Letters

Greco-Roman wrestling Sir: Rod Liddle suggests that some, perhaps many, middle-class voters on the right or centre right are deterred from supporting Reform because of their perception of the party as an unsavoury embarrassment (‘Can Reform smash its class ceiling?’, 23 May). Harold Macmillan in the second world war appreciated that the Americans – ‘great, big, vulgar, bustling people, more vigorous than we are’ – represented the equivalent of the Romans taking over from the declining, but perhaps more cerebral Greeks – the British. But he also argued: ‘We must run Allied Forces HQ [in Algiers] as the Greek slaves ran the operations of the Emperor Claudius.

Labour’s just deserts Sir: Last week’s leader hit the nail on the head (‘Desperate retreat’, 16 May). You have to wonder what is in the minds of the Labour party and specifically its potential new leaders Burnham, Rayner and Streeting. Their failure to read the room is what gave them the kicking they got at the local elections. Now they’re all expressing a wish to rejoin the EU, although Burnham will not apparently be campaigning on the issue in the forthcoming by-election. I bet he won’t! To bring an anti-Brexit, pro-EU agenda to an area dominated by Reform would be political suicide. Furthermore, if I were a constituent of Makerfield, I’d feel mightily annoyed that my vote was being used as a stepping stone in one person’s political career.

Tales from the City Sir: Simon Jenkins’s article on Liverpool Street Station (‘Horror storeys’, 9 May) is inaccurate, and an insult to every councillor on the City of London planning committee, whose professionalism I defend. Saying the committee was ‘clearly going to approve’ the application amounts to an allegation of predetermination. That is a serious charge against every councillor present. It is also untrue: 22 members heard the case and three voted against. Sir Simon writes that ‘both schemes were presented to a packed City planning committee’. This is also untrue. There was one planning application before the committee that day.

Pennies pinching Sir: I agree with much of this week’s editorial, except for two points (‘Nunc dimittis’, 25 April). As a formerly Positively Vetted civil servant, I cannot see what point there is in vetting an applicant for a job if the outcome of the vetting (as opposed of course to the private details) is not made known to the appointer. Who was responsible for this not happening in the current case still remains obscure. The second point I take issue with is your pressing for the end of the triple lock for pensions. I wish you would suggest how pensioners who have the ‘full’ state pension, and just enough more to put them over the threshold for Pension Credit, are expected to live?

Flat broke Sir: John Power’s article on the property squeeze (‘Flatlined’, 18 April) identifies a symptom of a deeper problem, the overregulation of property. Buyers are deterred by spiralling service charges, which are themselves driven by layers of legislation, insurance premium hikes and rocketing labour costs. Those still willing to take the plunge are then hit by a tax system that actively discourages transactions. In the absence of buy-to-let demand, it is no surprise values are dropping. The solution is obvious. Stamp duty, with its crude cliff edges, freezes activity and distorts prices. A landlord or renovator can face £20,000 or more in tax on an entirely ordinary flat, a deterrent by design. This is not a plea for higher prices.

Same old Sir: In Michael Simmons’s otherwise excellent yet alarming essay on ‘Benefits treats’ (11 April), one sentence spoiled the rest of my day: to say that pensioners are ‘protected from and by every government decision’ is maddening nonsense. Pensioners are affected in exactly the same way as everyone else whenever the government of the day changes anything. Every time we switch on the heating, shop, fill up the car, pay any bill, we are suffering under the same government-fuelled inflation as everybody else. The chaotic finances of local government mean our council tax goes up along with everybody else’s. Every time tax thresholds are frozen, many of us pay more tax.

Clerical errors Sir: Glad though I am that The Spectator bucks the trend in its conviction that the C of E is alive and well (Easter Special, 4 April), I cannot help but be frustrated by the sense that too many of these articles speak of, for and to a secure metropolitan elite. Of course Gen Z flocks to the church of Four Weddings and a Funeral. But what is there for those of us who do not live in such places of power and plenty? My sister and I, aged 19 and 23, are two Gen Z folk intellectually serious about faith. When we return home to Mid Devon and attend our childhood church for high days and holidays, we find a congregation that numbers about five, including our parents. And that’s if there even is a service.

Dark Greens Sir: Both your leading article and Angus Colwell’s cover piece (‘Zacked Off’, 28 March) are bang-on. Although I have never been an activist, I do have some previous as an environmentalist. Among other things, I was briefly employed by the Green party at the turn of the century. I felt I could support it because it represented something important that was otherwise missing from political discourse. It was vaguely liberal, or even libertarian, but not really on the left-right axis. In the mid-2010s I rejoined the party for two years and found that it had been heavily colonised by ‘progressives’ but still contained a decent core. No longer.

Leave the US to it Sir: I was struck by the dichotomy of your 21 March issue. Christopher Caldwell describes President Donald Trump’s world-affecting miscalculation in attacking Iran (‘The end of Trumpism’), while the editorial exhorts us to climb aboard this runaway train to ‘finish the job’. The conflux of multinational involvement in this fiasco is already reminiscent of the tumbling dominoes of August 1914. Underlined by three colliding religions, the scale is now much larger and touches the entire planet. The Americans, for whom the ‘special relationship’ is skin-deep, made this bed and should lie in it, not us. J.B.

State of the nations Sir: My spirits were raised by your stirring defence of the forthcoming royal visit to America (‘Britain’s Trump card’, 14 March). Its contemporary importance can be viewed in the light of Charles Moore’s Note (same issue) that the remaining hereditary peers have just been removed from the House of Lords. The monarch has thereby become the only person with a part in our legislature by virtue of inheritance, a situation bound to encourage those with republican instincts. Their tired old question will be resurrected: why can we not elect our head of state? The answer will be evident in pictures from the White House.

The West’s track record Sir: I read with much sadness Matthew Parris’s reservations about western attempts at regime change in Iran (‘Is this Starmer’s finest hour?’, 7 March). Sadness because he is quite correct, given the West’s track record in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria. He rightly alludes to Benjamin Netanyahu’s ‘Greater Israel’ plans amid destabilised, chaotic neighbours. In Syria in late 2010, I spoke with resident Sunni, Shia, Alawi, Christian and even Jewish residents from Homs and Hama to As-Suweida and Aleppo: well over 90 per cent pointed to their freedom of association and of worship, the women to the secondary and tertiary education they could enjoy, and all because the Assads could guarantee these things.

Bring back wisdom Sir: Douglas Murray is right that reducing the educational attainment of politicians is not the answer to people’s demand for change (‘The perils of idiocracy’, 28 February). But we do have an educational divide driven by disrespect, which graduates have caused and need to fix. Historically, non-graduates associated those of higher education with values like wisdom, curiosity and insight, thereby qualifying educated people to fix complex problems and make big decisions affecting everyone else. Now, people see insufficient evidence of such qualities among those in charge. The less that higher education imparts genuine wisdom and expertise, the more it relies on looking down on ‘respectable’ people and opinions.

Defence agreement Sir: If (a big ‘if’, I know) our politicians really would like to address the parlous state of the UK’s defences (‘Indefensible’, 21 February) but refrain from the necessary tax increases and/or spending cuts out of fear their unpopularity would open the door to their opponents, they should consider adopting a device the Danes have used to great effect for many decades. ‘Political agreements’, which I came across when advising the Danish finance ministry in the 1990s, are legally binding, long-term contracts between political parties to support and implement specified courses of action, regardless of who is in power, and requiring all parties’ sign-off to amend.

Growing pains Sir: It was reassuring to learn that Wes Streeting is a reader of The Spectator and also shares the view of many that his government has ‘no growth strategy’ (‘To lead or not to lead’, 14 February). However, it is a shame that following the October 2024 Budget he did not take up the Spectator’s ‘Refer a Friend’ offer, as both Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves may have benefited from its early insights. Many of your writers and readers clearly predicted that the disastrous Budget would create wider problems for the UK, damaging growth, adding cost of living pressures, increasing company failures, raising unemployment and prompting further wealth flight. All this is now coming to pass and underpins the current gloom.

Brute force Sir: General Sir Nick Carter is correct to point out the fragility of the UK’s armed forces today (‘Empty shell’, 7 February). He is also right to highlight the level of expenditure which will be necessary to overcome 25 years of structural under-investment in defence if the UK and its allies are to deter or win any future war. However, the suggestion that the British armed forces might be saved – relatively cheaply – by the institution of AI-automated kill chains alone is questionable. Indeed, it may be just another mirage of the type which has contributed to the current predicament. Autonomous weapons systems have existed for many years. With AI, they will proliferate and may become more important.

Chagos stupidity Sir: To British Establishment watchers, Michael Gove’s dissection of the dubious and devious machinations of Jonathan Powell, Richard Hermer, Philippe Sands et al over the Chagos Islands (‘The guilty men’, 31 January) should come as no surprise. Powell, in the Irish Troubles context in particular, has form. His negotiating position more resembled that of an imported diplomat than an official of the UK government. What is surprising in the Chagos fiasco, however, is the seeming gullibility of some at least on the American side. Are they, one wonders, working to a covert agenda of withdrawal and retrenchment, or are they just very stupid? Terry Smith London NW11 Democracy denial?

Class war Sir: Your leading article, ‘More in common’ (24 January), laments the ‘civil war’ between Reform and the Conservatives. But this division goes much deeper. Reform’s core support is the patriotic white working class in the so-called Red Wall seats – the people (often male) who supported Brexit and flocked to Boris Johnson in 2019 when he promised to get Brexit done. They are cultural conservatives but economic statists. That’s why (against his better instincts) Nigel Farage backs steel and water nationalisation and is soft on welfare and pensions. Reform’s natural political bedfellows are not the Tories, but the SDP (left economically, right culturally).

How to kill reading Sir: I am appalled by the response to Andrew Watts’s concerns about the teaching of reading at his son’s school. His article reveals a system almost guaranteed to discourage reading and an alarming turning away by a school from its responsibility to parents who have entrusted it with their children (‘Schoolboy error’, 17 January). Effective reading involves immersing oneself in the text without distractions, going at one’s own pace. The degree of involvement will be determined by the material and by the engagement of the reader. The remark by Andrew’s son’s head of English, that the school’s reading programme was not supposed to encourage reading for pleasure, indicates a wilful disdain for effective reading.

No EU turn Sir: Before Dr Brian Mathew’s letter on ‘How to restore prosperity’ appeared (10 January), the FT printed an article making it clear that Britain’s powerful financial services industry would not be included in the government’s much-vaunted ‘reset’ with the EU. It quoted figures from the City saying that this was ‘the last thing they wanted’ and explaining they were doing much better outside EU regulation. The article contained a reported comment from the government to the effect that they had taken note of the City’s views and that financial services would not now be included in their cherished initiative.