Alternative take on Brit values

Last week’s letters page had the holy trinity of people who I suspect believe themselves to be the upholders of British values Mr Hudson-Gool, Mr Anning and Mr Bullen.

Mr Hudson-Gool: An interesting start, asking in a loose way whether Mr Tebbutt feels sorry for his letter the day before Prince Philip died. I was unaware there was a requirement for foresight when writing into the local paper. For years, the younger generations have been told that there’s no money and that we shouldn’t allow people to live on bailouts. I suspect younger people will soon question why we’re bankrolling a ridiculously privileged family who already have their own assets.

Your argument seems to conclude that an elected executive is going to be just as bad as an unelected one so we should just keep the unelected one that we have no say over? Do you have that little faith in democracy?

Mr Anning: I would’ve responded to your previous ‘young generations are bad, etc ’ letter but I think we trod that ground weeks ago. Clearly you’re determined to instil this generational divide, which is saddening. It’s a shame that the subtext of your letter seems to be that we should be racing to the bottom in regards to helping refugees. Surely we should be striving for the top as an open and inclusive country? The problem that you seem to miss, and yet you get so close to, is that housing in this country is being hoarded as if it is an ‘asset’. If we were to deal with that problem, I suspect we’d find some decent space to be accommodating. Finally Mr Bullen, the problem with symbolic power is that, almost by definition, it’s symbolic. The Queen has no real voice. The ‘steadiness’ she offers is that people continually have no control over an unelected bureaucratic body.The only say we have is indirectly once every five years.

Anyway, has anyone got any complaints about the bins or the roads?

Lloyd Allen