Cameron, for and against

SIR: With regard to your September article about David Cameron (‘Beaten by the Bastards’): I cannot be alone in being staggered by the eye-watering sense of complacency and entitlement that underlies Ferdinand Mount’s piece. Mount himself is a Remainer but manages to swallow his annoyance at Cameron’s blunders in order to be able to write something that is pure sycophancy.

The responsibility for Brexit lies at Cameron’s door. You can print any amount of statesmanlike pictures of him and get his relatives to write many pages fawning over him: it changes nothing. After all, if there were a referendum to decide every policy the public are in favour of then we would have brought back hanging by now. How many innocent people would that have killed over the years? Mike Mcclinton, Basildon, Essex.

SIR: It was refreshing to read Ferdinand Mount’s piece on David Cameron. So many critics have hammered Cameron for holding the EU referendum in the first place. They are wrong: Cameron had little option, given the febrile atmosphere surrounding Europe in the Tory party. Cameron could appear to be too gimmicky and glib, but he can be proud of his policies, not least in sticking to the 0.7 per cent given to overseas aid. Mount was also right to emphasise Cameron’s stance on gay marriage, in opposition to the party that he led for so many years – no mean feat in itself. David Rimmer, Hertford Heath, Hertfordshire.