Shakespeare learned Latin and so should our children

I agree with Jordan Tyldesley that state-school children should study Latin (Education should not just be a prelude to dull employment, Voices, yesterday). For the past eight eight years, I have been home educating my two children all the way to university entrance. We followed Latin for a year with the Cambridge Latin course. While entertaining it contained very little academic teaching.

I was then persuaded by the author of Gwynne’s Latin to adopt the traditional method of learning grammar off by heart and using late Victorian-era textbooks for translation practice. The benefit was obvious as the children rapidly gained linguistic confidence and the traditional study skills helped with all their other subjects.

Whether or not the return of Latin teaching will take off depends on why this is being done. If it is just to provide general exposure to the classics, I doubt parents will buy into it. However, if it is taught as an academic mind trainer then parents will realise the value and demand it for their children.

If it was good enough for Shakespeare, Newton and Wordsworth, it is surely good enough for every child.

Tristram C Llewellyn Jones Shropshire

Accessible homes

Sadly, the government’s National Disability Strategy published last week lacks concrete action to tackle inequalities faced by disabled people across the country. On accessible housing, the government says it will “take immediate steps to boost the supply of housing for disabled people by raising the accessibility of new homes”.

However, raising the accessibility of new homes requires a change to the building regulations which isn’t mentioned in the strategy. The government launched a consultation on accessible housing a year ago which asked whether all new homes should be built to accessible and adaptable standards. We are still waiting to hear the outcome.

No wonder the strategy has had a lukewarm reception from Shelter and Habinteg, the housing association for disabled people.

Baroness Thomas of Winchester London

Make jabs mandatory

As is entirely the norm for him, James Moore has produced another well-written, informative and thoughtful article (Employers have to put vaccinated workers first, Business, Monday). However, while the pressure brought to bear on employees by their employers should provide a significant impetus for many people to get vaccinated, it does not address the bigger issue. That being the need to get over the line with the percentage of people of all ages who have been vaccinated, in order to achieve herd immunity by vaccination.

Given the reluctance of government to include all teenagers in the vaccination rollout, plus the likelihood that pre-teens will have to wait until they reach their teens, or even 18, to be included, and then add in all those adults who still manage to resist all pressures to get vaccinated, there is clearly a question mark over whether we will ever achieve a level of herd immunity sufficient to ensure we can safely return to our pre-pandemic lives.

So yes, employers and unions can do much to encourage a greater take-up of vaccination, but if we want, as a nation, to win our war against Covid-19, it will neither be enough, nor quick enough.

As a society, it is surely high time we accepted that what is right for society must trump an individual’s rights. Only mandatory vaccination for the widest practical range of age groups will ever achieve the desired result, and do so quickly enough to limit the ever-growing number of deaths and those blighted by long Covid, and give us the freedom which we so long for.

David Curran Middlesex

Damon and stereotypes

Victoria Richards’s piece on Matt Damon rightly comments on the apparent lack of awareness in his use of a homophobic slur. It is a pity, then, and somewhat ironic that it is presented in a torrent of stereotypes about the elderly.

Rev Fergus King Melbourne Remote working

The chancellor, Rishi Sunak, is wrong to suggest that young workers must get back to the office to get on in their careers. The last 18 months has shown us that, when implemented correctly, remote working can have a positive impact on both productivity and flexibility. Recent studies have highlighted these benefits, with Deloitte research finding that 55 per cent of workers believe their colleagues are just as, if not more, productive now than before lockdown.

It is also an outdated opinion that employees can only build strong relationships when in person, as modern workplace technology enables workforces to collaborate and build relationships no matter where they are.

Businesses that fail to offer this flexible working will lose out on talent to competition that does. There is no one-size-fits all answer to this and some employees will prefer to work in the office, which businesses should still accommodate for.

We cannot doubt the benefits that face-to-face interaction does provide in certain scenarios, but now is the time for organisations to put their trust in their staff to get the job done from a location of their choice. We must not place talent at a disadvantage for their decision to work from anywhere.

Nicky Hoyland CEO at Huler

BACK TO TOP