Tuesday's Letters: MEP should resign and allow the voters to have their wish

I voted Conservative in last year's European election and, as a result of the list system, he was elected as the Conservative at the top of the list. He was not elected because he was Edward McMillan-Scott. A major part of the Conservative policy was to leave the pro-federalist group they were in and join the more sceptical group of which they are now members. Mr McMillan-Scott did not object then, at least publicly.

Within weeks, however, he came out against this policy and, for his own self-interest, stood against the candidate supported by the

Conservatives in Europe as Vice-President of the Parliament. He deserved to be expelled. He let down his party, its members and those who voted Conservative in Yorkshire.

I wrote to him at the time to express my views as a voter and as a Conservative Association member. I am still waiting for the courtesy of a reply. Mr McMillan-Scott has not shown he is principled as he would claim. He has shown the opposite. He has acted in self-interest and arrogantly and his article in your newspaper illustrates that arrogance.

He should resign his seat and let a Conservative have the chance to be elected as the voters wished.

From: John Dawson, Gainsborough Court, Skipton.

From: Andrew Jones, Netheroyd Hill Road, Huddersfield.

I AM very annoyed with Edward McMillan-Scott's move to the Liberal Democrats.

I voted for him last year when he was top of the Conservative list in Yorkshire. I did not vote for him as a candidate but for the Conservative Party. He should do the honourable thing and resign. The Liberal Democrats are a pious bunch of europhiles – I did not vote for them. He is failing to represent my views under the manifesto he stood on. He should resign and let the next person down the list take the MEP slot. He has no legitimate mandate, he should go.

From: George McManus, Norwood, Beverley, East Yorkshire.

EDWARD McMillan-Scott MEP's resignation from the Conservative Party may have a number of unexpected consequences. European elections in this country are conducted on the basis of proportional representation and not "first past the post", as is the case with the House of Commons.

Posts in Brussels are allocated according to the percentage of votes cast and MEPs are decided based on a candidate's position on a party list prepared by the respective party hierarchies. Unlike elections to the Commons, nobody puts a cross next to the candidates' name but next to that of their party.

The election result in 2009 meant that the Tories, with 24 per cent of the popular vote in our region, qualified for two posts. The Liberal Democrats, with 13 per cent, qualified for one post.

Because Edward McMillan- Scott and Timothy Kirkhope were top of the Tory list, they took up the Tories' two posts. Now that he has resigned from the Tory Party, the party could argue that they are now under-represented and could demand that he be thrown out of the Parliament in Brussels.

We now have the ironic position that the Liberals, who have always championed the cause of PR, are in the invidious position of having more MEPs than parties who gained more votes at the election.

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

HAVING read the article by MEP Edward McMillan-Scott, about his views and beliefs, he should have joined the Liberal Democrats many many years ago – they deserve one another! He is no loss to the Conservatives.

We need real toughness over crime

From: Matthew Shaw, Golcar, Huddersfield.

"TOUGH on crime, tough on the causes of crime," announced Tony Blair before he came to power.

New Labour can be rightly proud of their record on collecting crime data and massaging the statistics downwards. If official figures are to be believed, crime is on the wane, and yet reality would suggest otherwise "on the ground" .

Remarkably, online crime such as card fraud is left for the banking industry to deal with, so this growing problem is omitted from official crime figures.

Law and order is deservedly a hot election topic simply because it is perceived that, as a society, we are failing to deal with it.

Justice Secretary Jack Straw will soon be scrapping his Early Release Scheme, designed to reduce the pressure on our bursting prisons. Since June 2007, 80,000 prisoners have walked free before serving their full term, many of whom have gone on to re-offend. Mr Straw claims that new prisons have now been built, but the suspicion is that this unpopular scheme is to be ditched in time for the election campaign.

Our prison system fails miserably to rehabilitate, nor does it seem capable of depriving inmates of the illegal drugs that put most of them there in the first place.

Singapore, a place where the rule of law is respected (or feared), has a zero policy on crime where litter doesn't exist, even chewing gum is banned. A place where punishments really do fit the crime and re-offending is unheard of. We live in a place where villains can slip quietly away when out on licence or simply skip bail before they get sent to prison.

Terrifyingly, two million UK cars are uninsured. The fine, should you be unlucky enough to get caught, is often less than the premium.

Some may suggest that we adopt Singapore's hard line approach, then maybe "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" won't just be some snappy throwaway soundbite.

From: Barrie Frost, Watson's Lane, Reighton, Filey.

FOR decades, we have pursued a softly, softly approach to criminal behaviour and criminals; prisons have been stuffed with televisions, then bigger televisions, then satellite televisions; state of the art gymnasium and leisure equipment plus three quality meals a day, all accompanied with little hard work, minimal discipline and with mobile phones and drugs easily obtained.

These conditions were promoted in the flawed belief that such kindness would lead to criminals repaying this kindness – what utter rubbish.

It has simply educated them into believing they are untouchable, with taxpayers compelled to fund their every demand. When prison regimes are so soft, it beggars belief that so-called experts wonder why the prison population is overflowing – the surprise would surely be if it was not.

The cost of running prisons has, or soon will, become unaffordable unless we change the whole prison regime. Experts in penal policies say offenders will only be sent to prison as a last resort with more community orders replacing jail terms. Fine, this will certainly limit the prison population, but if offenders know a prison term is very unlikely, there will be no deterrent to crime as an offender already regards a community punishment as "being let off".

Many people have suggested a return of National Service in some form. Even supporters of this, and I am one, must realise that the chances of this are virtually nil, for no one in authority has the bottle to reintroduce this, but why don't we alter the present sloppy prison conditions for an army-style National Service discipline?

A city centre in a sorry state of chaos and neglect

From: Douglas Hartley, Irving Terrace, Clayton, Bradford.

WITH reference to the letter about free buses for pupils (Yorkshire Post, March 3). When I was a schoolboy in the 1930s, Bradford City Tramways ran the trams and trolley buses. Bradford was a progressive city, governed by a responsible council. It had built four high schools for the academically able and offered the first school meals service in

the country.

I travelled from Clayton to Grange Boys' High School – two miles by trolley bus and a walk of a quarter of a mile. This, and the return journey, was done twice a day. Most of us went home for dinner. On the first day of the autumn term, you bought a scholars' pass from the conductor: a small, folded card, costing sixpence, and lasting one year. Showing the card, you could travel anywhere in the city, during school days, for a halfpenny.

Bradford Council does not now run public transport, or the city's schools. I am not sure that it is responsible for anything but chaos. It handed over control of the city's development to an unelected body, Bradford Centre Regeneration: the chief executive being a non-Bradfordian, Maud Marshall. This body has been disbanded. Its adopted consultant was the architect, Will Alsop, whose

extravagant "masterplans" have come to nought. His fees would be considerable.

Forster Square is a wreck. The City Hall area is in filthy

turmoil. "Building your City Park," so we are told (cost 24m). Widespread excavations are taking place, with huge diameter water pipes being laid beneath, in preparation for Maud Marshall's legacy – "a vibrant shallow pool". Or an enormous central puddle, to be cleared frequently of fast food litter, cans and bottles – as many citizens foresee. A stretch of road, much used by buses, is to be closed, which will produce congestion in other streets.

Soon, the towers of the deliberately neglected Odeon will be

demolished, to be replaced by an enormous steel, concrete and glass box, an insult to the nearby Alhambra Theatre.

Your recent editorial "Where's the vision for Bradford?" (Yorkshire Post, March 5) refers to a Bradford Chamber of Commerce report on "our tired city" and calls for fresh civic leaders and industrialists, equal to those of days gone by. I think the Bradford Civic Society would agree.

Taxpayers need a giveaway

From: Ian Williams, Woodhouse Close, East Ardsley, Wakefield.

MY daughter came home from school today with a letter entitled "Free laptops and broadband for 270,000 families across the country".

Imagine my excitement. Could my family possibly be one of the recipients? Not a chance, as I discovered when I read on. You have to qualify through basically not paying any taxes as per usual.

Why is it that if you pay in all your life you get nothing in return with the exception of high blood pressure each time you read about another ridiculous give away by the Labour Government?

Why give away free laptops and broadband? Is this an essential for people living in poverty? Why can we not start rewarding taxpayers with some of the great free giveaways that non-taxpayers receive?

Shorn of power

From: Terry Duncan, Greame Road, Bridlington, East Yorkshire.

I recall, in the not so distant past, when the Speaker of the House of Commons was "god" to all that occurred on the green benches.

Not any more, since Labour took over and appointed Michael Martin – and now John Bercow. The latter, as watched on TV during the last PMQs, could control neither those to the left of him nor to the right of him. I think it is something to do with dispensing with the wig of authority.

Once, the Westminster Houses of Parliament were the envy of the world.

Today, they are the laughing stock.