Dear Editor,

I would like to add to Lucy Edwards comments on August 6 regarding the build up of silt in the "river" that gives the town its name.

Following the building of Somer bypass tunnel a small channel was built to provide the stream that now flows through the old river Channel, hence the silt build up due to weak flow. This could surely be increased to an average winter flow obviously not storm level.

That was the level that the old river authorities failed to consider when they built culverts either end of the high street. It would surely not take a genius to work out a stronger rate of flow that would reduce silting and the culvers could easily cope with. Let's get a river back.

Peter Rutter,

Midsomer Norton

Dear Editor,

I am writing in response to Blair McAlistaire's letter regarding his recent return to Midsomer Norton after fifteen years. While I understand Mr. McAlistaire's disappointment at the sight of the River Somer, I was reminded of a letter from our former Mayor, a couple of years ago, explaining why Midsomer Norton was “miles better” than Auld Reekie.

Councillor Gordon Mackay took to your letters pages in 2023 to express his fondness for Midsomer Norton. Cllr Mackay, who previously lived in both Bath and Edinburgh, declared that he has "no regrets about moving" here, praising our "amazing High Street" for its selection of hairdressers, charity shops, cafes, restaurants, and pubs, alongside a monthly farmers market and craft fair.

Perhaps our Bonnyrigg Boy might like to take issue with his Clansman and fight the corner for the Town Council and its river improvements? Personally, I’d just like to know what is it about Midsomer Norton that is so fascinating to people from Edinburgh?

Yours sincerely,

Nigel Walker

Staddlestones, Midsomer Norton

Dear Editor,

So Nigel Farage finally published Reform UK’s ‘masterplan’ on immigration. It is absurd.

He claims all arrivals will be arrested - but charged with what crime? If they claim asylum, arrival is not illegal. Repeating the lie that they are “illegal immigrants” does not make it true. International law is clear.

To bypass this, he proposes leaving the ECHR. But there is no clear exit process, unlike Brexit, and leaving would also unravel multiple treaties on slavery, trafficking and human rights, as well as the Human Rights Act and the NI Good Friday Agreement. His “British Bill of Rights” would be worthless if a UK Government was determined to undermine it and remove safeguards against abuse by the powerful. This would put UK citizens at risk. A Brexit-style saga, only much longer (more than a decade perhaps?) and far more damaging.

Farage suggests housing migrants on disused RAF bases - a policy even the Tories abandoned after local protests. He talks of deals with regimes such as the Taliban to take returnees. Many Afghans risked their lives helping our armed forces. Sending them back would be monstrous and shameful.

People talk of Farage as a future Prime Minister. This plan demonstrates stunning incompetence and shows he is utterly unfit for office. If this is his application form for the job it should be stamped ‘Failed’!

Peter Scott via email

Dear Editor,

As the Energy Price Cap increases once again to £1,755 for a typical household, Marie Curie, the UK’s leading end of life charity, is calling on the UK government to implement a social tariff to protect dying people from rising bills.

Energy costs can double for those with a terminal illness, often forcing people to choose between heating their home, powering vital medical equipment, or buying food. With energy costs still much higher than 2021, households facing terminal illness are often forced to make impossible financial choices, at the worst time imaginable.

Last year, Marie Curie received more than 2,000 energy-related enquiries via our free Support Line. Dying people don't have time to lose – the UK government must act now to introduce a social tariff to ensure everyone can live the end of their life without worrying about bills.

Your sincerely,

Jamie Thunder

Senior Policy Manager for Financial Security at Marie Curie

Europe is roasting under a “heat dome” with temperatures up to 42°C.

A June heatwave killed 2,300 people in ten days across just 12 European cities. Wildfires rage in Canada, destroying seven-million hectares and polluting air in cities many miles away. UK wildfires have jumped from 69 in early 2024 to 564 in the first half of 2025.

The science is clear - fossil fuels are driving this. The solution is clear too - transition fast to clean energy.

Yet Reform UK’s Nigel Farage calls climate breakdown a “hoax” and Net Zero “Net Stupid Zero”. In May, he claimed Net Zero will cost the taxpayer £45-billion a year - however he used outdated figures. Current estimates are £26-billion a year, with £22-billion from private investors and only £4-billion from public funds.

Over 25 years, costs total £650-billion, but savings from cheaper operations are expected to be £600-billion. Net Zero could virtually break even for taxpayers. Farage left all that out. It was in the report he quoted, but he didn’t mention it. Why, I wonder? And especially, why no mention of private funding? There’s a big difference between £45-billion and £4-billion as an annual cost to the taxpayer.

When lives, livelihoods and ecosystems are on the line, creating false narratives using outdated data with crucial facts missing, all for political advantage, isn’t just dishonest - it’s dangerous and utterly despicable!

Simon Honey, via email

Another week of this Labour government and we have seen even more positive change for the nation.

Under the Conservatives, school truancy was out of control.

Under Labour, in their first full academic year, there were five million more attendances at school.

Under the Conservatives, thanks to Liz Truss, interest rates rose and pensions crashed.

Under Labour, we have a stable economy, and, as a result, have seen five interest rate cuts in a row, thus saving mortgage payers £1,000 per year.

Promises made, promises kept!

Geoffrey Brooking, via email