Martyn Sadler

Further to my article in this week's League Express, I explain why Prince Harry seems uniquely well qualified to be the Patron of Rugby League and I hope that he can encourage more young people to get involved with our sport. See whether you agree.

I thought you enjoyed fighting your corner. Oddly enough I think that the AOB forum is full of people who are deeply conservative, but perhaps not Deeply Conservative. We are all playing the modern game of moral preening and virtue signalling.

On that, I can agree with you.

For the second time, I'm not equating Harry's status with anyone else's. It's you who is doing that. I would have loved to spend some time living in Glasgow. I think it's one of the most interesting cities in the UK, although at one time it would have been quite dangerous. The history of the Glasgow gangs is a fascinating piece of social history. I assumed you must have lived there at some point. I wasn't objecting to your moniker, just wondering why you chose it.

The definition of a zero-hours contract, according to the Chartered Institute of Personnel Development, is: "an agreement between two parties that one may be asked to perform work for the other but there is no set minimum number of hours. The contract will provide what pay the individual will get if he or she does work and will deal with the circumstances in which work may be offered (and, possibly, turned down)." That isn't a million miles away from Harry's situation, given that he is presumably working for his grandmother, regardless of whether he's wealthy or not. Zero-hours contract are not necessarily taken up only by poorer people, even though many are. It's annoying when someone like you tries to put words into other people's posts, whether mine or anyone else's, that they actually made no reference to. As a matter of interest, what persuaded you to choose a moniker that refers to Glasgow gang culture?

Don't talk rubbish! You know perfectly well that I'm not insulting anyone and you look like a fool by pretending otherwise.

I would have thought that he is already on a zero-hours contract.

Sad to hear this. One of those BBC presenters whose name was synonymous with the subject he talked about. His only fault was that his description of films sometimes made them sound better than they actually were.

I'm always amazed at the way some people like to poke a stick at a dangerous animal.

Of course. But if someone like JonM, who clearly wants to pay more tax, could organise that payment through his tax return then it would effectively be him giving philanthropically to the government to pay for the services that he obviously values. Why should he be prevented from doing that just because you may not want to do the same thing?

What I meant was that through the tax system I would strongly discourage people from having two homes. The rental sector wouldn't be affected.

I suppose you think it's baloney because you don't agree with her. Although Corbyn didn't use the word "storming", as of course you wouldn't expect him to, he did, in my view, give a dog whistle to that effect. Perhaps Saintslass is a little better at spotting dog whistles than you are.

The post by Saintslass contained a number of assertions about Harrods donating £1 million and doing various other things. She referred to a company that owned the Kensington block that will house the residents being sold at cost price. I would like to know whether those were lies, as Griff appeared to suggest. As far as "storming" the properties of the wealthy is concerned, Corbyn said: “Occupy, compulsory purchase it, requisition it, there’s a lot of things you can do," on Peston's programme. I'm very happy to concede that "storming" is at least partly an exaggeration, although I can imagine some people being encouraged to break into properties by those words. I happen to believe that no one should be able to own and profit from more than one residential property and that no one should be able to own a freehold or long leasehold property who isn't a bona-fide resident of the country. I find it appalling to see properties deliberately held empty when so many people are homeless, but I also find it unacceptable to see some people having second homes when some people don't have one. If I were the PM for a day I would tax capital gains from second homes at 100 per cent.

You've lost me there. Can you explain what you mean?

It takes a lot to pull the wool over your eyes. I said 'supposedly' because Healey was never on record, as far as I know, of disavowing the wider application of that comment when taken out of the context in which he actually made the remark.