MEP hits home over priorities

From: Linda Sheridan, Larchfield, Stockton Lane, York.

GODFREY Bloom MEP is absolutely right to criticise the amount of aid we send overseas. It is totally loony to tell us, the people of this country, that we must accept a lower standard of living, face cutbacks in the NHS, education, pensions and care for the elderly while we are sending billions overseas. Make no mistake.

When overseas aid was envisaged it was not because of compassionate, altruistic reasons; it was sent primary to buy the allegiance of governments in Commonwealth countries and keep the Communists out.

Sign up to our daily newsletter

The i newsletter cut through the noise

Times have changed drastically and these countries are independent and in many cases far wealthier than we are.

Evidence shows that the money we send invariably fails to reach the people who need it, but is siphoned off to fund luxury lifestyles for dictators and corrupt government officials.

When the demands of the EU have reduced Britain to a Third World country will those countries now benefiting from our largess, reciprocate and send us billions in aid? I doubt it. I am voting Ukip come the next election.

From: Dick Lindley, Altofts, Normanton.

CONGRATULATIONS to Godfrey Bloom for his excellent synopsis of the idiotic and grotesque waste of our money which the Prime Minister is sending around the world as foreign aid, often to countries which are anything but democratic or run in a proper and fair manner (Yorkshire Post, August 8).

We have insufficient funds to look after our OAPs, many of whom live in abject poverty, or to properly care for our sick in the impoverished National Health.

To give our money to other nations when we are falling to bits here in our country is not only lunacy but in my opinion a complete betrayal of the British nation.

Conservative, Liberals and Labour politicians support this profligate waste of our hard earned cash and ought to be thoroughly ashamed of themselves.

From: Peter Hyde, Driffield.

THE use of the phrase “Bongo Bongo Land” by Ukip’s Godfrey Bloom was not politically correct and would, as he said, offend many left wingers who look to be offended.

To me, it signifies any land whose leaders are corrupt and there is little doubt that much of the aid afforded by our government, using our money, is sent to these corrupt leaders who happily misuse it for their own ends.

I have little doubt that a lot of aid is properly used but the residents of this country are being denied decent NHS care through so much being spent on aid.

From: Martin Fletcher, Savile Close, Emley.

I HAVE some sympathy for MEP Godfrey Bloom (Yorkshire Post, August 8). At the same time, he should have chosen his actual words more carefully.

From: John Watson, Hutton Hill, Leyburn.

YOUR Editorial about high pay for people running our big charities is only one story among many others in the press that cause me to get irate (Yorkshire Post, August 7) .

I have never, for years, supported any of our big national charities – and I never will – having read what the top executives of these organisations are being paid.

You say that there are over 30 people receiving £100,000 or over, some even up to £180,000. That is bad enough,but how many are there on £80-90,000?

There could be hundreds. As these pay rates come out of voluntary contributions they should be published for all to see.

I bet there are lots of good Christian folks who would be only too pleased to do those jobs as long as they knew where the money was going.

From: David Quarrie, Lynden Way, Holgate, York.

GODFREY Bloom made an error by using the phrase “Bongo Bongo Land”.

What he was, correctly, complaining about in that private speech in June, was the fact that this virtually bankrupt country is sending vast amounts of aid to numerous foreign nations, at the same time as making ever more “cuts” on vital services in our own nation. He is right to demand that charity begins at home.

Migration matters

From: Dr Robert Heys, Bar Lane, Sowerby Bridge, West Yorkshire.

ONE aspect of the controversial issue of immigration into the UK which has received little attention has been the effect it has on the immigrants’ country of origin.

If, as advocates of an “open door” policy (justifiably) maintain, such arrivals bring skills of great value to Britain, surely their loss may be correspondingly damaging to their homelands – a loss aggravated by the fact that those nations have provided the facilities necessary for acquiring such skills.

British universities benefit greatly from the fees of the many students from developing nations paid for by their own governments, the undesirable aspect being that too few take the benefits of such advanced education back home.

Migration between the UK and other nations can be of great mutual benefit, but it needs to be controlled and balanced to ensure this. The “go home” campaign, deplored by Nick Clegg and Vince Cable, (Yorkshire Post, July 31) is certainly not the right way to achieve this.


From: Leslie Duncalf, Lawrence Road, Marsh, Huddersfield, West Yorkshire.

I MUST apologise to Edward Baker (Yorkshire Post, August 2) and to anyone else who was misled by the accidental omission of the word “bad” before the word “sportsmanship” in my previous letter, although I would have thought that the context made it clear what I meant.

My purpose in writing again is to draw attention to the comments made by Alec Stewart and Michael Vaughan (both former England Test captains) following the controversial dismissal of the Australian batsman Usman Khawaja in the Old Trafford Test:

Stewart: “That is a ridiculous decision by both the on and off field umpires. Any wonder player’s don’t walk.”

Vaughan: “And people say you should walk - no chance when you get decisions like that.”

And, of course, the redoubtable Geoff Boycott left no one in any doubt as to what he would have done had he been in Broad’s position in the earlier Test (Tom Richmond, Yorkshire Post, July 19)!

Surely the point is that a batsman receiving a bad decision which goes against him is expected to accept it without dissent and leave the field, there being no suggestion that the fielding side could be guilty of bad sportsmanship for not intervening on his behalf.

There always have been, and always will be, bad umpiring decisions. This is no reflection on the umpires themselves – having played league cricket for over 30 years I know they do their best and are only human. It seems to me therefore that unless and until we establish the principle “the umpire is always right” (even when he’s wrong!) the sort of controversies we have witnessed recently are likely to recur.