HOORAY! At last a WMN reader, John Jones, agrees with what I have said for a long time – that there should be a referendum on the death sentence. Let the people decide, not politicians who don't live in the real world of murderous crime which blights the lives of many families.

With DNA making sure mistakes are not made, capital punishment is the only way to ensure that murderers are not let loose – after what is laughingly called a life sentence – to kill again.

People who kill young children, kill women in the pursuit of rape, kill during acts of robbery, or kill the police officers who put their lives at risk on our behalf every day, should receive no sympathy whatsoever. When convicted, such anti-social people should face the death penalty.

If hanging is thought to be too barbaric there are other ways of capital punishment, by lethal injection for instance.

I realise that do-gooders and left-wing liberals will fight any move to have a referendum on the subject and will be backed by MPs who feel the state should not take a life. But this argument no longer holds water.

Criminals among us who take lives without any thought of the grief the bereaved families will suffer for the rest of their lives do not deserve any compassion.

And why should taxpayers pay to look after such vile people as they do time in one of Her Majesty's Prisons – hardly a tough regime these days?

So all power to your elbow, Mr Jones, and I hope you continue with your campaign to bring back the death penalty. I will certainly back you up.

Colin Richey

Tiverton

Dishonest legacy

IT is a long established tenet of politicians that if you make a spectacularly unpopular decision, you ensure no-one can reverse it. Hence, after the Beeching cuts, we tore up railway lines and disposed of the land; when a Labour government cancelled the world- beating TSR2, the aircraft and the tools were physically destroyed.

Now things are more subtle, but equally dishonest. Having failed to persuade a sceptical public that ID cards are a good idea, the Government decided they would only be compulsory at first for people working in airports.

When that was opposed, it was quietly dropped, and we were told that the whole scheme would be "voluntary".

The Conservatives have a good chance of winning the next election, and have pledged to scrap the scheme.

Last Friday the Identity and Passport Service announced that the ID card database contract, awarded to IBM, would run for seven years, with stiff penalties in the event of cancellation.

So if Cameron and Co do cancel it, they will be publicly castigated for wasting public money on the cancellation and Labour will make political capital out of its own dishonest decisions.

And they wonder why hardly anyone votes...

Nigel Cheffers-Heard

Topsham

Costly assemblies

DAVID Cameron pledges a reduction in the "number, size, scope and influence of quangos". I hope this includes the eight regional development agencies established in April 1999 and the ninth in London added in July 2000. Their five statutory purposes are to:

Further economic development and regeneration; promote business efficiency; promote employment; enhance development and application of skill relevant to employment, and contribute to sustainable development.

Since 1999 they have cost the UK taxpayer more than £15 billion, and from their remit it would appear that their responsibilities could easily be transferred to existing government departments, resulting in considerable savings to taxpayers.

Harry Randall

Dorchester

Support for TV rebel

I FULLY agree with the letter from L Chapman (July 11) regarding the non-payment of the television licence by John Kelly.

The BBC is in serious breach of its licence conditions and should be taken off air and put under new management before being allowed back.

Unfortunately I am not able to go to the court today to show my support for Mr Kelly, but my thoughts will be with him and I hope that he gets justice – not perverted law.

Catherine Cracknell

St Austell

Anti-hunt activity

NOW that the Labour Government is in its death throes I note with interest the sudden increase in letters from anti-hunt activists distraught by the realisation that their beloved but useless Hunting Act is about to be consigned to the dustbin of history.

Alan Kirby's letter (July 7) is a particularly hysterical example. Larding a letter with such phrases as "barbaric pastime", "widely despised minority", "perverted obsession" and "bloodthirsty minority" does little to promote a point of view; it merely emphasises the writer's prejudice and lack of real arguments.

But he sinks to the depths in saying "God knows what plans they (the Conservative Party) have for the vulnerable people in our society, but it's already clear they intend to unleash a holocaust on wild animals" (use of the word "holocaust" is particularly objectionable).

What exactly is he implying?

Jonathan Marshall

Somerset

Licence politicians

TEACHERS should have a licence to teach – so says Gordon Brown's Government. Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

So what about a licence for politicians? At least teachers are prepared for the work they do by undergoing a course of training, which is considerably more than can be said for politicians.

They are totally untrained for the jobs they do, let alone being education experts as well.

Eileen Noakes

Totnes