Letters: “Want us to reach net zero? Stop buying unseasonal fruit”, Thursday 22 January). However, from a practical point of view, Peter Flynn is right about it being “a drop in the ocean”.

As Donald Trump plans to "drill, baby, drill”, Australia opens more coal mines, and the citizens of India and China try to catch up with Western levels of consumption, our efforts are just a flea bite on worldwide carbon emissions.

Mike McMorran

Bournemouth, Dorset

---

The corollary of Peter Flynn’s argument in his letter to The Independent is that, because we are small fry, contributing only 1 per cent to the world’s pollution, we are exempted from acting responsibly, and that our green “fanatics” and eco “zealots” are simply misguided.

We need only hope that the population of the rest of the world does not come to a similar conclusion.

Dennis Leachman

Kingston upon Thames, Surrey

Rebuilding Gaza

I applaud The Independent for drawing readers’ attention to the continuing ordeal of Gazans searching for their missing relatives (“The desperate search for loved ones under the rubble in Gaza: ‘My children ask me every day where daddy is’”, Thursday 23 January).

Millions of people worldwide have watched the horrors of Gaza with incredulity and trepidation. Gaza is not only an open-air prison, it is now a hell on earth.

Its people are suffocating, with no food, no water and no medical supplies. How can people survive under such harrowing conditions?

Dr Munjed Farid Al Qutob

London NW2

Tax doesn’t have to be taxing

I was pleased to read your editorial stressing the importance for democracy and general decency of newspapers being honest and clear in all their reporting ("Against the odds, Prince Harry has won a landmark victory", Wednesday 22 January).

It was therefore disappointing to also read repeated use of the term “tax raid” in reporting chancellor Rachel Reeves’s changes to the tax system.

A raid is a hostile and predatory incursion, thus some degree of illegality is implied, which is clearly not the case here. It is an emotionally loaded term and shouldn’t be used in objective reporting.

Martin A Smith

Oxford

To have a letter considered for publication, email your thoughts on topics covered in The Independent to letters@independent.co.uk. Please include your name, full address and contact phone number. Submissions may be edited for length and clarity.