George Carey’s claim, in his letter to police, that he only wished to get across bishop Peter Ball’s personal torment, and did not want to influence their inquiries, is astonishing (Friends in high places backed bishop accused of sex offences, 1 January). Surely Carey and others who wrote to police and prosecutors in support of Ball would have known that extenuating circumstances are within the purview of the sentencing judge and do not and should not influence any criminal investigation or prosecution.
This case highlights the fact that, despite all the claims, not everybody is equal before the law. One who can produce 2,000 letters from influential authorities can tweak the law in his favour. It is important that the remaining letters are disclosed so that we know the extent of the abuse of public office exercised by these authorities. This case is a serious public matter requiring full investigation. It is not now about Ball but about our public services.
Sushma Lal
Ystrad Meurig, Ceredigion
• Your story on the letters written in support of Peter Ball is yet another that was revealed only because of the Freedom of Information Act. Recently, the TaxPayers’ Alliance (TPA) has been calling for the FoI Act to be protected, rightly arguing that government transparency is in the public interest. Government should publish more data, the high-profile campaign group says, obviating the need for FoI requests and the attendant cost to government of their processing.
But the TPA doesn’t believe that it itself should be transparent. It fails to disclose its funders or anything about them, only stating on its website that the TPA is “entirely supported by private donations from its 80,000 supporters”. Transparency is important in campaign groups too.
Dr Alex May
Manchester
• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com
