I am pleased my letter (CP letters, 20-08-21) prompted some response but I have to disagree with Richard Ferraro who claims that 'by definition a fixed link would substantially increase vehicle volumes entering the IW's restricted road system'.

Not if it is managed properly! My suggestion of a £30 one-way ticket was based on the current Wightlink ticket pass price, but could easily be adjusted to keep the traffic volumes exactly as they are today.

If the cost is the same or higher than the ferries then what is the incentive for any more visitors to come flocking to the Island? I think many people actually enjoy the ferry because it makes them feel they are travelling abroad.

In response to Cliff Bennett (CP letters 27-08-21) I would say this. Red Funnel and Wightlink turn over £115m a year between them, which I appreciate includes catering sales.

If bridge tolls were kept in line with ferry costs and half the traffic transferred to a fixed link, that could generate £1.15 billion over 20 years — or substantially more with inflation taken into account.

The QE2 bridge over the Thames cost £120 million (the equivalent of £230 million today) so there's plenty of margin for a private finance investor. Once built, a fixed link requires minimal staffing with tolls being paid online (as with the QE2 bridge).

Finally, with all the environmental concerns at present, just switching the foot passenger traffic to electric trains would bring about a massive reduction in pollution generated by the Red Jet, Hovercraft etc.

And by the time such a link is built most cars will be electric so a similar saving on diesel for the numerous vehicle ferry crossings.