The Tories must hold Labour to account for its Chagos Islands betrayal

Plus: Sue Gray’s new role; the case for the ECHR; Australia’s example on assisted dying; and how the home of the Turin Shroud was saved

SIR – The Government’s proposed surrender of the Chagos Islands (report, October 7) is a shoddy and short-sighted deal that will be hugely damaging to Britain’s strategic interests. The last Conservative foreign secretary, Lord Cameron, killed off the plan – only for Labour to bring it back from the dead.
It ignores the interests and wishes of the Chagossian people, and appears to have been rushed through because of pending elections in both Mauritius and America. It has caused huge upset and worry among the other British Overseas Territories, which have been forced to seek reassurances from a Government that appears entirely unconcerned about the UK’s continued obligations to them and their peoples.
We also appear to have learnt none of the lessons from Hong Kong, where a deal was negotiated in good faith only for it to be trampled over and ignored, snuffing out democracy for millions.
Parliament will now scrutinise the details, but it is clear that the Conservative Party, as one, must vote against the proposal in both Houses.
Lord Blencathra (Con)President, Conservative Friends of the Overseas TerritoriesLondon SW1
SIR – The fiasco of Sir Keir Starmer’s plan to give away the Chagos Islands to Mauritius follows a decision by the International Court of Justice (ICJ). 
This misnamed court includes Judge Xue Hanqin of China, the country that may want the islands for itself. Other judges are from oppressive states such as Somalia. 
Judges are appointed to the ICJ by the UN General Assembly and the Security Council. Its “rulings” are political, not legal.
Laurence ClarkePoynton, Cheshire
SIR – Surely the Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary are starting to realise how unwise it was to concede the Chagos Islands to Mauritius – a country that has growing ties with China, which in all probability will seek to set up bases on the islands.
Mauritius is more than 1,000 miles from the islands and has never had any territorial link with them, besides harbouring the Chagossians in the 1960s when they were settled there. 
It takes bravery to recognise when one has made a mistake and rescind an earlier decision before it is too late. Has the Government got the strength of character to do this?
David S BaberAmersham, Buckinghamshire
SIR – A Marine Protection Zone was established around the Chagos archipelago in 2010. It is the largest in the world and protects a pristine oceanic wilderness, richly populated with much rare marine wildlife. 
I wonder how long it will be before Mauritius permits rapacious Chinese fishing fleets to destroy it.
Iain CassieLymington, Hampshire
 
SIR – Last week I saw Cable Street, a new musical at Southwark Playhouse. The show celebrated the fact that 100,000 Jews, Irish workers, communists and other inhabitants of London’s East End united to block the march of Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists through East London in 1936.
How sad to see that “pro-Palestinian” marchers supporting Hamas and Hezbollah were permitted to walk through London at the weekend (report, October 6) while the police once again stood by, despite the warning that “anyone displaying symbols, wording or otherwise indicating their support for a proscribed organisation risks arrest”.
These rabidly anti-Semitic “protesters” are succeeding where the BUF failed. A damning indictment of the mayor and the police in London.
Ian Portland-HillLondon W8
 
SIR – The Chancellor of the Exchequer tells us that the country is in dire financial straits. It therefore seems reasonable to reduce the number of tax-funded civil servants where possible. 
The Prime Minister has decided to dispense with the services of Sue Gray (report, October 7); but rather than remove her from the government payroll, he has created a non-job simply to save face. We already have too many “special advisers” propping up this Labour administration. It is beginning to resemble a glorified job creation scheme.
Mick RichardsMalvern, Worcestershire
SIR – The reasons to delay or cancel VAT on independent school fees are well documented and extensive. 
In her recent social media activity, Bridget Phillipson, the Education Secretary, has revealed her disdain for the independent sector. She has lost all judgment on the topic and has not answered the many detailed and important questions that have been raised by the tax. The time frames are unworkable.
This policy requires more analysis, scrutiny and time – as well as an Education Secretary who wants to work with the sector rather than destroy it.
Richard PallisterEast Bergholt, Suffolk
SIR – Tax associations have warned the Treasury that universities risk being dragged into Labour’s VAT raid on private schools (report, October 7). Why shouldn’t they be? What is the justification for taxing one form of education but not another?
Labour should be able to explain this clearly but will have to fudge the response, as we all know that the real reason for the raid on private schools is class envy.
David BartholomewHenley-on-Thames, Oxfordshire
 
SIR – Some years ago I attended an ancient tree forum at Basildon Park in Berkshire. We were told that an oak tree grows for 300 years, is in its prime for a further 300 years and then takes 300 years to die. We visited an oak in the grounds estimated to be 1,000 years old. 
The oaks of Hartley Wintney Common may be famous (Letters, October 7), but by oak standards they are comparative youngsters.
Duncan RaynerSunningdale, Berkshire
 
SIR – Your front page (October 4) leads with Boris Johnson’s call for a referendum on the European Convention on Human Rights and his comments that the ECHR does not “provide people with protections that they wouldn’t otherwise have”. These comments are false and dangerous.
The ECHR has provided vital protection to people in the UK when politicians, institutions and our domestic legal system have failed them. It has secured the full decriminalisation of homosexuality and access to abortion care, and has ensured that abuses in immigration detention centres are investigated. It has helped the families of people who die as a result of state failings to hold the government to account – including by securing effective investigations into the Hillsborough disaster, the infected blood scandal and the Covid-19 pandemic.
Leaving the ECHR would be an unprecedented and extreme move. Not only would it breach the Good Friday Agreement, undermining peace in Northern Ireland and reducing rights protections for everyone in the UK, but it could also lead to the unravelling of human rights protections across the continent. Human rights protections are the lifeblood of our freedoms, not something for politicians to switch on or off for their own benefit.
Kerry MoscogiuriDirector of Campaigns and Communications, Amnesty International UKLondon EC2
 
SIR – Judith Austin (Letters, October 7) defines the first duty of a government. 
I recently asked a group of refugees from different countries what they saw as a government’s primary obligation to its people. Health, education and low taxation were among the suggestions. It was a Ukrainian who, like her, said “defence”.
Tom StubbsSurbiton, Surrey
 
SIR – More than 10 years ago I had a stall at the annual church fete to sell second-hand ties of every colour and style. I sold just two that afternoon. Today, the tie has definitely gone out of fashion for men internationally.
Yet there is a halfway house: the cravat. Colourful, stylish, elegant and so much better than the half-dressed appearance that seems to be the new norm for men.
Harvey VivianMalvern, Worcestershire
 
SIR – I was fascinated by your article (Features, October 7) on the tests confirming that the Turin Shroud is 2,000 years old. Since the late 17th century, this unique relic has been housed in a suitably breathtaking chapel designed by the great Sicilian architect Guarino Guarini. In 1997 the chapel was badly damaged by fire (the shroud was rescued), but it has now been brilliantly restored. 
Fortunately the Italian authorities suffered none of the ideological hang-ups that are preventing a proper restoration of Clandon House by the National Trust.
Roger WhiteSherborne, Dorset
 
SIR – I have read the articles and correspondence you have published both for and against voluntary assisted dying (Letters, October 7). Opponents of the concept often argue that patients could very well manage with palliative care instead of forcing a doctor to “kill” them.
Here in Australia, all of our states now permit assisted dying. The last to introduce it was New South Wales in November 2023. My husband was diagnosed with cholangiocarcinoma that month, with symptoms not manifesting until March this year. Our doctor referred him for palliative care and the nurses were spectacular. He had decided many years ago that he would like to investigate euthanasia, so we were provided with a telephone number. 
He was assessed by two independent doctors as being eligible for assisted dying – first because he had less than six months to live, and secondly because his mental acuity ensured that he wasn’t being coerced into it. Stringent laws have been written to safeguard the individual.
By June, his body was obviously breaking down and, while his brain remained as sharp as ever, he could not bear the physical indignities. Over a glass of wine, he told me that he’d come to the end of the line, and his relief at making the final decision was palpable. 
Three days later, after he had said wonderful goodbyes to our grandchildren, family and friends, two doctors arrived at our home. The lead doctor explained everything clearly to him and the few people present, and he was permitted to die by infusion on his own terms, on his recliner, listening to the Hebrides overture and singing to me under his breath. Words cannot convey the love, caring and peace that were present in our lounge. It was quite simply beautiful.
I can only hope that I will be able to die in the same, special way. Come on, Britain, your citizens deserve the right to die how they wish. You are very much behind the times.
Davina MacLachlanMurwillumbah, New South Wales, Australia
 
We accept letters by email and post. Please include name, address, work and home telephone numbers.  ADDRESS: 111 Buckingham Palace Road, London, SW1W 0DT   EMAIL: [email protected]   FOLLOW: Telegraph Letters @LettersDesk NEWSLETTER: sign up to receive Letters to the Editor here