Dear Editor,

In August of this year, Union flags fluttered gaily over parks, gardens and streets as people gathered together to mark the 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War.

The celebrations commemorated two sorts of victory: the military victory which finally brought an end to years of bloodshed in blitz and battle, and - at the heart of the conflict - a moral victory over oppressors who incarcerated, tortured and murdered countless scores of innocent people because of their race. British people felt proud to belong to a country, symbolised by those Union flags, which stood firm against injustice and oppression, and supported those who suffered it.

Can those be the same Union flags, then, which have suddenly appeared all around us, and all over this justice-loving country, with a very different message altogether? Not so long ago, when another oppressor marched into a country that was not his own and made the lives of its residents a living hell, ordinary, decent people all over Britain put up Ukrainian flags in solidarity, and thousands of you (though to my shame I was not one of them) welcomed war-struck refugees into your homes and offered them new lives. We are not even being asked to open our homes to the refugees and asylum seekers who are currently trembling in fear in hotels, hostels and detention centres around this country.

As part of the school curriculum, pupils all over this country are being taught 'Fundamental British Values.' These are identified as democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, and mutual respect and tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs. These are the values for which we fought that devastating war over 80 years ago. And these are the values which our flag should represent.

Elizabeth Atkinson

Carhampton

Dear Editor,

I am trying to contact Mr Paul Gillett, who was the sales director at Pittards in Yeovil for 40 years.

You published an article featuring him in 2002 at his retirement.

Our family gloving firm, Polya Gloves in South Wales, had a very close relationship to the Pittards firm and I spent one summer there in 1971, learning the leather business.

Paul Gillett had recently joined Pittards and he looked after me during this brief apprenticeship.

I would love to get in contact with him.

Yours sincerely,

Michael Polya

via email

[Readers are asked to email [email protected] with information]

Dear Editor,

I have received the latest mail-shot from Rachel Gilmour, the Member of Parliament for Minehead and Tiverton Constituency (which now includes Wiveliscombe), “reporting back to you on my first year as your MP”.

In 2016, and thereafter, the Liberal Democrats revealed themselves to be, neither, ‘liberal’, nor ‘democratic’. They withheld ‘loser consent’, following a well-prepared, democratic, referendum. In a democracy, you only get to withhold ‘loser consent’ once. For that marks the end of democracy.

In her ‘report’ every matter reported on is parochial. Do not the people of Somerset and Devon have any international concerns? Are they not to be concerned about migrants entering this country? Are they not to be concerned about increasing congestion everywhere we go? Are they not to be concerned about an increasingly overloaded national welfare infrastructure; to which they have contributed all of their working lives? Are they not to be concerned about what is being taught to their children?

Mrs Gilmour also provides a bar-chart, to demonstrate that – when people abandon the Tories in this region – they vote Liberal Democrat: not Labour. What Mrs Gilmour forgets is that the electorate of this country is increasingly aware that we have one task ahead of us now: to compel our globalist King to have to summon Mr Nigel Farage to form a government in his name.

The Liberal Democrats form part of our ‘Uni-Party’ globalist parliament. And how many of your readers are impressed with the buffoonish ‘leader’ of the Liberal Democrats, Ed Davey?

Sincere regards,

Mark Dyer

Wiveliscombe

Dear Editor,

A recent headline read: “Council to spend up to £20-million for advice on how to save money.” The first public comment summed it up: “I can tell them how to save £20-million.”

When Somerset Council was created in April 2023, the Liberal Democrat executive inherited £800-million of debt and was tasked with saving £18.5-million annually. That should have been the priority. Instead, there was no merger planning after May 2022, and 300 staff have only just left to balance the budget. Retaining experienced staff took second place to initiatives such as My Life My Future. Simple, early steps like requiring managers to run wider areas, could have saved money without delay.

Now the council proposes a “Modern Data and AI Council.” Yet even a government trial of Microsoft Copilot showed no productivity gain. At a time of near-bankruptcy, this is no moment to experiment with expensive new systems and consultants.

Residents are entitled to clear answers. The repeated use of the word “capacity” in transformation papers suggests that this £20-million Inspiring Innovation programme is little more than a smokescreen to rehire some staff recently let go, while avoiding the practical restructuring that should have begun in June 2022.

Liberal Democrat councillors must focus on debt, core services, and immediate savings—not consultants, not experiments, and not delay.

Chris Mann

Taunton