TUITION FEES

I WOULD like to return to the question of university tuition fees, which seems to have been elbowed aside lately by other, newer, events.

As I understand it, these fees will not apply in Scotland, yet Scottish MPs were allowed to vote them in for England. The majority in favour was so small that without Scottish votes, the measure would undoubtedly have been lost.

Talk about 'Don't do as I do, do as I say.' Could anyone seriously think that Scots could be told that they would be required to pay a big new bill which would not apply to the English? I don't think so. Aren't we already ripped off enough by Scotland, which already enjoys a higher slice of public spending per head than England does?

I decided to take my complaint to my MP, Alan Milburn, to find out if he could justify this inequality. I received a reply (and not very promptly) under Mr Milburn's name which was a routine 'party line' statement and did not even address the above question.

I wrote a second time on February 9 repeating my question, but to date have not received a response. I would have thought that Mr Milburn, having shed ministerial office, would have had far more time to deal promptly with constituency matters.

However, that is by the by. Maybe it is time to widen the debate. If anyone can tell me why Scottish MPs should be able to wish large bills on England which they are not also paying, I should like to know. - GJ Taylor, Darlington.

BBC

THE article 'Jail threat in TV licence row' (Echo, Mar 1) exposes yet again that the BBC is pursuing an agenda rather than fulfilling obligations under its charter to Inform, Educate and Entertain.

The spirited stance adopted by James Mawdsley, whose bravery and principles are already established, should be warmly applauded and strongly supported. In refusing to pay his licence fee because the BBC are to screen a series of cartoons which openly knock his religion, he highlights the culture that now rules the BBC.

The left-liberal ethos of the corporation closely follows the editorial policy of The Guardian and now prevails in all aspects of news presentation, current affairs, moral and constitutional matters.

Political bias, the undermining of our right to rule our own country by persistent, pro-EU reports, the deliberate misrepresentation of key issues eg regionalisation, and the constant attack on established moral and family values, this, it seems, is the role that the BBC has taken upon itself (with your money) to perform.

Christianity is the faith of the vast majority of the people in Britain. This faith is also a fundamental building block which has combined with other qualities in forming a British identity.

To openly satirise Catholicism in the planned screening of a cartoon series called Popetown is setting out to intentionally insult a very large number of people and is a clear violation of the charter of our foremost public service broadcaster.

The self-appointed intelligentsia at the BBC would never allow minority faiths to be maligned (nor should they), we therefore are entitled to ask by what right do they feel justified in attacking Catholicism and therefore Christianity in general? - Dave Pascoe, Press Secretary, UK Independence Party, Hartlepool Branch.

GRIEF

WHAT a deeply perceptive report (Echo, Feb 24) on the symptoms displayed by so many who indulge in 'recreational grief.'

The authors of the report have pinpointed the problem accurately; the decline of institutions that once gave meaning to people's lives, such as the family, the church, the nation and the neighbourhood.

The cure is in our own hands. Build happy, secure families where parents and children stay together. Marriage is for life not just until things get hard then divorce.

Love, care and nurture by parents and extended family for children. Anything less breeds delinquent behaviour.

Children are not objects to be passed first to one parent then the other at set times like in some callous game of pass the parcel.

Churches need to teach Christianity properly and Christians live as true representatives of their faith, then others will see the relevance or desirability of becoming part of a believing Christian community.

Being proud of one's country and caring about what we as a nation do should not be regarded as nationalism and put down as politically incorrect.

Happy, secure and good living people don't need artificial displays of grief, hollow expressions of public caring, as the report puts it. Their care for each other and their neighbourhoods will be ongoing, permanent, not displayed in brief, emotional outbursts.

This 21st century disease of ostentatious caring needs to be cured as soon as possible. It cannot replace the genuine article. - EA Moralee, Billingham.

LENT

LENT, now upon us, is an opportunity to remind ourselves of certain unpalatable truths.

Thus, we enjoy our role as top species, we kid ourselves that the world, indeed the universe, is our oyster, that there is no limit to what we can achieve.

Yes indeed, in terms of the murder of other species, of the devastation and pollution of this once beautiful plant, there is no limit to what we can achieve.

God allows us an awful lot of leeway, but in the final analysis it is He who calls the shots and one day there will no longer be any getting away from this fact. So we might as well get used to it now and that's what Lent is for.

Yes, Lent is all about honesty and realism; it's also about that most unpopular but most basic of all the virtues - humility. Never has the human race been in greater need of it. - T Kelly, Crook.

MIDDLESBROUGH FC

MAY I take this opportunity to congratulate Middlesbrough on winning the Carling Cup in Cardiff.

If anybody deserves to win a trophy, then it is the Boro. I am over the moon for the town and in particular the chairman, Steve Gibson.

He has ploughed millions of pounds into the club, and saved them from extinction. How I wish that Darlington Football Club had a chairman like him.

Congratulations Middlesbrough and Mr Gibson. You deserve it. - Christopher Wardell, Darlington.

CHARLES KENNEDY

CHARLES Kennedy's claims to be 'green' don't stand up to the merest scrutiny.

His proposal to tax freight planes as well as passengers might perhaps raise a billion pounds a year. But UK aviation's tax-break is currently £9bn a year. So under a LibDem government, society would still be indirectly subsidising aviation by almost three times the cost of the annual roadbuilding budget. I wouldn't call that green.

Nor is it green to levy a tax per aircraft, regardless of the distance travelled. We should be taxing the fuel that's burned, or else the tax makes no distinction between lesser and greater polluters. Mr Kennedy has a strange notion of 'making the polluter pay'.

But I suppose we shouldn't expect any better from a LibDem leader who chooses the most highly-polluting mode of travel to tour the country telling people how green he is, as Mr Kennedy did in the 2001 general election campaign. - Nic Best, Euro-candidate for NE Greens.