I FIRST came upon Meghan Markle in 2015, not yet linked to Harry. She was researching her ancestry in Malta. Her accompanying publicity machine demanded coverage in the Times Of Malta commensurate with her being a major US TV star [sic]. Some forget that, such was the later excitement of her wedding, the right-wing Tory press traced her heritage back, obligingly, to the Court of King Henry VIII. Little did we know her life was so miserable as we apparently have a racist media, royal family and public.

The only problem with this narrative is that recent global academic research (as Kemi Badenoch has outlined in the Commons), portrays the UK as a welcoming, tolerant, multi-racial, multi-cultural society.

Los Angeles is the home of the world's greatest dream factory and I wonder if Meghan struggles to differentiate reality from fantasy? She told Nancy Pelosi her childhood was one of near poverty yet she attended exclusive kindergartens and private schools. Of course, she went on to marry a Prince but, were they alive, the Grimm brothers could sue for copyright. Could she be lying? She says she has no sister (she had). Harry says she has no Dad (he is an award-winning lighting director). He is the person Harry, banking £80m for the Netflix deal, criticised for a photographic deal at the time of his daughter's wedding.

It is a valid question, given she had to apologise to the High Court that she "forgot" she had briefed the authors of the biography Finding Freedom. Even Netflix is embarrassed, as the trailer highlights crowd events not pertaining to her – for example, Katie Price's court appearance, a Harry Potter premiere, Michael Cole beginning a prison term, and Kate being harassed outside her flat and others.

But wait, what is this? She says her engagement interview was rehearsed, but no. Mishal Hussain's response that "recollections may vary" echoes those of the late Queen's reaction to the accusation of Palace racism in the Oprah Winfrey interview; an interview in which the North American media found 17 contradictions. Meghan says that after she was married, the Palace confiscated her driving licence, keys and passport (yet she undertook four tours in six months). Netflix claims it asked the Palace for comment. The Palace reiterated that it did not.

Harry and Meghan were said to want privacy. We should oblige. They are, clearly, the world's biggest victims: not the people of Ukraine; not the Covid bereaved. Let the narcissistic eco warriors, with their hypocritical gas-guzzling limousines and private jets, leave us in peace; but don't exploit the Sussex brand.

John V Lloyd, Inverkeithing.

MY HOPE FOR RECONCILIATION

IT is indeed a sad state of affairs when a family fractures and is at war with itself.

In every such collapse, there are two sides to the story.

It is particularly poignant in the case of our royal family where this rupture is played out openly in the media for all to gawk at those miserable goings-on.

Both sides have taken their stances, both seeing right on their own side and malice in the other.

Diana, if there is an up above, must be heartbroken to see her beloved sons at daggers drawn when she would have wished to see them working in tandem and harmony.

Perhaps too much metaphorical blood has now been spilled in public to allow the healing of the open wounds and for a genuine reconciliation to make the broken relationships whole again.

I just hope that Harry and Meghan along with William and Kate manage to put their differences aside to repair and renew what was once a strong and reliable relationship.

There can be no doubt that such would be the dearest wish of the boys' mother and would bring a broad smile to her spirit in heaven.

Denis Bruce, Bishopbriggs.

IS FLYNN RUNNING SCARED?

YOU report that the SNP's new leader at Westminster, Stephen Flynn, is uneasy about Nicola Sturgeon's plan to use the next General Election as a "de facto referendum" ("'It's us on the frontline': Flynn hints at concerns over 'de facto' Indyref2 plan", December 11). This plan has been dismissed by Professor James Mitchell, among others. After all, the vote will be in a General Election. The clue is in the name.

Mr Flynn's objection is that such a strategy would put SNP MPs on the frontline of the nationalist struggle. Call me naïve, but isn't that precisely where one would expect SNP MPs to be?

Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh.

SNP CHANGES ARE NO BIG DEAL

“AND a great clamour was heard in the land”. So the unionist punditry would have you believe about the SNP and “deep divisions and splits”. Three SNP MPs leaving their front bench posts is hardly the same as the Tories fighting over Brexit for 30 years, expelling senior members of the party and having three different leaders in the last year. Or the Labour Party disbarring their previous leader as well as preventing anyone to the left of Jim Murphy standing for Labour in elections.

The SNP does have a history of splits over fundamentalists or gradualists, but to claim this as some kind of Spartacus moment is beyond absurd.

GR Weir, Ochiltree.

CRIMINALISING PEACEFUL PROTEST

EVERY year for many years Catholics have held pro-life vigils outside hospitals where for the 40 days of Lent we pray for mothers and babies going through the trauma of abortion. Now MSP Gillian McKay with the enthusiastic support of Nicola Sturgeon wants to criminalise us.

Buffer zones are unnecessary. Existing legislation can deal with any problems that might arise at pro-life events.

This proposal is a direct attack on Catholics. Harassment, intimidation and threatening behaviour are already criminal offences. There is no evidence that Catholics taking part in pro-life vigils engage in any of these activities. We have never seen or heard of any incidents at these events. These proposals seek to criminalise lawful, peaceful pro-life witness and represent a threat to everyone's freedom of speech.

The use of the term “safe access zones” is designed to create an impression that pro-life vigils present a danger to women. This is entirely false. Buffer zones are intended to silence any opposition to abortion.

The “precautionary” approach is most disturbing. It is designed to punish Catholics attending pro-life vigils before any offence has been committed. The police will have the power to arrest anyone for just being there without any evidence of a crime. Such a proposal has no place in a free society.

Protecting the peaceful exercise of the rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly is fundamental to the rule of law in a free society. No one should be threatened with punishment for peacefully expressing their view on abortion or any other controversial issue.

Brian McKenna, Dumbarton.

UK MUST SEIZE THE DAY ON COAL

HOSTILE views on the reopening of the Cumbrian coal mine ("Protest held at Whitehaven coal mine site", December 11) are unrealistic in these days of acute and chronic energy crises, shared with the rest of the western world.

Likewise, "going green" for energy is largely avoidable, and can be without tears. Expecting the rest of the world to respond to Britain's example is over-optimistic, like yearning for the days of the Empire.

The energy emergency is much more demanding and threatening than even the rather bogus "climate emergency", which lacks convincing supporting evidence.

UK governments are to blame, having neglected for years to maintain our national power power supply reserves. They have ignored that vital need. Now, like the rest of the western nations which accept the UN's Green decarbonising advice, of dubious benefit, we are in an acute jam which direly threatens domestic and industrial imperatives.

We cannot afford to depend on fuel for power from other nations, however friendly, because energy shortfalls are affecting them no less than us.

Nor are wind-dependent renewable sources to be trusted. Their intermittency means they can help us only minimally. A mere 3-4% of the world's energy needs come from renewables, often down to less than 1-3% of the total demand. It is unsafe, therefore, to fail fully to utilise our indispensable national fossil fuel assets.

We are wonderfully adequately endowed with fuels, for centuries if need be. Since most of the rest of the world has no scruples about using fossil fuels, we could not help to save the planet by restricting their availability and uses.

The alleged climate change-based necessity to curb CO2 output is now being very seriously questioned. Reducing CO2 release is likely to be the wrong means in attempts to stabilise the climate. The many references to the sun's role in controlling world climate include the Lightfoot and Ratzer papers in the Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 2022.

The main coal mining problems lie first in miners' health and safety, although modern mining methods will minimise risks. Secondly, although mining creates new jobs, many will have to be for foreign, experienced workers.

So, despite the climate alarmists' anger and perceived fears, revived coal mining is a "needs-must" opportunity for us and our nation.

(Dr) Charles Wardrop, Perth.

WINTER WORRY

WHAT a beautiful winter morning it is: bare-branched trees seen through the mist, a frost so thick it looks like snow and not a breath of wind. Only one thing troubles me. With all the country’s wind turbines becalmed, demand for energy at a peak and a shortage of gas right across the Continent, how long will the National Grid cope? Will we face rolling power cuts this Christmas?

Otto Inglis, Crossgates, Fife.