Is EU referendum question clear?
AS actions speak louder than words, if Prime Minister Cameron really wants to rid the world of corruption, he should start with himself.
If PM Cameron and his pro-EUites think they have such a strong case, then why does he need to cheat by asking a biased yes/no question after promising an in/out referendum, and disgracefully disregarding the conventional government 28-day purdah prior to a referendum?
It is impossible to ask the EU question with a yes/no answer without bias, given the predisposition of most people answering a yes/no question positively.
Further, as the question can be asked both ways round, there is the potential for misunderstanding by disadvantaged people, and not voting in accordance with their intention.
The Electoral Commission favoured ‘Should the UK be in the EU?’ – potentially misleadingly implies the UK is not already in the EU.
Therefore, to comply with the pre-election promise, and be as clear to all as possible, the question should be ‘Should the UK remain IN the EU, or opt OUT of the EU?’, with the ballot paper options upon which to vote being IN or OUT.
DAVID G MEACOCK
Layters Close Chalfont St Peter
a political party is an essential criterion.
If and when there are such people, I have a supply of white rosettes begging to be used!
SHIRLEY SCRIVENER Former Independent Mayor Beaconsfield Town Council
them unless they give us a large percentage of their homes virtually for nothing’.
Can you imagine if car manufacturers had to give away every third car they built to someone who could not afford to buy one?
Or if supermarkets had to give away a third of their food to people who were hungry – there would be outrage in those industries and rightly so.
Private housebuilders are forced into being the providers of social housing because they need planning permissions that are only issued with these restrictions.
There is no profit in it for the housebuilders and their shareholders, so naturally they build the minimum possible.
The government however (and local councils) own vast amounts of land across the country suitable for development and instead of building affordable homes themselves, they sell land to the highest bidder, without taking the social responsibility themselves.
The irony of all this is that housebuilders generally get the blame for not enough homes being built.
There was nothing wrong with the original idea, so come on councils start building council houses again and stop selling them off cheap!
STEPHEN WICKS Chief executive Inland Homes