PLEASE keep your letters to 250 words maximum giving your name, address and daytime telephone number - even on emails. Email: Write: Swindon Advertiser, Unit 1 and 2 Richmond House, Edison Park, Swindon, SN3 3RB. Phone: 01793 501806.

Anonymity is granted only at the discretion of the editor, who also reserves the right to edit letters.

May’s resignation is a significant loss

It should be said that the passing of Theresa May as prime minister represents a significant loss to those who wanted a more responsible attitude to business and the economy.

In her first speeches as a candidate for the leadership of the Conservative Party in 2016, she proposed workers on company boards and mandatory publishing of the ratio between the CEO’s pay and the average company worker’s pay. A radical offer for a Conservative.

It is a profound shame that those who are more sympathetic to this kind of politics (whatever party they are in) have not appeared to notice. That window has now closed. Whoever succeeds her will be sure to offer something very different, and that, in my opinion, is a huge shame.

Josh Adams, Beechcroft Road

Single issue won it for the for Brexit Party

In reply to Mark Webb (SA, May 28) when I said that the Brexiteers were moderates I was really describing the people who voted for the Nigel Farage new Brexit Party.

The Brexit Party achieved a landslide victory with 32 percent of the national vote in the EU elections. The total allocation of seats for Britain in this election was 73 and of those the Brexit Party gained 29 MEPs. Mark Webb must stop thinking about British politics in terms of left and right wing. The division of the country at the present time is between Brexiteers and Remainers. The Brexit Party did not even produce an election manifesto. They stood on the single issue of leaving the EU without a deal and in future trading on WTO terms. This was all the voters wanted to know. That single issue was sufficient to achieve a landslide victory for the Brexit Party.

Steve Halden, Beaufort Green

Voting stance is naive

Knowing his views on the EU, I can understand why Bill Williams voted for the Brexit Party, (SA, May 28). However, to have decided already to vote for them in the next UK general election appears naive.

The Brexit Party opinion of the EU is clear, but we don’t yet know its stance on the broader international issues such as the United Nations, NATO, nuclear weapons and international aid. The party has not commented on foreign ownership of our utilities and their essential infrastructure or on the creeping privatisation of the NHS. Nor has it said how it will address the problems Brexit poses for Northern Ireland, Scotland and Gibraltar.

Finally, we don’t know whether, with Nigel Farage in Downing Street, it would continue the austerity programme, retain the triple lock on state pensions, tackle the crisis in adult social care or even those of housing and homelessness.

I sometimes think that even after almost a century, Great Britain may not be quite ready for universal suffrage.

Don Reeve, Horder Mews, Old Town

Hapless or hedonist

I sometimes feel I’m stuck in a parallel universe. Could our barmy electoral system really end up presenting voters with a choice at the next election between the hapless Boris Johnson, the hopeless Jeremy Corbyn or the hedonist Nigel Farage? This surely can’t be true can it?

But hold on, the best that 320 million Americans could come up with was … yes …

Me, I think Des Morgan should be putting his hat in the ring!

John Stooke, Havisham Drive, Swindon

Letters to the Editor: What do you think?

Do you have an opinion on our reader letters? Get in touch.

Add your contribution now By uploading a contribution, for use online and in print, you accept our contributor terms. You will either own or have permission to use anything you provide.