Celebrity obsession hinders good causes

While I do not disagree with many of Russell Brand's views on drug addiction, I do question why he was picked to give evidence to a Commons home affairs select committee (Treat drug addicts with compassion, Brand urges MPs, 25 April). It speaks volumes on how celebrity obsessed society has become that this lavish photo opportunity could have been provided. I recognise that Brand has experience of heroin addiction in his past, but so do many others. Some of them have, no doubt, gone on to help others directly following their own reformation rather than existing in the rarefied atmosphere of Hollywood stardom.

Noting that Harry Hill is a former doctor and Bob Mortimer once worked as a lawyer, can I now expect them both to be appointed as government special advisers in their respective fields of expertise?
Tim Matthews
Luton, Bedfordshire

• Russell Brand's engagement at the select committee inquiry into drugs was certainly amusing. However, it also revealed the nature of the inquiry. Why tackle the real issues, including the relationship between drugs and organised crime or the increasingly evident value of medical marijuana, when it's so much easier to portray advocates of liberalisation as well-meaning but ultimately not worthy of serious consideration? Amusing, certainly, but the joke's on us.
Mark Chapman

• Peter Beresford rightly regrets the "growing divide between small charitable organisations ... and the traditional large organisations" (Tax relief row exposes big charities' priorities, Society, 25 April). It should be added that the super-rich voluntary organisations delight in using celebrities to increase their funding and publicity. But wealthy celebrities sanction and reinforce inequalities of personal income and power. They are a part of the problem.
Bob Holman

Today's best video

Find your MP

Today in pictures