What do you think?
Would Labour have handled the last four years any better? Join the debate by emailing letters@westerndailypress.co.uk and including your name and address
facts and information myself, rather than feel brainwashed through fear of change into always voting for the same party.
I’m glad to know, from recent letters, that I’m not alone in trying to cast my vote in a fair-minded and thoughtful way, after considering what each party has to offer and what is best for the country first, and secondly me.
However, if there was a box that said “none of the above”, that’s probably where I would place my cross, as each party has released at least one policy that I feel uncomfortable backing.
It’s often about picking the least worst of a poor bunch, which is very sad and unlikely to change in the near future. I’ve yet to find a manifesto where I can say yes to every policy, and if there are voters out there who can honestly say they support every part of a manifesto, I’ve yet to meet them.
For roughly two-thirds of my life, the Conservatives have held power and control. When I look at the current state of our country, it provides the clearest evidence to me of the cumulative effect of Conservative policies, which levered over time have created huge inequalities.
It is only now that I clearly see them for what they are and what they stand for. They understand the cost of everything but have totally lost any connection with values. It saddens me to witness the continuing decline of all of our services, infrastructure, living standards, the list goes on.
For such a wealthy country, I often feel some aspects are becoming increasingly similar to those of a third world country. Voters would do well to research what the
Conservatives would have achieved by now, had they not had the Liberal Democrats to temper their policies for five years from 2010 to 2015.
I believe I’m right in thinking that David Cameron sought to temper unions by proposing the introduction of a voting base threshold regarding strike action, to ensure a proper threshold was crossed in terms of the number of people taking part in the ballot.
I wonder why we don’t consider that rule for our general elections. We should all be mindful that low voter turnout will further erode democracy in our country.
I don’t envy the party that wins on July 4. Some days I think ‘let the Conservatives have it’. Then, five years hence, let them explain how come we are still in this dire state, or probably worse when they don’t have world events to disguise their lack of ability and competence.
My current assessment is that a competent government will need 15 to 20 years to put our country back to where it could and should be.
I will continue to remain committed to voting, and sometimes wonder what type of government we would get if it was law that you had to vote. As the system currently stands, we have a veneer of living in a democracy which gets thinner with every year that the Conservatives remain in power.
Rachel Chidgey Hemyock, Devon
They produced, instead, what has become the oldest, most copied constitution the world has ever known, with three branches of government providing checks and balances on power, which gives a level of transparency to government.
The British establishment has changed little since 1776. It is in secrecy where the power of an unwritten constitutional monarchy like ours resides, and the British are fed up with it.
Is this an open goal for the people to elect our own Independents? We could therefore enact the world’s first completely bloodless revolution with the stroke of a pen and establish our very own Independents Day.
Marcus Blackett Stroud, Gloucestershire market statistics for the period January to March 2024 deposited in the House of Commons Library reveal the employment rate for people aged 16-64 was 74.5%. About 1.4 million people of age 16-plus
(just over 4%) are unemployed, which is a historically low figure.
In addition, there are approximately 9.3 million people of working age who are economically inactive, and this is fewer than recorded in the summer of 2011.
Currently, most of the 2.7 million ‘inactive’ people under the age of 25 are students. For people aged 25-64, approximately 2.4 and 1.5 million are not seeking work because they are sick or they have caring responsibilities, respectively.
Mr Milton is also clearly unaware that official statistics show income inequality has risen significantly in this country from levels in the 1960s and 1970s, and furthermore his justification that we have always had such inequality, which is much larger than in many developed countries, is a very lame one indeed.
He seems to think that asking rich people to pay their fair share in tax will make them ‘poorer’, rather than just a little less wealthy, and will encourage them to emigrate. It can be argued that people who are motivated to move abroad simply because they want to pay less than their fair share of tax have little concern about, or commitment to, wider society.
Perhaps he is worried that he will lose business advising such people how they can minimise the amount of tax they have to pay if they go overseas? For someone with a background in accounting, Mr Milton is also remarkably ignorant about pension schemes for those who were employed in the higher education sector.
My work pension comes from the Universities Superannuation Scheme, which is the largest private pension scheme, by assets, in the country, and, contrary to Mr Milton’s disparaging remarks, is not a “silver spoon of a large public sector pension”.
My advice to Mr Milton is to be grateful that he has been able to ‘better’ himself and to stop condescendingly and obnoxiously berating those who have been less lucky in life than himself.
Professor Bruce Webb
Exeter, Devon