Blair surely deserves title of Britain’s worst Prime Minister

From: Jon Marcus, Colville Gardens, Lightwater.

I HESITATE to take issue with politically astute Sir Bernard Ingham, but in his column (Yorkshire Post, June 12) he refers to “class warrior” Gordon Brown as “surely the worst Prime Minister this country has ever known”.

Really? Despite Mr Brown’s many failings, in my view Tony Blair is the worst Prime Minister ever in terms of damage to our country.

He is responsible for:

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

n Unrestricted mass immigration which has made England unrecognisable and many English people feel they have lost their country.

n The Human Rights Act – great for human rights lawyers like Cherie Blair – means we have no control over our borders and cannot restrict those who come in or deport dangerous terrorists and criminals.

n Handing more of our sovereignty to the EU so we are now ruled by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats and he wanted us to ditch our currency and join the euro. (Obviously nothing to do with his ambition to have been the first president of Europe).

n Involving us in wars, notably Iraq (weapons of mass destruction ready to be fired in 45 minutes) and Afghanistan, which we should not have been involved in, costing hundred of British lives, billions of pounds and made us a target for Muslim extremists. (Obviously nothing to do with him wanting to strut the world stage pretending to be a cross between Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher of Falklands fame).

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Yet, despite his war-mongering, he surrendered to the IRA terrorists, politicised the Civil Service, bypassed/ignored Parliament, allowed prisoners 
to be released halfway through their sentence and dumbed-down education.

The list goes on.

From: Terry Marston, Lincoln.

THE sign of a national leader is someone who can produce a programme that all can get behind and support.

We know David Cameron can’t do that (not even in his own party); George Osborne’s “we’re all in this together” is as hollow as it is unconvincing.

We surely don’t need the Bishop of London to throw his mitre in the ring and exaggerate another Tory division in our society – the generation gap.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

So why did he do it? Claiming to be a baby boomer is no defence for his attack on the elderly in our society.

My retirement plans have been made more stringent and austere by the Tory coalition’s budgets. And why? No satisfactory big society answer is forthcoming.

I did nothing to promote the credit crunch. I had no over-indulgent debts. It was my savings (that I had to fight hard to rescue) that baled out the greedy products of Thatcher’s credit free-for-all.

They fuelled the inflation of house prices – not us.

From 2002, frequently my partner and I in conversation foresaw that it would be the profligacy of the self-centred young borrowers who were likely to take us all down with them.

And so they did – with a little help from the banks.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

As for the Bishop, I could take his rebukes if he had been with me in the queues at the gas works for coke in the depths of the prolonged winter white-out of 1947 or at Keighley market, standing hours in frost and fog, for an orange per customer at Christmas – and in all the other rationing queues we wartime kids took in our stride.

We had a very deprived childhood – due to the war 
and its consequences which we all endured in the national interest. And the Bishop of London wants to take away the little we have to further succour the kids which my generation and our children have already over-indulged.