Cabinet warfare

The reason for leaking against Phil Hammond lies in the fact Brexiteers in the Cabinet wanted money for lifting the unpopular public pay freeze.

Their desperation to get wriggle room can also be seen as they want less emphasis on controlling immigration. The one consistency in the Brexiteers’ position is that they are strongly neo-liberal and therefore against industrial strategies. Instead of solving problems which come up later, they want to keep the hungry voters at bay with bribes.

With this government also being increasingly seen as irresponsible in not planning to avoid food scarcity, in claiming wrongly that a Norway solution would not give us freedom to make our own free trade deals, in wanting a small transition as we leave, and in not having plans to safeguard finance or car industries, we can only hope that the internecine cabinet warfare galvanises Tory moderates to actually do something.

ANDREW VASS Corbiehill Place, Edinburgh

The Chancellor may not be correct when he says that public sector employees are overpaid, but the real point is that they are paid too much – the country cannot afford them.

Many jobs in the public and private sectors are not easily comparable – the supermarkets do not employ midwives and the local authorities do not employ taxi drivers – but when these issues are taken into account, public sector employees are paid about 9 per cent more than their counterparts in the private sector.

There are also the questions about pensions and sick pay. Some employees in the public sector pay 14 per cent of salary towards their pension – less tax which is 8.4 per cent, while the taxpayer pays 32 per cent. This equates to a further 12 per cent salary increase over the private sector.

Everyone is living longer and public sector employees seldom work beyond the age of 60, with a final salary indexlinked pension, which in the main is unfunded. Private sector employees can only dream of such a pension.

JAMES MACINTYRE Clarendon Road, Linlithgow

I am puzzled that Judith Gillespie should think that any problems arising from increased longevity will be solved by importing more people (Letters, 15 July). She advocates an open-door immigration policy in order to counterbalance a shift in our demographic as more people here live into their 80s and 90s. But that will merely add to the problem, not solve it. The people we import will grow old too and then the demographic problem will have worsened accordingly.

The population of the UK has gone up by five million since 2001 and Scotland’s population is at an all-time high. The increase is mostly due to immigration, as births and deaths have been fairly equal for some time. Our public services are struggling to cope with the numbers and the increase in demand is driving up the cost of those services, hence our growing national debt. Open-door immigration will wreck our public services and damage our economy. It is a problem itself, not a solution.

Longevity is a problem because many people in their 80s and 90s require residential or nursing care. Care for the elderly is now a substantial part of the economy, employing thousands of people. Paying for such care for one elderly person costs in the region of £40,000 a year.

At present we have an iniquitous system whereby those who have savings have to pay their way, while those who have none are paid for by the State. It is unjust for the State to punish those who have saved some money, but it would cost billions for the State to pay for everyone, so there is little likelihood of the injustice ending any day soon. The good news, however, is that though we are living longer, we still do not live forever. The demographic shift is from dying in our 60s and 70s to dying in our 80s and 90s. That means there is a 20-year transition period during which the increasing numbers of very old people will be problematic, but eventually a new status quo will arrive.

That new situation will certainly mean a larger percentage of the whole population will be in the 70+ category, but the most important factor is their state of well-being. If people are fit and healthy, and able to live independently, they are no problem to society.

But we do need to devise a way for them to make a quick voluntary exit when their faculties fail, rather than forcing them to vegetate for years, semi-conscious in a care home. The general move to healthier lifestyles and the decline in smoking are positive indicators that people are getting the message.

LES REID Morton Street, Edinburgh

Italy has threatened to issue the 200,000 migrants in detention centres across the country with temporary EU visas as it struggles to cope with even more entering its shores.

There is a little-known Brussels directive which allows a country to issue residence permits giving full working rights, housing and benefits for up to two years to migrants.

This would enable these migrants to travel unhindered throughout Europe under the Schengen scheme to their country of choice.

The UN Refugee Agency confirmed that seven in ten of the “refugees” coming to Europe were economic migrants. This is unsustainable. Germany, Austria and France are desperate to stop free movement since another directive states that they, as member countries, would have to give social welfare and housing and allow family members to join them.

Europe is in chaos but thankfully, Britain is not part of the Schengen agreement. A quick Brexit anyone?

CLARK CROSS Springfield Road, Linlithgow