Well, well, well and more well, well, wells!

About 110,000 Unite the Kingdom marchers descended on London last week, far beyond the expectations of the predicted turnout.

Tommy Robinson and his right-wing agitators are not everyone's cup of tea, but then again, right-wing politics is well spread across Europe in any case.

As an example, the current German government only got in by the skin of a bratwurst against that country's very strong right-wing opposition.

I don't mind admitting that it was nice to have the Union Jack and flags of the individual countries of the UK on display instead of Palestinian flags or Hamas banners.

The ordinary folk are just heartily fed up with lack of action being taken against illegal immigrants, not just by this current lot of no-hopers running (don't make me laugh) the country, but by past Tory governments as well.

While young couples find it harder and harder to get a mortgage, contracts by many local authorities allow officials to rent out newly built homes to illegal immigrants. That cannot be right.

It is not good to see a number of police officers injured in the line of duty, but sometimes it goes with their job. However, if this and previous governments had taken action as promised against illegal immigrants, then yesterday's rally would not have taken place.

Rayner, Mandelson, Reeves (a chancellor by title only), the London rally — Starmer's every waking hour must be like a living nightmare, and I have not one ounce of sympathy for a man who is so brainwashed ideologically that he just cannot see what damage he has, and continues to cause, to the United Kingdom.

King Charles, it would seem, has made some observations, but “The Monarch Reigns, but does not Rule” does not allow him to publicly comment. The Magna Carta (1215), instigated by the barons, and later the English Civil War, ensured that monarch and Parliament remain detached from each other. We all know that Charles I got carried away and completely lost his head over that little escapade.

Last week, Donald Trump's state visit took place. Among all the protocol of political nonsense spouted at such events, The Donald is well known to publicly announce some of his feelings, another potential nightmare for Starmer if that should happen.

Just an afterthought: Recently the USA, on the direct order of Trump, hired an aircraft and sent a load of South Koreans home who had illegally entered the USA. Looks like we're trying to do the same thing at the moment. Possibly we should show The Donald that “we hear you, Mr President.”

My favourite politician is not British, however, although I admire both Churchill and Thatcher. I am a big fan of the late Lee Kuan Yew, prime minister and leader of Singapore. He paved the way in making that country the great hub of the Far East that it is today. Merdeka!!

And here endeth my rant!

NB: To me, it will always be the Union Jack, not a flag. Why change the name — does anyone out there know why?

David Lloyd

Address supplied

As a Green Party supporter, I see the recent £1 million fine against Surrey County Council not just as a punishment, but as a tragic failure on two fronts.

For over a decade, our national SEND system was strangled by Conservative austerity. But this fine is proof that the crisis is also one of local mismanagement. When 98.3 percent of parent appeals are successful, it’s not just about money — it’s about a council that has stopped listening to the families it serves.

The Green Party has long warned that you cannot cut your way to a caring society. This fine, paid from the public purse, is the price of that failure. It is an outrageous waste of money that should be directly supporting children, not compensating for failure.

While the new Labour government must urgently provide full, ring-fenced funding to fix the system at its root, Surrey County Council must also be held accountable. They must end the exhausting battles they force parents to fight and start putting our children's futures first.

Natasha Fletcher Frustrated Farnham parent (and Green Party supporter) Address supplied

The Petersfield Post (August 28) stated the East Hampshire District Council (EHDC) was £116.4 million in debt. This refers only to government loans to the council. The actual figures are that the council is in debt £116.4 million to the government loan scheme. This is the scheme that has caused enormous problems for other councils, such as Croydon, where residents are paying for this type of property speculation.

The true figures are we do owe the government £116 million (which according to the Post is £907 per resident), but the property it bought is now valued (by the council) at £99 million. A £17 million deficit is still a considerable sum, and I cannot find any accounts for these investments. (The EHDC website is still showing the 2023 property valuations.)

It is true to say that the council did buy properties leased to reputable companies, but these leases are coming to an end and companies like Waitrose and Rolls-Royce are cutting back on shops and offices. The Asset Strategy (2023-28) Plan (which unbelievably is still in draft form) on the current EHDC website states: “8.2 Expiry profile — as at the end of 2022, the current weighted lease term to expiry is 5.1 years. Commercial property is cyclical and the council will focus on extending this expiry profile to reduce risk wherever possible.”

Should I be worried? No idea. I can find no financial information apart from that published by central government, and if there have been any discussions by councillors in meetings I’m pretty sure the public were excluded and the minutes are secret.

Brian Evans

Petersfield