The Spectator - October 29, 2016

LETTERS

as beech and oak. The eventual result will

be a much less diverse population of trees,

particularly of deciduous varieties, which

will be largely limited to those that squirrels

do not attack, such as ash and lime. In

turn, this will have huge and unimaginable

consequences for Britain’s wildlife as a

whole. The red squirrel argument, led

by Prince Charles, is a sideshow, but the

wider impact of grey squirrels upon the

environment will be enormous and needs to

be properly acknowledged.

Rupert Marlow

Vowchurch, Herefordshire

Trash t al k

Sir: A great shame that Lord Heseltine

is not more careful in his use of language

(Diary, 22 October). His accusation that

Brexiteers ‘trashed’ the currency (based

on a three-month assessment of currency

movements) is both disingenuous and a

misunderstanding of the meaning of ‘trash’.

I think he’ll find that ‘trash’ means ‘wilfully

to damage or destroy’.

I haven’t yet met a Brexiteer who

thought that there would be no short-term

consequences of Brexit. Neither have I met

one who didn’t think that in the medium

term the whole economy — including the

currency — would flourish once out of our

current restrictive cartel.

Mike Kaye

Nocton, Lincolnshire

Grammar mistake

Sir: In a letter to The Spectator two weeks

ago (Letters, 8 October), I made a serious

error. The figures I cited on grammar

school pupils in Northern Ireland,

apparently showing that children from poor

homes in the province did significantly

better at university entrance than their

mainland equivalents, were based on my

misunderstanding of the statistical tables.

The difference is far smaller than I stated.

While I do not in any way retreat from

my view that academic selection helps the

poor, I think it is my duty to set the record

straight.

Peter Hitchens

London W8

Essential accessory

Sir: I fully agree with Dr Ian McKee’s

advice that ‘every young woman should

have [a condom] in her handbag’ (Letters,

15 October). I would add that, above all,

every young man should keep a condom in

a readily accessible jacket pocket as well!

Peter Barker

Snettisham, Norfolk

Bear baiting

Sir: I couldn’t agree more with Rod Liddle’s
exposé of western politico-militaristic
hypocrisy (‘Stop the sabre-rattling’,
22 October). We’ve already poked the
Russian bear way too hard — unnecessarily
so. What Rod could have also highlighted
was that Nato has spread so far eastwards
that it’s a blessed surprise the next world
war hasn’t already started.
It almost did in 1962 when Khrushchev
tried to move nuclear missiles into Cuba.
The same principle applies to what ‘we’
are doing now — frontline, aggressive
technologies, nuclear-implied, established
in the old Soviet states of Latvia, Estonia,
Lithuania and even Poland. In Moscow, the
memory of 20 million dead Russians and
their cities razed to the ground by the Nazi
war machine is still fresh. How can anybody
be surprised that Putin has drawn a line in
the sand with regard to Kiev and Sebastopol
becoming American fortresses? In his mind
he is ultimately defending his country — no
different from John F. Kennedy. Moreover,
the Chinese are in full accord with him. If
I could wave a wand to bring back Nixon
to calm it all down, I would. As Mr Liddle
illustrates, it is a real worry that we have
nobody capable of proper realpolitik at the
moment.
J.B. Cowper
Maidenhead

On the bright side

Sir: Matt Ridley’s article ‘Climate of
ignorance’ (22 October) brought back
memories of the climate-change debate
15 years ago. As someone professionally
engaged in translating climate-change
science to a corporate audience in the
early 2000s, I was able to record some of
the results of the Third Assessment Report
of the International Panel on Climate
Change; to wit, that increased atmospheric
CO 2 levels were expected to significantly
increase agricultural productivity. Strangely,
these positive impacts of greenhouse gas
emissions were, to my knowledge, ignored
by the media and other commentators
at the time.
Ian Emsley
Ealing, London

The price of fame

Sir: I was delighted to learn from Charles
Moore in his column that he received a fee
of £225 for appearing on Any Questions?
(22 October). In August I, too, appeared on
this most excellent of programmes. Since
reading Charles’s column I have been
mulling over the reason why I only received

a fee of £222, and I find it most worrying. Is

a radio presenter really worth three pounds

less than a Spectator columnist?

Iain Dale

LBC Radio, London WC2

Raven wisdom

Sir: Mary Wakefield’s article on the

intelligence of the Tower ravens (‘How

clever are ravens? I asked at the Tower’, 22

October) was most interesting. The people

of the first nations on the northwest coast

of Canada (think British Columbia) —

particularly the Haida and Squamish —

have known this for many centuries. Indeed,

they believe that it is only because of the

raven that we have sunlight at all.

Christopher Gordon

Farnham, Surrey

Grey menace

Sir: Michael Heseltine is to be congratulated

on setting out the grey squirrel problem

(Diary, 22 October). Everything he says

is correct, but he does not go far enough.

Grey squirrels wreck and destroy young

trees, especially those we most value, such