I was totally astounded when I read Mr Corcoran’s letter stating that ‘it was not too bleak for Labour!’ You have to have the thickest rosecoloured glasses not to recognise that the result was not only bleak for Labour but a total disaster.

They will never be in power again until they ditch Momentum and return to the middle ground.

Mr Corcoran refers back to the popularity of the Labour Party in 2017.

At that stage Mr Corbyn was new and fresh and offering change.

Since then his true persona and beliefs have become known.

The 2017 manifesto was attractive because it included, for example, commitment to free university education. A promise which they have since acknowledged was not one they could have funded.

He mentions Boris Johnson’s lies – only time will tell. The 2019 Labour campaign was based on lies, bribes and scare stories. On Brexit they flipped between Remain and Leave, eventually trying to have a foot in both camps.

It is stated that Mr Corbyn has done the honourable thing and resigned.

Did he have any choice? It would seem that he is hanging on long enough to influence the choice of his successor. If the Labour Party manifesto was so popular, why was it rejected by the electorate?

If Labour had won the election they would have reduced the voting age to 16 and given the vote to immigrants. Boris will retaliate by reviewing and reducing the number of Parliamentary seats, ensuring that all voters have proven ID and reviewing the postal vote loopholes.

I am disappointed that so many good, moderate Labour MPs such as Frank Field and Rebecca Flint have lost their seats as a result of the election and deselection by extreme left constituencies. I hope that the new Parliament will be a less confrontational place with government more by consensus.

I do not know why Mr Corcoran feels it necessary to continually print his qualifications. Isn’t that elitist? Possibly it is to try to give his views some dubious credibility.

M Cooper GCE ‘O’ level. Failed.