Advertisement

Letters: of course we need a new referendum

Demonstrators on the People’s March in central London on 23 June 2018, the second anniversary of the Brexit referendum.
Demonstrators on the People’s March in central London on 23 June 2018, the second anniversary of the Brexit referendum. Photograph: Niklas Halle'N/AFP/Getty Images

Your leader endorsing the need for a referendum on the Brexit deal is self-evidently on target despite the opposition from those who declare that the 2016 referendum result represented the unchallengeable will of the people (“We must be given the chance to deliver our verdict on the terms of Brexit”, Leader). That interpretation has never made sense to me because a parallel exists that immediately puts the matter in the right perspective.

What voters opted for in 2016 is the exact equivalent of a house purchaser making an offer for a property that looks attractive. But that’s a situation that would always lead to a rethink if a survey subsequently revealed a different picture regarding the desirability of the property. The truths that have emerged since 2016 about what this country is taking on with Brexit are as startling as the most dismaying survey report, yet there are those who regard a rethink as akin to treason. Where is the logic in that?
Mansel Stimpson
London NW3

Your editorial and front page (“Give Britain a new referendum on Brexit, says Sadiq Khan”, News) make compelling arguments in favour of a second referendum that includes the option of staying in the EU. As the Tories recite their mantra “will of the people”, there is little attempt to consider which people: those of 2016 or those of now. The margin of victory for leave was 2.8%. The Office for National Statistics gives UK life expectancy of around 81 years, which equates to 63 years of voting. So in the period since the referendum the young people coming into the electorate will be about 3% of the total. A similar number will have died. So the composition of the electorate has changed by more than the margin of victory in 2016. This indicates that we no longer know “the will of the people” and the case for a second referendum is compelling.
David Holdsworth
Settle, North Yorkshire

Your editorial does not consider what our relationship with the EU might look like, should a “people’s vote” lead to an abandonment of Brexit. Neither we nor the 27 other nations could possibly carry on as if article 50 had never happened. Our status would not be what it was before June 2016. We are now in a different place.

The sensible option is to carry through the referendum result but go to a close relationship with the EU, for example by remaining in the customs union. This position might get broad public support and would enable a period of reflection and an opportunity to consider whether we should stay where we are, move further away or re-enter the EU, thus allowing future generations to determine the path we take.
Ken Hall
Knaresborough, North Yorkshire

Ofsted under pressure

The Ofsted chief inspector is doing those of us concerned with education an important service in pointing out both the unethical practice of “off-rolling” and the dangers of equating “disadvantage” with “low ability” (“Ofsted chief slams schools for their ‘hollowed out’ education of the poor”, News). However, Amanda Spielman does education a disservice with her dangerous generalisation that “it looks as if, to some extent, the schools system has stopped working in the interests of children”. That nebulous qualifier – “to some extent” – will infuriate the vast majority of teachers sympathetic to her criticisms.

Many will view the organisation she heads as having “to some extent” acted against children’s best interests in its failure, until very recently, to recognise, let alone tackle, the deleterious effects of the high-pressure accountability regime it epitomises. Her “fury” with some schools’ practices needs to be leavened with an equally furious acknowledgment that all is far from well in that regime. Her words of criticism, however justified, need to be expressed particularly carefully at a time when Ofsted is under more scrutiny than ever.
Professor Colin Richards
Former senior inspector of schools
Spark Bridge, Cumbria

Who’s appalling, Vince?

You report that Vince Cable has ruled out leading his party into formal coalition with a Jeremy Corbyn-led government (“Cable rejects coalition with ‘appalling’ main parties”, News). Apparently, it would be as “appalling” as working in an administration led by Boris Johnson. Presumably, though, not as appalling as holding ministerial office in a coalition whose austerity policies have wreaked such havoc on public services and the lives of the poor.
Michael Clayton
Emneth, Wisbech
Cambs

More women, please

I was perplexed to see that your sports section contained no mention of the England netball team’s win over New Zealand (by the biggest margin ever). When I reread the section, the only writing about women’s sport I could find was yet more coverage of Serena Williams. This one-sided approach is not a true reflection of the sporting world.
Louise Robb
Letchworth Garden City
Herts

Single and loving it

To the reader who described single people in their 30s as “the have-nots and we are sad” (“My friends and I are single, childless – and running out of time”, Dear Mariella, Magazine) – NO, WE ARE NOT. Please, please do as Mariella says and go and shape the world you want. You’ll find that we have (in addition to far more sleep, money and clean clothes) quite a lot of time, in particular after 5pm and all weekend, to do whatever our heart desires.

If you do end up meeting and mating, you’ll wish very much that you had spent your 30s gathering glorious stories to tell, rather than wasted indoors being a sans enfants. And if you don’t, you’ll wish you had had fun anyway while your knees and pelvic floor were still working.
Hannah McCarthy
London SE24

A plug for electric cars

Electric cars may be the future, but 43% of houses/flats have no garage or drive (“Electric cars are the future: it’s time for the freeze on fuel duty to end”, Business and Cash). How are they going to charge their electric cars overnight if they cannot park outside their properties?
John Richards
Oxford

Etiquette be damned

Cheer up, Eva. It’s not all doom and gloom (“Anger about makeup on the tube is the first stop to misogyny”, Eva Wiseman, Magazine).

I recently travelled down on the Northern line to Euston, where I was fascinated by the skill displayed by a fellow traveller applying full makeup. Not an arched eyebrow in sight... apart from her beautifully applied ones.

Arriving at St Pancras, I waited for my train alongside any number of people eating sandwiches and, yes, some were women. I flouted the protocol and ate mine on the train. Times have moved on since I grew up. Let’s not allow social media sites to knock us back.
Sue Beaumont
Houghton Conquest
Bedford

Ding, ding. All change

Jonathan Bouquet invites us to “join me on the 172 bus” (“May I have a word”, Comment). If he’s referring to London’s 172 bus and TfL carries through its proposals to “make the route more efficient and improve reliability” in anticipation of the now delayed opening of Crossrail, we’ll no longer be able to travel to St Paul’s Cathedral on this bus as it will be diverted before it gets there. So if we are going to take him up on his offer and want to stay with him as far as St Paul’s, we had better do it sooner rather than later.
John Street
Bromley