THERE has been much debate recently about the purpose and need for Trident, but that is just part of the puzzle. I bet if UK citizens were asked to identify the Malvinas Islands on a globe the overwhelming majority would be clueless even if they were told they were known by us as the Falkland Islands. Next year is the 40th anniversary of the Falklands War, a conflict which cost the UK taxpayer £2 billion and the lives of 237 servicemen to wrestle a few rocky outcrops back from Argentina. The struggle over sovereignty took place despite the fact that the Falkland Islands were not even “discovered” by the UK but we decided later they belonged to us.

Since 1982 the islands, which currently have a population of roughly 3,000, less than 30% of whom consider themselves to be British, has had a permanent UK military presence of approximately 1,200 regular members drawn from all three armed services and according to some sources accounts for up to 1.5% of the UK “defence” budget.

Just as in the case of Trident, I would question just how the average Joe in the UK has benefited from these 40-year-long arrangements. No doubt the Establishment response would be that we are protecting the wishes of the 30% of the islanders who want to remain British, but the real reason is that dominion over the Falklands will give us ownership and access to regional resources and a foothold in the Antarctic. However, as we have seen first-hand with the exploitation of Scotland’s North Sea oil, the common man gains little from the process. The Establishment, international corporations and their shareholders are the ultimate beneficiaries.

Meanwhile my "back of a fag-packet" calculations suggest that the UK Government is prepared to spend without question in the region of £30,000 per annum per Falkland Islander to maintain control of the place but doesn’t want to give some hard-up Scottish parents £20 to feed their kids. Government of the people by the people for the people? Aye, right.

David J Crawford, Glasgow.

FREE SPEECH RIGHT IS NOT ABSOLUTE

IN an age where, around the world, journalists are being harassed and jailed for telling truths that are unacceptable to those in positions of power and influence, it is strange to find the debate over free speech framed around Piers Morgan’s right to be nasty to people and Tess White’s right to make snarky comments in the Scottish Parliament. Even the Universal Declaration of Human Rights does not support the absolutist view of free speech or other rights, referring to that point where the exercise of one’s rights compromises the rights of others to do the same. At this point restraint or negotiation may be more appropriate.

Similarly, the idea that there is no right to take offence would be fine if offence were doled out equally. However, it is fairly obvious that certain groups are considered to be fair game in this respect, not only the obvious ones such as politicians and celebrities but ordinary people with honestly-held and relatively harmless views, while it is (often rightly, it must be said) considered beyond the pale to cause offence to some groups and plenty will take offence on their behalf.

The line between fair comment and hurtful can often become blurred and should be observed regardless of who is involved. Finally, as a former teacher, may we be spared more vague comments about education being the answer. The result of this will only be a bit of unnecessary fiddling with the curriculum accompanied by the sound of Stuart Waiton’s laptop starting up.

Robin Irvine, Helensburgh.

GRAVY TRAIN WILL HIT BUFFERS

CLIMATE change and net zero are gravy trains for some, and a useful tool for government to take our attention away from real problems such as our now-total lack of conventional defence, and the poor general health of the population.

However, the proponents of these schemes will be gone eventually, and the first few long power cuts will show the public what pursuit of the climate change mantra really means for them.

But the real limiting factor will be lack of money. We are living on ever-increasing debt, the interest on which will eventually become too much – or more likely the banks will stop creating this magic money when they realise that it is being used to cripple the means by which their interest is earned and paid.

Malcolm Parkin, Kinross.

COMPROMISE FOR THE MASKLESS

AS someone who is exempt from wearing a mask but is nonetheless aware of the distress that this can cause to others, I think I have found a compromise solution. I carry a foldable oriental hand fan, and when I am at the counter in a shop or coffee bar or close to another customer, I simply open my fan in front of my mouth and nose.

Incidentally, such fans are available from a very well-known and ubiquitous online retailer at a very modest price and in colours to go with every outfit.

Penny Ponders, Edinburgh.

NAME THAT SHIP

THERE was no mention in the announcements this week in the flurry of new bills by the Scottish Government ("Sturgeon seeks to ‘transform’ nation with legislative agenda", The Herald, September 8) of a “Name the Stricken Hull Bill”.

As widely reported, the two new Calmac ferries at the nationalised Ferguson’s yard in Port Glasgow are running four years late, and at least 100% over budget. The first of these two dual-fuelled ferries has been named Glen Sannox. A few early suggestions for the name of the second ferry include Boatie McBoatface 2, or The Spin Never Stops, or Nicola’s Folly, or Hair’s Bounty.

However, I am sure your creative readers could assist in finding a more appropriate name for the forlorn Hull 802.

Robin M Brown, Milngavie.