Working people have every right to be angry

Harry Bell’s column last week was nonsense even by his own low standards.

To smear the Labour Party as “angry” is almost as stupid as his calling the NHS “geriatric”. It’s true, working people might feel that they have a lot to be angry about, given the way that their rights, benefits and support have been stolen from them over the past 40 years; they might be angry that their children attend underfunded schools and are subjected to ideologically imposed 11+ testing; they might be angry about the piecemeal closure of the K&C hospital, or the state of our roads, or the systematic tilting of the tax system in favour of the extremely wealthy.

They might be angry about the impossibility of living in a decent, affordable home and now, the prospect of having that home stolen from them by Theresa May’s dementia tax. All that, on top of the removal of employment rights, of social care support, of decent pensions, of environmental protections, and 10 years of constant downward pressure on wages: yes, that might well make people angry.

But the Labour Party? No. We know that anger is counterproductive. In a democracy we have to persuade voters, illustrate the shortcomings of this government, and propose better alternatives. If we allowed anger to overcome us we would fail.

Yes, debates in the party are often passionate, but we understand our role in the wider world. In Canterbury, our ranks include specialists in philosophy, poetry, religion and art as well as former miners, shopworkers, teachers and healthcare workers.

Harry says that Labour “looks like a protest movement for the perpetually aggrieved”.

The huge numbers of people who talk with us on our street stalls or on the doorstep know that to be a falsehood. But, sadly, journalism of the Harry Bell type, with its sneering contempt for a whole political world view of which he appears to actually know nothing could give some readers the impression that there is substance behind his vacuous rantings.

That is wrong and a disservice to the people of Canterbury, to the balance of Gazette, and to political debate in our city. Dave Wilson, by email

Richard Parkinson has allowed Harry Bell’s contentious opinions to get under his skin and therfore misundertood what the columnist was trying in his own unique, inimitable style to get across (Gazette, May 18).

Harry Bell was not condoning graffiti but simply stating that there was insufficient evidence to indicate that events being held in either the Westgate Hall or The Cricketers contributed towards a wall being damaged nearby. Without any incontrovertible proof of any direct link Mr Parkinson’s accusations remain unsubstantiated making his call for a ban on all future festivities a disproportionate, knee-jerk reaction.

Idiotic habitual vandals don’t wait for music festival weekends to occasionally crop up. They are prepared to kick a hole in a wall or daub a surface with paint at any given opportunity. I imagine the psychological reasons for their behaviour are complex, deep-rooted and multifarious. Clive Wilkins-oppler Garlinge Road, Petham