SIR – In the report about the university’s plans for a new student complex off Oldbury Road the uni chief is quoted as stating that “the vast majority of students who move in there will not drive”. I remember a similar report years ago where it was laughably stated that students could not afford private transport... and guess what? The roads all around our avenue are choked with cars on both sides.

There are plenty of other concerns about the huge influx of students and other people.

St John’s Medical Centre appears to be at capacity as you can never get an appointment with your chosen doctor. All the utility services will be at full stretch but will there be a new sewerage works? Will there be no power cuts? Will there be extra police and ambulance personnel and an increase of staff at the one hospital in Worcester? I suspect not.

But I was surprised to read that the crossing on Croft Road should have been one with lights control. My husband and I complained about the zebra crossing as being potentially dangerous due to its positioning, and were told it was due to the cost and the uni spokesman tells us he too was unhappy about it as there was a contribution for one with a lights system. What a shambles the whole thing appears to be.

Barbara Parker

St John’s, Worcester

Lib Dem has no answers

SIR – I read with amusement Lib Dem (remember them?) Charles Tucker’s letter (Worcester News, 14th July) where he attributed a medley of statements to me that I ‘didn’t quite say’ but ‘might just as well’. If I had wanted to make the points that Mr Tucker attacks me for, I would have made them. Mr Tucker has no explanation for the central points I raised in my letter. He does however demonstrate the phenomenon of cognitive dissonance; an anxiety arising from the rejection or contradiction of firmly-held beliefs. In this case his Europhilia and its rejection by the voting majority. On a final point, I’d ask Mr Tucker to read through UKIP’s full manifesto from last year. Perhaps we can debate how many of our policies are ‘from the 1950’s’. Co-incidentally, that decade saw the emergence of the proto-EU in the form of the ‘European Coal and Steel Community’.

Interesting to note the 50’s foundation of the community and its philosophy was moulded by those mid-20th century outlooks. Perspectives that have little relevance in the 21st century, globalised world.

James Goad

UKIP Worcester

Accept result and move on

Sir – Why are MPs having a debate on a second referendum about leaving the EU? Are we having the best of three then? Would there be any talk of a second vote if Remain had won? Of course not. It’s a few who can’t stand defeat throwing their toys out of the pram.

It was a fair vote and over 17.4 million voted to leave, a majority of over one and a quarter million.

What a lovely democracy we live in when the majority vote counts for nothing. Why don’t people just get on with it, and start working together to make the country great again?

Gb Dipper

Leominster

Makes sense to ban drones

SIR – I am not surprised at the proposed actions of the Malvern Hills Conservators involving drones and their possible prohibition.

Some years ago I was witness when another problem, similar but more dramatic, took place. This involved the landing of hot air balloons on the Malvern commons. Dog walkers lost their animals when they panicked. I had to recover a flock of geese from neighbouring fields.

Both the pilot and the gondola occupants were threatened, in no uncertain terms. Balloon firms have now been instructed not to land on common land.

Drones will have the same effect on livestock, particularly horses. With commons not having roadway fences, it does not need a PhD to calculate a possible catastrophe.

Steve Southwick

Callow End