I DO not remember seeing the names Francis O’Grady, general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, or Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury, on any ballot papers at the last General Election. But both are making political demands which should be treated with contempt they deserve.

O’Grady is calling for a people’s vote on the final deal with the European Union (or as I would rephrase it, a losers vote, as remoaners still cannot accept they lost and we are leaving a sinking ship just in time).

Next we have Welby, who should be more concerned about filling his empty pews and promoting Christianity rather than standing on a soapbox at the TUC meeting spouting about big companies who are not paying enough tax, and his concern about zero contract hours in the workplace.

He is right about companies such as Amazon not paying their fair share, but as the Church he is supposed to head is committed to having millions of pounds invested in Amazon and also having employees on zero contract hours it is time he buried his head in shame, gave up the Archbishop’s job and joined the Labour Party. He would fit in nicely.

Bob Waite,

Holgate, York

A selective use of facts from columnist

A couple of weeks ago in his column in The Press Tim Murgatroyd exhorted the benefits of local journalism (I agree with him on that).

One of those benefits was that local journalists are more trusted than the London-centric media.

How strange then that he chose to undermine this trust in The Press with his usual misrepresentation and selective use of facts in his column on economics last week.

The IPPR report has some very worthy suggestions as to how to reduce inequality, but the IPPR is not right-leaning.

In its list of thinktanks The Guardian describes it as follows: ‘The IPPR rose out of the ashes of Labour’s 1987 election defeat, aiming to invigorate leftwing thinking’.

Space precludes a detailed discussion of how he arrives at his far left solution by his cherry picking of statements.

But, it is strange that he highlights the fundamental shift that Labour introduced in economic policy in the 40s but neglects to mention that the IPPR report also identifies the fundamental shift that the Thatcher Government made in the 1980s that was required to overcome the colossal damage done by “Old Labour” economics in the 70s, policies similar to those to which he regularly espouses.

Reform, yes, revolution no. Oh and perhaps he would like to have a chat with the Archbishop regarding his Church’s holding of Amazon shares?

Mike Huffington,

Walmgate, York