SIR – This week I had the occasion to see the new Ketch roundabout for the first time and I was appalled to notice that part of it was built around the electricity pylon near the Ketch.
Then, as we got on to the new A4440 dual carriage road going north towards the M5, there was a road sign with 60 on it, being two lanes, but it then reduced to one lane before the next roundabout, and my son, who was driving, remarked that it was an accident waiting to happen.
My question to the highways department is this, who is responsible for two blatant errors in the planning of the road improvements?
In my previous letter of June 3 I mentioned that the school students would have planned it better.
Answers please from the highways department would be appreciated.
N M DUNKLEY
Worcester

Staying in the UK is doing us harm
SIR – We have just had the publication by a group of business leaders and economic analysts of “Change or Go,” a 1,000 page assessment of Britain’s place in the EU: This report challenges the many myths David Cameron and his allies are using to try to frighten the British people into staying in the EU.
We should all welcome this list of demands for changes that Cameron ought to make, but clearly is not making, in his negotiation with the EU. The report concludes that, unless the Prime Minister can achieve a fundamental change in Britain’s relationship with Brussels, the country’s households and businesses will be better off if the UK opts to leave the EU.
In light of this report there are two important things that need to be highlighted. Firstly the startling level of the UK’s contribution to the overall EU budget and secondly the supremacy of EU law over UK law. These are two fundamental principles that must change, unfortunately, however, it is clear Cameron intends to do nothing about these issues.
The conclusion is that the EU is bad for Britain. We are better off out. This report gives us 1,000 pages of reasons why. I only wish Cameron were honest enough to tell the British people the truth about the damage the EU does to every family and every business in the UK.
M YOUNG
Worcester


The world of Labour fantasy economics
SIR – We have had fantasy football and cricket, and now we have Labour fantasy economics and politics.
Even moderate Liz Kendall has made the statement that Labour overspending did not cause the collapse of (American financial services giant) Lehman Brothers. Nobody claims that. It’s a deliberate straw man argument.
In America the Federal (the US central bank) kept interest rates artificially low and created a consumer boom in order to buy cheap Chinese exports. American banks were encouraged to take extreme risk in investment banking and sell sub-prime mortgages, and oversight of these activities was reduced. Growth in the economy meant increasing tax revenues could be used to increase government spending. The boom could not last, and financial collapse caused a massive bust.
Here in Britain the Bank of England kept interest rates artificially low so we could all buy cheap Chinese goods, British banks made risky investments and took on sub-prime mortgages, Gordon Brown reduced oversight of the City and increasing tax revenues were used to increase public spending. The boom did not last and turned to bust. Gordon Brown had to use massive sums of taxpayers’ money to save British banks from the collapse he helped to cause.
Just what was the difference between America and Britain? Nothing, of course. It was the British Labour government which nearly bankrupted our country. None of the Labour Party leadership contenders appear to have learned any useful lessons at all and still inhabit an economic fantasy word.
FRANCIS LANKESTER
Worcester

Charities should take care who they support
SIR – Like Peter Talbot (‘Animal Welfare Over Metal Machinery’ – July 2) I am currently a supporter of SVR, indeed, I have gone to some personal expense of purchasing shares in the organisation to help continue their good work.
I am, however, equally dismayed at the way otherwise decent charities like SVR choose to partner with Worcester Racecourse and support the 42 deaths that have now been caused here since 2007.
SVR are joined on this rather shameful list of local organisations by the otherwise excellent St Richards Hospice (again who I have donated to historically), which choose to benefit financially from the taking of animals lives for nothing but entertainment. If you are a supporter of these organisations, perhaps you would like to ask them how many horses they are happy to see die to support that income stream.  
As a trustee of a national charity I cannot fathom the strategic decision taken by these custodians of heritage and compassion to associate themselves with this cruelty; especially when it so clearly attracts a significant risk around reputational damage and loss of income from disgruntled supporters.
PAUL CROUCH
St Peter’s, Worcester

A living wage?
SIR – Does our Queen really need £43,000,000.
I live on £300 a week perfectly happily.
Some people make a god of money.
GEORGE COWLEY

Worcester