The Spectator

Friday

The Spectator

The Spectator at war: Who governs Britain?

From our UK edition

From 'Government by Newspaper', The Spectator, 29 May 1915: WE went to press last week too early to comment upon the outrageous attack made by the Daily Mail upon Lord Kitchener. In condemning Lord Northcliffe for his action in this matter we find it difficult to show that restraint and moderation of language which the gravity of the situation demands. Though, in our opinion, the importance of the whole incident and the power of Lord Northcliffe to injure the Secretary for War or anybody else have been very much exaggerated, the attack deserves, and must receive, the severest reprobation.

Thursday

The Spectator

Letters | 28 May 2015

From our UK edition

Why we don’t need mayors Sir: There are a number of arguments against Steve Hilton’s call for more than 10,000 mayors (‘We need 10,000 mayors’, 23 May). One is that such an idea ruptures the whole tradition of British municipal administration, under which a system of elected councils is maintained to which executive officers are answerable. Another is that it may be doubted whether there is enough administrative talent available to exercise a substituent mayoral system effectively and efficiently. Politics will always get in the way, for one thing — a factor that our present system of councils takes into account. Form is not so far encouraging, either. Mr Hilton might like to ‘jet’ over to mayoral Bristol and see a bad idea in action.

The Spectator

Barometer | 28 May 2015

From our UK edition

Steam privatisation Cunard celebrated its 175th birthday by sailing three liners down the Mersey. The formation of the Cunard Line was an early triumph of privatisation. — The Post Office had been operating a monthly service to New York with sailing brigs since 1756. In 1836 a parliamentary committee decided that a steamship service should replace it, and that it would be more efficient for the Admiralty to put it out to tender to private operators. — Samuel Cunard defeated the Great Western Steamship Company and the St George Steam Packet Company by offering a fortnightly service from Liverpool for an annual subsidy of £55,000. The service, which at first only reached Halifax, began in May 1840.

The Spectator

Portrait of the week | 28 May 2015

From our UK edition

Home A Bill to enable a referendum on whether voters wanted Britain to ‘remain’ in the European Union figured in the Queen’s Speech. Another Bill prohibited any rise in income tax rates, VAT or national insurance before 2020. Tenants of housing associations would be given the right to buy their homes. Provision for Scottish devolution was promised in fulfilment of the recommendations of the cross-party Smith Commission. A ‘powerhouse’ in the north was to come into being through cities being given powers over housing, transport, planning and policing. Laws on strikes would be tightened. Red tape for business would be reduced, and a new quango set up to invigilate late payment to small businesses. Apprenticeships would be encouraged and childcare expanded.

The Spectator

Redefining aid

From our UK edition

In this week’s Queen’s Speech, the government promised as usual to cut red tape for businesses. But David Cameron is remarkable in his enthusiasm for simultaneously wrapping his own government in red tape. He has proposed a law to prevent the Chancellor raising rates of income tax, and in one of the last acts of the coalition he pushed through a law which commits British governments for ever after to spent at least 0.7 per cent of Gross National Income (GNI) on international aid. There is little chance of the Prime Minister failing to meet his self-imposed spending target. Civil servants at the Department for International Development (DfiD) have proved themselves to be more than equal to the task of shovelling money in the direction of developing nations.

The Spectator

The Spectator at war: Marital obligations

From our UK edition

From 'Boys and Compulsory Service', The Spectator, 29 May 1915: [To the editor of The Spectator] Sir,— The wasteful expedient of universal service may be unavoidable, but I submit that loss will outweigh gain if we compel boys under twenty to fight abroad. To this, however, I would admit one exception—married men of whatever age. They have voluntarily incurred responsibility for the defence of their wives, and this, I think, must in their ease prevail against other considerations. But the unmarried are in a different position, and should be exempt from compulsory service abroad till a later age. Any that volunteer may be presumed to have some special suitability, but the rest should not be compelled to fight except to meet an actual landing of the enemy.