Letters: Why is Britain so poorly prepared for dealing with water shortages?

SIR – Nearly 50 years since the previous drought and the best the water companies can offer is a hosepipe ban.

This would suggest that the two words missing from conversations within the water industry have been “strategic” and “planning”.

Philip Hall
Petersfield, Hampshire

SIR – We have just received our third letter from South East Water, this one telling us that using hoses is banned.

We know. It’s on the news several times every day. These three letters have been sent, no doubt, to all residents in Kent, and anyone else who gets water from this company.

What a waste of money. It should be spent on fixing leaks instead.

Lesley McDowell
Herne Bay, Kent

SIR – In 1987 I spent a very hot six months deployed to Cyprus.

Thankfully both the Dhekelia and Episcopi British sovereign base areas had their own desalination plants, and we experienced no household shortages of water.

Why cannot our huge multinational water companies plan ahead in such a way? If they will not do so, then local authorities should take the lead, and every small or medium-sized town along the British coast should invest in its own plant.

Lt Col Mark Jackson (retd)
Pershore, Worcestershire

SIR – While I am in complete agreement with Lesley Boardman (Letters, July 31) about what we can learn from Bermuda’s approach to water – having lived there myself – it is worth noting that the island receives about 65 inches of rain a year, whereas the South East of England receives about 21.

Perhaps this is even more of a reason to adopt Bermudan methods for water conservation.

Janet McNeill
Upper Basildon, Essex

Lessons of Thatcher

SIR – Inflation is caused by too much money chasing too few goods and services.

Taming it must be the top priority, otherwise it will undermine every other aspect of good economic management. With interest rates at historically low levels following the 2008 financial crash, huge money injections into the economy in response to the pandemic, and supply-chain disruptions (caused not least by Covid and the war in Ukraine, it is unsurprising inflation is rampant.

The hard-won lessons of the Thatcher era were as follows: the interest rate is the primary tool for keeping inflation at bay, by controlling the money supply to provide conditions for sustainable economic growth; the purpose of taxation is to fund essential public services, not to serve as an ineffective instrument for demand management; and excessive taxation dampens economic growth.

Some seem to be trying to argue this in reverse: use low interest rates to support growth and high taxes to control inflation. It is time to get back to the seemingly forgotten basics.

Edward Hill
Chandlers Ford, Hampshire

SIR – The outcome of the Conservative leadership contest seems to hinge on who is most likely to deliver a win in the next general election.

This means that long-term strategies, which may need to be radical and unpopular, are sacrificed for popular short-term measures.

Thanks to the failure of successive governments to look more than a few years ahead, Britain is in a worse position than it could have been with respect to pandemic planning, energy security and cost, water supply, food security, healthcare and social care.

It is time for politicians to act in the long-term interests of the country.

Jos Binns
Camerton, Somerset

HS2’s sole beneficiary

SIR – I must challenge Jim Steer’s assertion (Letters, July 31) that HS2 is “one of the most tangible means of spreading wealth across the country”.

The Northern section has been cancelled, leaving us with an improved rail link between Birmingham and London. This will merely result in higher property prices in Birmingham as more people live there and commute. The Midlands and the North will, as usual, suffer as London gains a larger catchment for its workforce.

John Clifton 
Ash, Surrey

SIR – HS2 will connect London with the big cities – not the areas of the country that voted for levelling up.

Jim Steer claims a number of unquantified benefits, but the business case for HS2 appears to be elastic – like the ever-increasing cost.

After the Public Accounts Committee reviewed the taxpayers’ loss for HS1, Margaret Hodge, its chair, said the Department for Transport “must revisit its assumptions on HS2 and develop a full understanding of the benefits and costs of high-speed travel compared to the alternatives.” We can already see that one alternative – a digital infrastructure – has enabled new work practices and reduced the need for rail capacity.

We should instead consider how the country could invest £100 billion most effectively – or, better still, return it to taxpayers.

Simon Morris
Whittlebury, Northamptonshire

SIR – Jim Steer writes of “increased skills and economic benefits” along the HS2 route.

Since there are no planned stops between London and Birmingham, it is hard to see exactly what these might be. Indeed, in view of the disruption to those living on the route, and the associated destruction of landscapes and properties, this ridiculous railway project may harm more people than it benefits, with communities suffering the long-term consequences of a service they cannot use.

Max Ingram 
Emneth, Norfolk

SIR – Jim Steer criticises Kit Malthouse for calling the HS2 project a “killer whale”. Surely white elephant or dodo would have been more appropriate.

Mark Treadwell
Birmingham

One proper carrier

SIR – Sir Peter Luff (Letters, August 31) is, I would suggest, missing the point when he leaps to the defence of the procurement of the Royal Navy’s two large aircraft carriers, HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales.

Frankly, without catapults and arrestor gear (“cats and traps”), these warships are no more than “through deck cruisers”, albeit somewhat larger than the former Invincible class, HMS Invincible, HMS Illustrious and HMS Ark Royal.

Today’s though deck cruisers, like their predecessors, carry helicopters, together with the fifth-generation fighter, the F35B – which, with its vertical or short take-off and landing (VSTOL) capability (an added complexity that affects aircraft performance), is intended to replace the VSTOL AV-8B Harriers deployed by the US Marine Corps on their Wasp-class amphibious assault ships. If, in 2010, the admirals, civil servants and politicians, including the minister for defence equipment, had worn their thinking caps, they would have emulated the French and ordered just one “proper” aircraft carrier, nuclear-powered and with cats and traps.

Now, 12 years later, the Navy would have an aircraft carrier (perhaps with two crews for extended time at sea) capable of carrying a full air wing, including the F35C (much more capable than the F35B and ordered by the US Navy), the F-18 Super Hornet (for strike missions and air-to-air refuelling) and the E-2 Hawkeye (for airborne early warning), together with a squadron of anti-submarine warfare helicopters.

Sqn Ldr James A Cowan (retd)
Durham

SIR – Sir Bernard Gray’s account of why the Royal Navy’s new carriers, Queen Elizabeth and Prince of Wales, were procured with a short take-off and vertical landing capability accords with what Sir Peter Luff said.

However, at the end of his piece, Sir Bernard states that “the electromagnetic system [Emals, being developed by the US] won’t be launching F-35s from US ships until at least 2025.”

I’m afraid he is wrong. Emals is fitted to the new US nuclear carrier Gerald R Ford (CVN 78). Although the ship has suffered huge development problems, not least with Emals, to date she has achieved 10,000 catapult launches (including of F-35Cs) without mishap.

The problem has been with the “mean time between failures” of the equipment (reaching only about half of the designed target). The US Navy says it expects CVN 78’s first operational deployment to be “some time in 2022”.

Wg Cdr Bob Crane (retd)
Huntingdon

The ancient problem of inaudible actors

SIR – Mumbling, muttering and murmuring are not just a curse of modern television programmes and cinema.

In the very early 1980s I went to see the Oresteia at the National Theatre. The actors’ faces were obscured by masks (a tradition in ancient Greek theatre), which meant I couldn’t hear a word. It remains the only performance of any kind that I’ve left during the interval.

Anne Jappie
Cheltenham, Gloucestershire

SIR – The problem of mumbling actors on screen is exacerbated when, as is often the case, there is irritating background music. Another problem is that, when watching on catch-up, subtitles are not always available.

I went to our local cinema a few years ago on a Tuesday to see The Revenant, and was somewhat surprised to see a chalk board outside the entrance stating: “Subtitles on Wednesday”.

I should have gone the following evening.

Bruce Ridge
Clevedon, Somerset

A modern curriculum

SIR – Lord Baker writes of the need to “modernise our regressive Edwardian curriculum” and introduce a “career-led and technical curriculum”.

This is nothing new. I spent 40 years as a classroom teacher and headteacher and, over this time, there was a succession of such initiatives, which usually coincided with a new education secretary or government.

The main courses included Dove, TVEI, GNVQ and, more recently, technical A-levels. Each one included the word “vocational” in its name. A major problem, however, was that the students who were successful at the exams they took at the age of 16, whether academic or vocational, were, in the main, inclined to study academic advanced-level subjects in order to progress to Russell Group universities.

A good way to help solve this problem would be for such universities to offer the technical subjects supported by Lord Baker, and give the courses honours-degree status.

David S Ainsworth
Manchester

Proms alternative

SIR – Recent letters (July 31) have criticised this year’s Proms, along with Radio 3.

As an alternative, I recommend the Radio Swiss Classic service, which can be found online. It plays traditional classical music, with minimal talking between items and no irritating, repetitious commercials. Brilliant.

Martin Gorman
Winchcombe, Gloucestershire

Pay us in seashells

SIR – A growing number of shops, restaurants and service providers are refusing to take cash and only accepting card payments (Features, July 30). Some consumers are asking whether this is legal, but are unsure of their rights. The fact is that shops can require whatever form of payment method they want, as long as they are not discriminating by doing so. If they say they only accept seashells or Lego bricks, that’s perfectly legitimate.

Confusion arises, perhaps, because people have heard, but misunderstood, the term “legal tender”, and think their cash payment should be accepted. In fact, the definition of the term is merely that it cannot be refused as payment for a court-awarded debt.

Doug Clark
Currie, Midlothian