PETER?FARRELL, of Rectory Road, East Ogwell, writes:

Like several of your readers I have been shocked by the tragic impact of recent weather, particularly in Dawlish and the Somerset Levels.

I also feel a bit stumped as to how best to show support without the charity campaigns which are often initiated following natural or human-inspired disasters around the globe. I would hope that government and other relevant budget holders are swiftly able to re-examine domestic and international priorities so that sufficient funding is identified, as already promised, to support those in immediate need and carry out infrastructure and other initiatives to reduce the likelihood of similar, or worse, happening again.

I do not agree however with the line of argument, which I have seen expressed in print and heard in local conversations, which suggests that the money to help victims of this flooding should come from cuts to foreign aid as 'charity begins at home'. It seems to me that it would be wrong to victimise still further those people around the world who are in the most vulnerable of positions, often in very long-term need, because of natural disasters or human actions, in order to alleviate similar need but in such a relatively affluent society such as ours. Much better, and fairer, I think, to look at our nation's spending plans in the round, and see what current government priorities might best be scaled down or dropped completely, which would not have such a devastating impact on people's lives.

The editorial in last week's paper referred to the HS2 train project: a scheme such as that would be much higher up my list to take a hit rather than foreign aid.MORE LETTERS IN OUR DIGITAL EDITION