How about tackling banking ‘top cats’?

Longfield Road,


MICHAEL Dennett (letters, January 27) has misunderstood my letter.

I wrote “mitigate” which is not synonymous with his “exonerate”.

Nor did David Chaytor and others try to hide behind Parliamentary privilege - they argued unsuccessfully that the Bill of Rights required trial not by Crown Court but by the High Court of Parliament itself.

Certainly “Thous shalt not steal” - yet whoever emptied his pen of the boss’s ink at 4.59pm every Friday?

At the other end of the spectrum, Ruskin attacked usury, ie the charging of interest on loans at no cost, labour or risk to the lender, as worse than theft; for the usurer is himself deceived that “money can grow out of money, whereas all usury is increase to one person only by decrease to another.”

Gordon Brown sought to persuade Governments to regulate a global market that uses money amorally like in a game of Monopoly; but David Cameron, who said in the election that bailed-out banks in substantial public ownership should limit bonuses to £2,000 seems to have caved in to the RBS, whose Mr Hester, on a yearly wage of millions, is in line for some £2 million extra.

So yes, benefit fraud is anti-social and needs to include the top cats, to whom we have blindly let slip the world’s economy.

Michael chides me for my reference to Olwen Jennings; and yes, I ought to have begin it with the words “on another topic”, for I was pointing out that a question I put to her in your columns last year had yet to be answered.

So his words on my recitude or whatever must have been jesting - didn’t St Paul write that “there is none that is righteous, no not one”?

Life’s about getting one another onto higher ground.