The Spectator

Saturday

The Spectator

The Spectator at war: Commons courtesy

From our UK edition

From 'Parliament and Registration', The Spectator, 10 July 1915: The modern rigidity of the party system has enabled Ministers, once they have attained to power, to despise the House of Commons, for they know that the Whips will see that the party votes straight, and that is all they care about. This is a fundamental mistake, for the House of Commons in war time quite as much as in peace time is, with all its defects, one of the most valuable of our institutions. It provides the machinery for the criticism of the Government under conditions in which that criticism can most effectively be made and most effectively be answered.

The Spectator

The Spectator at war: Thought for food

From our UK edition

From ‘The Grand Victualler to the Nation’, The Spectator, 10 July 1915: As important as the supply of munitions is the supply of food. One, indeed, is useless without the other. No matter how much shell we have, we shall not be able to use it if our men are starving and are too weak from privation to load their guns or continue to keep up the supply of ammunition. If we are to ensure that this country shall always be abundantly victualled, we must take vigorous and timely action. If we do not, there is very grave risk that one day the country will be suddenly awakened by the news that there is a serious shortage of food, and that unless some tremendous effort is made we shall run the risk of starvation.

Thursday

The Spectator

Letters | 9 July 2015

From our UK edition

The case for Daesh Sir: For once the admirable Rod Liddle has got it completely wrong (‘You can’t take the Islam out of Islamic State’, 4 July). We absolutely shouldn’t call the homoerotic, narcissistic death cult ‘Islamic State’ — not because it offends ordinary Muslims, nor because it has nothing to do with Islam (it has everything to do with Islam) but because it legitimises and validates the preposterous project. The media has a responsibility not to run terrorist propaganda unchallenged. Politicians, including the Prime Minister, are starting to wise up to this and should be applauded for doing so. We are in an information war with our enemies.

The Spectator

Barometer | 9 July 2015

From our UK edition

Naming terror David Cameron and the BBC argued over what to call the terror group most papers refer to as Isis — with the PM preferring Isil and the BBC continuing to call it Islamic State. Two more terror groups whose names caused problems in Britain: — The Red Army Faction was a German terror group which existed between 1970 and 1998, when it declared itself dissolved. Faced with the acronym RAF, British media preferred to call the group by its nickname the Baader-Meinhof Gang. — In the 1970s Italy was terrorised by a group known as the Red Brigades, most notorious for kidnapping and murdering the former prime minister Aldo Moro in 1978.

The Spectator

Portrait of the week | 9 July 2015

From our UK edition

Home In his Budget, George Osborne, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, slowed the planned rate of bringing in £12 billion of welfare cuts. He forecast a surplus by 2020. The bank levy would be reduced but a surcharge on bank profits imposed. The total of benefits that a family can claim a year would be cut to £23,000 in London and £20,000 outside it. Tax credits for those with more than two children were to be reduced. Local authority and housing association tenants in England who earn more than £30,000 (£40,000 in London) would have to pay more rent. Maintenance grants for students would be turned into loans. Income tax thresholds were raised.

The Spectator

One-nation economics

From our UK edition

In his hastily scripted victory speech, David Cameron hit upon a mission that he wanted to define his remaining years in office. ‘I want my party, and I hope the government I would like to lead, to reclaim a mantle that we should never have lost: the mantle of one nation,’ he said. The problem was obvious: how could he reconcile this phrase with the hideous financial decisions that he had to make in office? With having to decimate not just unemployment benefits, but the support given to the millions trapped in low pay? George Osborne started to give his answer with his Budget this week. His main decision was a to introduce a new ‘living wage’ of £7.20 an hour, rising to £9 an hour by 2020.