((Spoilers down to 'Kerblam!' lie ahead.))

Spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler

Hey Doctor, it's me, Morgan; we met that time with the evil meatloaf, you probably don't remember. Anyway, I've been following your most recent series, and I have a fairly serious concern. To whit: why do you keep letting people die?

I'm not talking about Grace back in The Woman Who Fell To Earth; you couldn't do anything about that, and you worked hard to save people. And nobody died in The Ghost Monument, though you certainly walked through a lot of previous death - and discussion of genocide elsewhere - without feeling like maybe you should do something about it. But then things started to go off-piste.

'Rosa'? You did a whole rant about how terrible guns are, then had absolutely no problem with your buddy Ryan shooting a guy into the undefined distant past.

'Arachnids in the UK'? You let the giant spider die. I can think of a million ways you could've saved it - take it to a planet or time with higher oxygen levels, to name but one! - but you sat there looking sad while it suffocated slowly to death.

'The Tsuranga Conundrum'? I mean, you did all right, but isn't the fact that an emergency medical organisation wires their ambulances to explode maybe slightly concerning to you? That looks like a wrong that needs righting to me.

'Demons of the Punjab'... why did Prem have to die, exactly? The only answer you've got is 'because Yaz has never heard of him', but couldn't you come up with some way to save him and preserve the timeline? You did in Pompeii, and later regenerated into Peter Capaldi to remind yourself of that! I get that you were worried about this turning out like Rose and her dad, but by the end of that episode Pete knew he was sacrificing himself. Prem was just trying to talk his brother down, and given his non-threatening attitude, I don't even know why the (Hindu! Like him!) rider shot him. Even if you didn't want to interfere in the Partition - not even one tiny bit - you could definitely have saved his life.

But that pales in comparison to 'Kerblam!', where - I'm sorry, Doctor - you went full-on corporate shill. Let's review the ending of your adventure there:

-You unilaterally support the computer which killed a woman just to make a point.
-You let the mega-corporation get away with only paying their staff for half of their minumum estimate for the length of the shutdown. Two weeks paid leave for a month's maintenance? That's exploitation!
-And - oh yeah - you deliberately killed a man.

Because let's not mince words - that's exactly what you did. You let the man you outnumbered, what, four to one? Five? Run down into a room full of bombs. And then you - you, Doctor, quite deliberately - set those bombs off. You didn't have to. There was no benefit to you from ordering the robots to open the parcels rather than just making them stand there holding them. You just wanted to kill an angry young working-class man.

I get that you're trying to be non-interventionist these days. I can't say I get why - that's the sort of message they spout on Gallifrey, which you ran away from, remember? - but I get it. And I'm sure you use that to justify letting innocent creatures and people die, and allowing corporations to exploit their workers. But how - how, Doctor? - do you use it to justify cold-blooded murder?

-Sincerely,

Morgan, Tigereye Castellan of the Continuity Council of Gallifrey-in-Exile