Theresa May’s decision to call a snap election was wisely pondered

SIR – Why is it that much of the media, and many Opposition spokesmen, are lambasting Theresa May for reversing her stance on a snap general election?

Hasn’t anyone heard the maxim: “Wise men change their minds, fools never”? N D Manton Carnfoth, Lancashire SIR – Predictably, following her decision to call a snap election, Theresa May has been accused of going back on her word.

Mrs May’s original decision not to hold an election was based on the fact that she felt, quite rightly, that a vote at this time would be a distraction from Brexit. However, given the determination of Jeremy Corbyn, Tim Farron, Nicola Sturgeon and other Remoaners to impede negotiations, the Prime Minister has chosen to go to the country to obtain the backing she needs to accomplish Brexit without having her hands tied at every turn.

Although Mrs May voted for Britain to remain in the EU, she has accepted the will of the people and is determined to see it through. This shows her to be that rare animal – a politician who can be trusted. Robert Readman Bournemouth, Dorset SIR – Despite the Conservatives’ commanding lead in the polls, I fear that Theresa May’s personalisation of the election campaign, evident from the moment of her announcement, may lead to some loss of support in the weeks leading up to the election.

She is not exactly Margaret Thatcher and she has not yet set out her preferred Brexit deal. Chris Scott-Barrett London E2 SIR – While Mrs May has called the election at a propitious time, I would caution those who speak of who the next Labour leader might be, and of landslide victories.

The Conservatives should win, but what would be disastrous, apart from a Labour victory, would be a narrow margin of success for Mrs May. This would throw the issues of Brexit and a second Scottish independence referendum even more acutely into focus, and deepen the mood of uncertainty that currently prevails. Hamish Alldridge Pittenweem, Fife SIR – As the majority of constituencies are “two-horse races”, it would surely be best for any televised debates to be structured as a series of oneon-one encounters involving each combination of a pair of party leaders.

There would be no questions from the audience, or a presenter: just two people airing their differences.

Even I would watch that. Kevin Cottrell Grosmount, Monmouthshire SIR – The only people who welcome an election are companies which print leaflets and posters, together with their suppliers. Bernard Powell Southport, Lancashire