Advertisement

The shame, indignation and sadness caused by the Windrush scandal

Theresa May is offering compensation to people affected by the Windrush scandal, but will they want to take it?: Getty
Theresa May is offering compensation to people affected by the Windrush scandal, but will they want to take it?: Getty

I’ve never written to a newspaper before but I’ve had to voice my shame, indignation and sadness about the treatment of those who came from the Commonwealth to support in the rebuilding of the UK in the aftermath of WW2. I’ve watched so many interviews on the TV over the last few days where dignified, quietly spoken people just seem bewildered by what is happening to them. We asked these people to come help, they did, and even at the time I don’t believe we all treated them with kindness. What kind of country are we that even when we acknowledge injustices have been done, we dilly dally. Act, for goodness sake. These are people with families, they are not “missing” boarding or landing cards.

I’m 63 and am so ashamed about how my country is behaving.

Barbara Burrell
West Sussex

Patrick Cleary tries to deflect some of the blame for the Windrush scandal onto the LibDems because Theresa May’s policies were put in place during the coalition years. That is both disingenuous and plain wrong. Theresa May had a very firm command over the Home Office and pushed through these policies despite warnings and attempts to ameliorate them from some big Tory names. What chance did the minority party in the coalition stand? Zero. The LibDems have paid a heavy price for the mistakes they made during the coalition years but all of the blame for the Windrush scandal lies at the door of Theresa May. Patrick Cleary should not try to make life easier for her on this issue.

Joe Hennessy
Faversham

Theresa May says that Windrush victims will get compensation but considering the toxic atmosphere she created when she was home secretary, and with how events unfolded at Grenfell, I can’t for the life of me imagine that these victims will readily snap up the compensation given. By terrorising these people through gleefully creating a “hostile environment”, they’re naturally going to be suspicious of any gesture such as compensation.

David Murphy
Unsupplied

New meat labels?

How about “Guaranteed safe to handle” fresh meat? We have heard so much about dangerous bugs and antibiotics it would be nice to know that what you’re handling is reasonably safe, rather than treating it like novichok.

Michael Mann
Shrewsbury

In defence of the hyphen

Having just read John Rentoul’s Mea Culpa on the excessive use of hyphens, I moved onto the letters page to find “post-Brexit” and “36-year-old”.

I would like to say a word in favour of the poor misjudged hyphen. It takes up no more room, it can add illumination, as Rentoul points out, and why not follow some half remembered rule of grammar such as the use of inverted commas when lifting bits out of another place and the Oxford comma. It is better to follow some rules of grammar, however poorly remembered, than abandon them altogether as many seem to do on social media these day.

R J Alliott
Cambridge

Call for radical thinking over antibiotic overuse

Thank you for elucidating the intertwined link between the over-use of antibiotics and the rise of multi-drug resistant pathogens. Deaths caused by antimicrobial resistance outstrip those caused by pandemics such as Ebola or diseases such as cancers and diabetes combined. The call for radical thinking could not be more timely than now, when millions are projected to prematurely die in 20 or 30 years’ time with no new drugs in the pipelines for over three decades.

There is a need for stringent monitoring and surveillance systems, more research across disciplines from microbiology to social sciences, alongside public awareness campaigns and social media marketing strategies aimed at public audiences with effective hygiene and sanitation measures. Although, none of the above is efficient on its own. As the old adage goes: “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”

Dr Munjed Farid Al Qutob
London

Acid attack victims are damaged for life – but their attackers serve less time in prison

A barber is jailed for 8 months. His crime? Giving a young boy a No1 haircut to teach him a lesson. The boy was allegedly traumatised. His hair will grow back within a few months without any further ill effects. A man is jailed for 16 years. His crime? Throwing acid over two people, unknown to him, thereby permanently and horribly disfiguring them. Their suffering will last a life time. If indeed they have the courage to continue their lives.

Should acid attacks not be penalised with a life time sentence without a possibility for parole? After all, victims of acid attacks have been innocently condemned to a life time sentence without parole.

Gunter Straub
London