Mr Glen misunderstood, and so does not address, the key point I made in my letter ('Here is a tale of two cities', Journal Postbag, September 20) and suggests that I was ‘blaming the banks’ for the Salisbury attack ('Don’t blame UK banks' Postbag, September 27). A closer perusal of my letter will show that in no way did I do so.

The attack on the Skripals by the Russians has so far cost Salisbury £7.5m, and the cost to Wiltshire Council in lost car park charges alone is said to be £2m. I pointed out in my letter that the City of London – for which Mr Glen is currently the minister – has profited, and continues to profit, from a range of shady activities which involves billions of rubles being stolen from Russia and the Ukraine. Four of the big accountancy firms - and some of the large legal firms - are active in what a select committee called ‘dirty money’.

I suggested that Mr Glen could ask (not ‘force’ as he misquotes me as saying) the City to underwrite the losses that Salisbury, and Mr Glen’s constituents, have suffered.

This is the point that Mr Glen does not answer. He simply says that the government, i.e. the taxpayer, will provide the money. Why should the taxpayers and community charge payers be asked to fork out millions while the City of London continues to make such large profits? Mr Glen’s claim to ‘put his constituents first’ rings hollow while this is allowed to continue.

Peter Curbishley

Great Durnford