The Daily Telegraph - 26.08.2019

B

oris Johnson has said that the odds of

striking a Brexit agreement with the

EU are “touch and go” and that “the

important thing is to get ready to come

out without a deal”. Remainers may

howl with outrage, but this is a simple

statement of fact. The Prime Minister has been

explicit that he wants an exit agreement, so long as

the EU is willing to compromise. But the only way

to ensure that Brussels does budge is to show that

the UK is prepared to walk away without a deal.

Indeed, all of this should have been obvious

in January, when Parliament overwhelmingly

rejected the Withdrawal Agreement negotiated

by Theresa May. After that, there were only three

options left for the UK: stay in the EU, walk away

without a deal or properly renegotiate. Instead,

Mrs May chose mere tweaks to the Agreement.

Watching from Brussels, it must have looked like

capitulation was imminent.

But the election of Mr Johnson has changed the

situation completely. He has stepped up no-deal

preparations, to ensure that the country is both

psychologically and economically ready for such

an eventuality. The Government is articulating the

economic case for Brexit, and taking practical steps

to show that our future will be brighter outside

the EU. As the meeting between Mr Johnson and

Donald Trump at the G7 summit yesterday showed,

the UK will not be left friendless post-Brexit, and

a trade deal with the US is on the horizon. Mr

Johnson will also not let the Remainers walk over

him in Parliament.

They can try, but this Government has indicated

that it will fight, rather than succumb to arcane

tricks of procedure. Confidence and resolve are

key. Since Mr Johnson has become Prime Minister,

the Leave forces have been more united than at

any point since the Chequers summit of last year.

The stronger Mr Johnson’s position becomes, the

more the Tories become the party of Brexit – and

the more desperate the diehard Remainers look.

It is to be hoped that the EU will compromise

and excise the backstop from the Withdrawal

Agreement, along with addressing some of the

other problems with the deal. Last week, Angela

Merkel and Emmanuel Macron signalled that

changes are possible; Donald Tusk’s tone implies

that we are still in the cold days of January. There

is just about time for a mutually advantageous deal

to be reached. But only if the EU is willing to put

pragmatism ahead of ideology.

Pragmatism must

rule over EU ideology

I

t has not been a summer short of nail-biting

cricketing moments. After an extraordinary

triumph in the World Cup last month, yesterday

Ben Stokes led England to a dramatic one-wicket

victory against Australia in the Third Test, drawing

the series level. Cricket commentators nearly ran

out of adjectives to describe events at Headingley:

unprecedented, unthinkable, unbelievable,

remarkable, magical. Should Ben Stokes now

become Sir Ben? Some wags have even suggested

that he be made prime minister by acclamation,

in the hope presumably that he might pull off a

similar victory against Jean-Claude Juncker and

the Europeans. That time may come, but for

now we can only offer the team our hearty

congratulations and best wishes for the rest of the

series. England’s hopes rest on your shoulders.

Feeling Stoked

H

aving a hospital appointment is a stressful

enough experience without it being

cancelled and rescheduled. But as the

Telegraph reports today, in some NHS trusts,

patients have had vital appointments cancelled

more than 10 times in a row. The total number

receiving at least five cancellations in a row has

more than tripled in three years.

This is a scandal that medics say is being fuelled

by the pensions crisis within the health service.

Punitive changes to the way pensions are taxed

have led to senior doctors cutting overtime,

reducing sessions or retiring early, a problem

which Boris Johnson has pledged to fix. But in an

era when yet more money is being poured into

the NHS, we should also talk frankly about its

institutional failings. The Left and many healthcare

professionals prefer to demand extra cash, but the

NHS is crippled by bad administration.

Some patients have had to wait months because

staff could not read illegible referrals. Others have

reported that the NHS used taxis to deliver letters

announcing a postponement of an appointment

the next day. Such chaotic maladministration not

only undermines public confidence in the health

service, but causes pain and distress, particularly

to elderly and vulnerable patients.

The situation is made worse by the fact that

working out what precisely is going wrong

is difficult in a highly secretive system that is

politically protected from criticism. Indeed, the

figures the Telegraph has uncovered have been

described by health experts as potentially just

“the tip of the iceberg”. This cannot go on. The

Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, must intervene

as a matter of urgency.

NHS ill-health

ESTABLISHED 1855

We accept letters

by post, fax and

email only. Please

include name,

address, work and

home telephone

numbers.

111 Buckingham

Palace Road,

London

SW1W 0DT

fax

020 7931 2878

email

dtletters@

telegraph.co.uk

follow

Telegraph Letters

on Twitter

@LettersDesk

Letters to the Editor

W

hile everyone else was

looking at Donald Trump

and Boris Johnson as they

complimented each other across the

table at the G7 meeting in Biarritz

yesterday, my focus was two places

to Mr Johnson’s right. I was studying

the face of Her Britannic Majesty’s

Ambassador to the French Republic,

Lord Llewellyn of Steep.

As plain Ed Llewellyn, Lord Ll

was David Cameron’s chief of staff,

and also his closest aide on all EU

matters. Most particularly, he advised

Mr Cameron on how to win enough

concessions from the EU to secure a

Remain vote in 2016. The concessions

offered by Mrs Merkel took no tricks.

The referendum was lost. Mr Cameron

resigned, ennobling and promoting

Mr Llewellyn as he left.

And yesterday our ambassador was

sitting with our new Prime Minister,

smiling tightly as he watched the

whole diplomatic world that he had

fought to defend falling apart. When

Lord Ll was in 10 Downing Street, the

then President of the United States

said that Britain would have to “go

to the back of the queue” for a trade

deal if it left the EU. Yesterday, the

now President of the United States

said that a deal could be done “pretty

quickly” and told Britain that the EU

was “the anchor round its ankle”. (An

odd phrase, but we know what Mr

Trump means.)

Lord Llewellyn is an able and

professional man. No doubt he will

take it all in his stride, but his presence

reminded me of how miraculous the

change taking place is. Until Boris

Johnson became Prime Minister,

the governing classes saw Brexit as

a nightmare from which they would

quite soon awake. Either it would be

nullified by Mrs May’s capitulation

to Brussels’s demands or it would not

even nominally take place. Now they

watch it happening before their eyes,

and they fear they cannot stop it.

Enter every caveat you like –

that Mr Trump is an unreliable

interlocutor, that Congress, not the

President, will decide what trade deals

are made, that Philip Hammond and

other leading MPs working, unpaid,

for the European Commission will

find a last-minute spanner to throw

into the parliamentary works – and

you still see a most dramatic alteration

in the political weather. Even the EU

leaders who attended yesterday’s

G7 accidentally reveal this. When it

was Mrs May, whom they had nothing

much against, they shunned her like

a wallflower at a party because of her

weakness. Now it is Mr Johnson, he,

or rather he and Mr Trump combined,

form the centre of their attention.

The Brexit process has often

seemed irrational and emotional on

both sides, but this column keeps

trying to point to its underlying logic.

We clearly and (to use a Trumpism)

bigly voted to leave. So we must. And

when we do leave, we must follow

the logic behind leaving, which is of

divergence, not convergence.

This should not, and need not,

mean antagonism, but it does mean

embracing difference. We are

rejecting membership of a big bloc

of the sort familiar to readers of

Orwell’s 1984 (“Eurasia”) and striking

out for a freer world. Some say we

are merely embracing “vassalage”

to the United States, but it would

be strange to argue that Canada or

Australia – both economically much

smaller countries than ours – are

American vassals. Besides, deals with

America do not involve the transfer

of our law, legislation and ultimate

authority to it, which is our situation

in relation to the EU.

With two months left, I feel too

superstitious to shout out “Westward

look – the land is bright”, lest a nasty

dark cloud appear. But I am enjoying

the spectacle of Lord Llewellyn of

Steep’s learning curve.



Last week, I aired the idea that

there is such a thing as a Left-

wing face: I feared that Olivia Colman’s

possession of one might make her

unsuitable to play the Queen. There

is also such a thing as a conservative

face. It is quite different from a Right-

wing one, which tends to look severe

and vain (think of Oswald Mosley).

The conservative face takes many

forms, but in general it is one which

you rarely see among bureaucrats,

television presenters or masters of

charles moore

notebook

This change in the political weather is miraculous

oore public relations, but do find among

soldiers, farmers or engineers. It tends

to be what people used to call “an open

countenance”, with a suggestion of

humour, of being outdoors a good deal

and (in men) of liking whisky.

Classic conservative faces include

Mrs Thatcher’s convivial deputy,

Willie Whitelaw, and the late, great

W F Deedes, who appeared on the

page opposite. Female examples

would include Queen Elizabeth, the

Queen Mother.

Current examples are worryingly

rare among big C Conservatives, but

one would be the Brexiteer Owen

Paterson. What about Boris Johnson

himself? It looks like a conservative

face, but this can only be confirmed

after October 31.



This column’s suggestion of a

restaurant chain – working title,

Hobson’s – offering absolutely no

choice of food and therefore freeing

the customer from the agony of

decision is gaining ground.

A learned reader points out that

such a phenomenon existed in the

18th century and was called “the

ordinary”. I had often noticed the word

in writing of the period, but thought it

just meant a basic inn. In fact it means

(I quote from Johnson’s dictionary) “a

place of eating established at a certain

price”. Customers of my chain will be

proudly known as “ordinary people”.

read more at telegraph.co.uk/opinion

sir – Glasgow University (report,

August 24) wishes to pay reparations

for historical monies from benefactors

active in slavery. This could be hard to

compute, especially as pertains to the

father of James Watt.

A visitor to Jacmel on Haiti’s south

coast will find rusty remains of a Watt

steam engine hidden in the brush near

the town’s runway. One could argue

that steam did as much as the abolition

of slavery to lessen its continuance.

On Haiti’s west coast, near Les

Anglais, lie the remains of its indigo

industry. Local people say the sands

are white from the bones of Scots who

died in bondage after the Clearances.

Perhaps Glasgow University should

pay reparations to the descendants of

those who fled Scotland. It’s certainly

far easier to compute.

Curtis Paskett

Buckhurst Hill, Essex

sir – My grandfather, and many like

him, died in industrial accidents that

would be criminal today, caused by

uncaring negligence in the early 20th

century, but I and other descendants

live prosperous lives because of the

profits drawn by the industrialists.

Should we press for reparation

payments from institutions that have

also benefited?

William Fleming

Frimley, Surrey

sir – Charles Moore (Comment,

August 24) rightly observes that

universities should be as concerned

about the Test Acts as they are about

past complicity with slavery.

The Test Acts excluded Catholics

and Dissenters from education, some

professions and political office.

Between 1719 and 1871, Parliament

abolished the various Test Acts,

beginning with the Schism Act, which

had excluded non-Anglicans from

being school teachers and prohibited

higher education establishments

known as dissenting academies.

In 1871 the Universities Test Act

repealed laws requiring academics at

Cambridge, Oxford and Durham to

hold Anglican beliefs. It is hard to

overstate the importance of repealing

the Test Acts, which marked full

freedom of religion in Britain and its

spread across the world.

Countries such as the United States

and Australia, which branched off

from Britain during this period, or

immediately after, wrote clauses into

their constitutions prohibiting any

future government from requiring

assent to particular beliefs for those in

public office.

This is a history that universities

should carefully reflect on, not least in

the light of current attempts on some

campuses to censor students and

outside speakers who dissent from

politically correct orthodoxy or hold

minority religious beliefs.

Dr Martin Parsons

Devizes, Wiltshire

sir – Would it not be better if Glasgow

University used the £20 million being

offered in reparation for profiting from

slavery to fight modern slavery?

George Holder

London SW

Add to slave reparations a claim by Scots exiled by the Clearances Cancelled BA flights

sir – Am I alone in thinking that the

recent flight cancellation notices

issued by British Airways amount

to one of the biggest fiascos for the

company in recent times.

On Saturday morning, I received

a notice from BA informing me that

my flight to Toronto on September 11

was cancelled. My immediate reaction

(apart from fury) was to find another

means of reaching my destination.

Having done this, I set about

claiming a refund and, in so doing,

discovered that all flights associated

with the booking would be cancelled.

I therefore rearranged my return trip.

Late on Saturday afternoon I had a

further email from BA saying that my

flight on September 11 was reinstated

and I could confirm my reservation.

What did it think passengers had been

doing since the original cancellation?

A P Ward

Preston, Lancashire

sir – I wonder if the BA pilots who

want a massive pay rise because

profits are up would volunteer to take

a pay cut if profits were down.

Mark Solon

London E

Fracking tremors

sir – Your report “Biggest fracking

tremor was minor says Cuadrilla”

(Business, August 23) includes

references by the Labour MP Rebecca

Long-Bailey and Friends of the Earth

to “earthquakes”.

These opponents to developing a

potential indigenous energy resource

have little understanding of hydraulic

stimulation (which they crudely call

fracking) or of earthquakes. 

The Traffic Lights System (TLS)

implemented by the Government,

with a 0.5 ML (Richter) limit during

stimulation is itself questionable. It

currently imposes a de facto ban on

the effective stimulation of shale. Most

practising engineers and geoscientists

agree that the more appropriate

measurement is peak particle

velocity measured in mm/sec, as with

quarrying and construction.

The Richter scale was devised in

1935 to measure the magnitude of

earthquakes of moderate size (that

is, magnitude 3 to 7) by assigning a

number so that earthquake could be

compared. The Richter scale has been

replaced since by other scales, often

still referred to as “Richter”.

What is important is that Richter

is a magnitude scale, measuring the

energy release at a point in the ground

where the movement has occurred.

The effects at the surface can be

classified using the Modified Mercalli

scale, which assesses intensity (the

effect felt) and will be different at

different places. It is a subjective scale,

hence the argument that peak particle

velocity at dwellings or locations

of concern is a much more easily

recorded.

Before the event last week recorded

at 1.55 ML Richter, earlier events

in Lancashire were equivalent to

0.5 mm/sec. Quarry consent may be

for 6mm/sec and pile-driving may be

15mm/sec, both significantly higher

than the TLS criteria. This shows

the inadequacy of the Government’s

approach. Using Richter as a crude

measurement, 3.0 ML would be like a

heavy lorry passing – of little concern.

John Beswick

Rothley, Leicestershire

The meaning of pingo

sir – To be pedantic, a pingo (Leading

article, August 24) is an earth-covered

ice hillock up to a couple of hundred

feet high. They only create ponds

when they melt and collapse, to leave

holes in the ground.

Roger Croston

Christleton, Cheshire

Bikers on footpaths

sir – In response to letters (August 24)

from readers seeking to ride bicycles

and horses on public footpaths,

I would also like to ride my trial

motorcycle on them.

I currently ride it on unrestricted

byways, which I share with ramblers,

cyclists and horse-riders. This is a

legal form of recreation and I have

full respect for all other users.

I would love the opportunity to ride

on footpaths, where practical. I should

add that my motorcycle is light and

quiet and gives me the opportunity to

explore the countryside.

Andrew Walker

Abbey Dore, Herefordshire

sir – In winter, I am often up to my

ankles in mud churned up by horses

on bridleways. Do I want my footpaths

in the same state? Certainly not.

Frank Goodland

Olney, Buckinghamshire

Mini drama

sir – The article by Andrew Roberts

about the Mini (Cars, August 24) took

me back to 1961. Having returned from

two years in Australia, I could just

afford my first car. It was a tartan red

Austin Seven Mini, with no heater –

which would have cost me a pound a

month extra over 36 months.

I was serving at the Royal Naval

Air Station Culdrose in Cornwall and

living in Camborne. The Christmas

pantomime that year was Snow White

and I was one of the dwarfs. The dress

rehearsal didn’t go too well, and it was

almost midnight before the producer

was happy.

I didn’t change, but jumped in the

car and set off for home across the

moors. Half-way across, I was stopped

by a police sergeant and a constable.

“Good evening, Sir, would you mind

stepping out of the car?” This I did,

as he shone his torch into the car.

“Will you open the boot?” This I did.

“Thank you, Sir. Goodnight.”

As I got into the car, the sergeant

turned to the constable and said: “I

wondered who bought these cars.”

Derrick G Smith

Bexhill-on-Sea, East Sussex

sir – In Andrew Roberts’s excellent

review of the Mini at 60, it was nice

to see the name-check, “as Christy

Campbell notes in her indispensable

book, Mini: An Intimate Biography”.

I would like to reassure readers

and former colleagues at The Sunday

Telegraph (where I was defence

correspondent for 10 years) that I was

at the time – and remain – a bloke.

Christy Campbell

Great Barton, Suffolk

They manage these things differently in France: a burglar shot, Le Petit Parisen, 1900

BRIDGEMAN IMAGES

SIR – John Humphrys (report,

August 17) relates that he was

uncertain how to address a burglar.

I, too, experienced this social

awkwardness when, in the middle

of the night, I saw two men with

torches prowling about in next

door’s garden. Our neighbours were

away. Without thinking, I opened

my bedroom wìndow, leant out and

said loudly, “Can I help you?” in

what I hoped was an authoritative

manner. I was ready to do a quick

spring backwards just in case

they tried to shoot me, but they

turned out to be local policemen

investigating a reported break-in.

How should I have challenged

them? I felt that I was altogether

too English.

Liz Wheeldon 

Seaton, Devon

The proper etiquette for addressing a burglar

sir – If Furneux Pelham (Letters,

August 24) had put a security system

in its church roof, it could have had

unlimited insurance cover.

I was a churchwarden of St

Mary’s, Rushden, where a highly

recommended roof alarm was installed

10 years ago, giving peace of mind.

John Allen

Irthlingborough, Northamptonshire

sir – The diocesan advisory committee

and Historic England were content

to allow our church to suffer terrible

water penetration over the years it

took to raise funds for a lead or steel

replacement roof, rather than permit

us to install any sort of composite

covering, even temporarily.

Historic England placed the church

on its at-risk register and suggested

we cover the decaying felt – the only

permitted covering – with tarpaulins.

Cristina Fearon

Stourton, Wiltshire

sir – Thieves who strip lead from

church roofs deny Christians the

right to a place of worship. These

thefts are hate crimes and should

be treated as such by the police and

the courts.

David J Critchley

Winslow, Buckinghamshire

Stopping theft of lead from the church roof

The Daily Telegraph Monday 26 August 2019 *** 17

RELEASED BY "What's News" vk.com/wsnws TELEGRAM: t.me/whatsnws