Tax avoidance | Dangerous Dogs Act | French infrastructure planning | Pithy letters
The news that “firms giving advice on aggressive tax avoidance could face large fines” (17 August) is welcome. However, fines will be borne by the companies and the worry is that they will be treated, as they are now, as part of the cost of doing business. Not until “respected members of the community” working for the big four accountancy firms are jailed will this moral injustice be ended.
Paul Brannen MEP
Labour, North-East of England
• The horrific death of David Ellam (Dog kills man just days after police returned it to owner, 17 August) tragically highlights the failure of breed-specific legislation in section 1 of the Dangerous Dogs Act, which classifies dogs as dangerous based on their appearance rather than their actions. The fact that a few measurements can determine whether a dog is dangerous or not – rather than its behaviour – has never made sense and in this case led to heart-breaking consequences. Blue Cross wants to see a repeal of section 1 and instead a focus on empowering enforcers to tackle irresponsible owners and dangerous behaviour of any breed of dog before attacks happen, to keep our communities safe.
Becky Thwaites
Head of public affairs, Blue Cross pet charity