Do you agree with our readers? Have your say on these MetroTalk topics and more in the comments.
Joe says, ‘Give the youth a break’
In the most recent episode of ‘Let’s bash the youth for no reason,’ Fred from Sunderland (MetroTalk, Fri) criticises them for wastefulness because they’ve never given food waste to a pig farmer in exchange for pork, as he did.
Sounds like an idyllic childhood, Fred, but my parents – who are in now in their late 70s – didn’t have any such scheme. Everything went in the black bin and was left out for the binmen. The pork would just be a joint from Tesco.
Young people today have a better idea about recycling than most.
I know back in your day, Fred, your elders would have criticised your generation, too. It’s what we do when we get older and more out of step with things.
Just be aware this is what’s happening for you, rather than there being a generation of useless young people. Give them a break. Joe, London
Should Prince Andrew be stripped of his title?
I agree with the two out of three people polled by YouGov who say Prince Andrew should be stripped of all his titles. All of the royal family should be.
The whole Andrew/Jeffrey Epstein affair is just more evidence that we need to abolish the monarchy.
Regardless of how involved he was with Epstein’s crimes, Andrew’s upbringing was so privileged and detached from reality that he saw the people around him more as furniture than human beings – as was thrown into stark relief by Emily Maitlis’s BBC TV interview with him in 2019.
And his position as a senior royal has, of course, only been achieved by dumb luck.
Speaking of sheer dumb luck, we’re fortunate that King Charles seems to be a kind, sensible chap. We could easily have someone like Andrew next in line to the throne – or worse, someone willing to use their undeserved power to get anything they want at the expense of ordinary people. Do we really want to keep taking that risk? Charlie Parrett, Stoke
Got a question about UK politics?
Send in yours and Metro’s Senior Politics Reporter Craig Munro will answer it in an upcoming edition of our weekly politics newsletter. Email alrightgov@metro.co.uk or submit your question here.
What will it take to stop knife crime in schools?
Further to the senseless murder of Harvey Willgoose, 15, and his mother’s call for knife detectors in schools (Metro, Tue).
It reminds me of their installation in schools near where I lived several years ago following an increase in knife crime.
Some parents were horrified and many objected to the arches and to police providing a schools officer for every school. But why object to your child being kept safe?
Those carrying knives soon found ways round it, anyway, such as hiding weapons in flowerbeds through fences and getting pals to throw them in.
How do we stop knife crime, with knives readily available and weapons being made from all sorts of things?
The punishment for carrying has to be a major consideration. Amanda Henry, Leeds
Frustration doesn’t justify violence, reader responds to the ‘abuse’ A&E nurses are facing
Julie (MetroTalk, Thu) says violence against A&E nurses is ‘shocking and inexcusable’ but suggests it is ‘understandable’ patients feel frustrated at how long they have to wait to be seen.
That is hurtful and deeply offensive. I do not know if she is making excuses to justify the abuse nurses are subjected to but that comment feels like a slap in the face. Sally, NHS Nurse
More on unsafe cosmetic procedures
Ryan (MetroTalk, Tue) talks about an ‘imaginary ideal’ that is driving people towards insecurity and potentially unsafe cosmetic procedures.
Sorry to be a git but some of this ‘ideal’ is based on facts. Decades of research shows weight measured by body mass index has an ideal range. Sticking to it is not to do with beauty/attractiveness but health/longevity. Paul Duckett, Lewes
How safe is nuclear power?
I’ve been reading the correspondence about nuclear power and claims it is unsafe because of the Chernobyl incident (MetroTalk, Fri).
If we applied the same thinking to dams, we’d have no reservoirs as they would be considered dangerous because of the huge number of people whose lives have been lost in dam failures across the planet over centuries.
Given this, why do we accept reservoirs with absolute confidence as to their safety? Because we know lessons are learned from these disasters and that in this country we insist on the highest safety standards, which are not always practised abroad.
Quite why the anti-nuclear lobby can’t accept this baffles me. John Daniels, Redhill
