In Depth:  Steve Fryer

Dear Editor,

In his letter (en March 2019) Richard Carter expresses concern at what he sees as the ‘creeping liberal secularism’ of the EU, with the implication that it is a bad influence on Britain.

Dear Editor,

The importance of ‘nation’ as a concept is sometimes referred to in the EU debate but often, I feel, confusing it with our modern idea of the 'nation state'. The thought-provoking article 'What is a Nation' in April's en mentions this problem.

Dear Editor,

The desire to stand with our neighbours, sharing and working together, is not inherently ‘humanistic’ as implied in your commentary on Brexit in August’s en. The referendum was a choice between partnership or ‘going it alone’. I chose partnership – and I did so as a Christian, not a humanist.

Dear Editor,

In the well-balanced article, ‘EU: pros and cons’ (April en), the writer states, on the ‘con’ side, that the UK Government’s vote is routinely ignored in the Council of Ministers. ‘Ignored’ is surely the wrong expression to use in the context of a vote being taken. A losing vote is not an ignored vote. It just means that the UK Government is usually out of step with the majority of other European governments. This is unfortunate, but we can’t really claim that the EU is ignoring us when successive UK governments have been able to arrange significant opt-outs from EU policy, as well as a rebate. It seems as if the EU has been trying to accommodate us rather than ignore us.

Dear Editor,

My thoughts on the article ‘Reaching local people’ in November’s en were different to those of your January correspondent.

Dear Editor,

As a Christian who is positive about the EU I’d like to pick up on your last (tentative) point in ‘the commentary’ (July EN ) – that the EU has been instrumental in keeping the peace in Europe.