The least of our problems

It would appear that I've rattled

Tom Gauntlett's cage (On matters Trivial, March22). Firstly let's be clear I don't give advice, advice costs money so he needs to go elsewhere.

He appears to have a bee in his bonnet because I stated that the Harry and Meghan saga is trivial, which as a self-professed republican, he's making no sense in criticising me for, as I should have thought he would feel just the same and that anything relating to the Monarchy was trivial.

I'm sorry he feels the way he does because the world seems to be going to hell in a hand-cart and I can't help feeling that Harry and Meghan are the very least of its problems.

He will remember, I hope, that I wrote that I had no issue with anyone who had lost their ‘serf gene’ and who had republican tendencies, despite this comment of his being outrageously condescending to the majority of the people in this country and beyond, Mr Gauntlett seems to think that if the UK went to a system of electing a president as head of state that everyone would get a democratic choice on who the candidates will be.

This is simply naive as he seems to forget the people won't be doing the choosing part, just the voting part.

The choosing will be done for them by the political elite because it will be a political appointment in just the same way they get presented with the candidates for the Mayor of London. Realistically they can vote for just one of two candidates along party lines, in pretty much the same way as we get to vote for our MPs, but only after the party has chosen who the candidate will be. So it's really done on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. Why they might even appoint a president in the same way as the EU Commission does, wouldn't that be fun?

Still in Mr Gauntlett's own words, he claims he's a disinterested observer, so why then is he bothering to pass comment at all? Again, this is contradictory and it really makes no sense.

T Gardiner Gosport