Only admirals get to use the green pen
Re your letter about C, MI6's head, using green ink (19 June), Sir Mansfield Cumming was an admiral before he became head of the Special Intelligence Service (later MI6). A curator at the Royal Navy Museum told me that early in his career, he had written to his director in green ballpoint. His note was returned with a simple comment: 'You are not an admiral.'Peter ElliottSt Albans
On the subject of rural minibuses (Letters, 22 June), I wouldn't have been able to visit Charleston House in East Sussex if it hadn't been for Cuckmere community art shuttle. Driven by volunteers (thank you, Sue and Mark), it links up with two art galleries that reduce entrance fees for those who arrive by public transport. A brilliant idea that I hope gets picked up by others.Joy McLaughlanLondon
Re Bob Marshall-Andrews's letter (24 June), the BBC hasn't consigned Gaza: Doctors Under Attack to oblivion, it has decided not to show it and returned the rights to the makers. This means it can, and almost certainly will, be shown by a channel whose impartiality isn't subject to quite so much public scrutiny. Given all the publicity, there's likely to be quite a queue.Henry MaltBythorn, Cambridgeshire
Why is every human experience now 'a journey' (Letters, 25 June)? I've heard of cancer journeys, menopause journeys and, today, people's 'parenting journey'. Ridiculous.Cherry WestonWolverhampton
I've always disliked 'free gift'. Is there any other sort?Steve Lupton Prestwich, Greater Manchester
Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
34 minutes ago
- Times
No 10 gags civil servants to stop them speaking out in public
Sir Keir Starmer has gagged senior health officials, military leaders and even the head of the civil service from speaking openly in public, in a move that has been described as a 'chilling' attack on free speech. In an edict issued across Whitehall, Downing Street has warned public sector officials not to talk at open events where their comments have not been vetted in advance. They have also been barred from taking part in any public question-and-answer sessions — even if they are part of an industry event. The rules also apply to media briefings on issues such as public health, carried out by senior figures such as the chief medical and scientific officers. While these can go ahead they must be cleared in advance by Downing Street and have a minister or special adviser in attendance. Those affected include public sector officials working for arms-length bodies such as the media regulator Ofcom and the education inspectorate Ofsted, which have operational independence from the government. The rules also apply to senior health leaders, diplomats and military officers. The edict has already led to cancellation or curtailment of a number of public events where senior government officials were due to speak. The Whitehall think tank the Institute for Government (IFG) was forced to cancel an event on Tuesday which was due to discuss Labour's new approach to public sector spending after Nick Donlevy, a senior civil servant at the Treasury, was made to pull out. Last week the Royal United Services Institute (Rusi) told journalists attending a land warfare conference that they would not be able to report on a speech by Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton, the chief of the air staff, who is expected to become head of the armed forces. • No 10 gags military chiefs at events where a minister is present The think tank said there had been a change in 'reporting rules relating to speakers from the British armed forces'. It said that the majority of speeches and panel appearances by British personnel 'will not be for reporting', whereas those by individuals from foreign militaries will be. Sources confirmed that the change had been forced on Rusi by the new Downing Street senior Whitehall figure said the move had been made to prevent high-profile officials from causing 'problems' for the government by using speeches to 'lobby ministers in public' or criticising spending plans or government policy. However, it has caused unease both inside and outside the government with one senior source describing it as 'unnecessary' and heavy-handed. 'It's the usual desire of No 10 to control absolutely everything without thinking through the consequences,' the source said. 'The idea that even the cabinet secretary cannot take part in a public question-and-answer event is both misguided and counterproductive.' Another added: 'This is mad on so many levels.' Alex Thomas, programme director at the IFG, said the rules would have a 'chilling effect' on public debate. 'This will lead to a more closed government and less effective policymaking,' he said. • Foreign Office staff told to resign if they don't like Gaza stance 'Openness is one of the seven principles of public life and it cannot be a good thing that officials that are responsible for the day-to-day running of critical public services will no longer be able to attend, speak, and answer questions at events.' 'Ministers will always be the main public spokespeople for government activity but this is an overreach and will damage the quality of government and public discourse.' Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, described the move as 'outrageous'. He said: 'This unprecedented ban on civil servants speaking in public will damage public debate, politics, policymaking and the civil service itself. What are they thinking?' Baroness Spielman of Durlston, the former head of Ofsted and now a Conservative peer, said the restriction was 'astonishing and unworkable'. She added that it would force bodies like Ofsted to cancel interactive stakeholder events without a minister present and slow down communication. 'Government grinds too slowly and this will jam the works completely,' she said. Sir John Kingman, a former permanent secretary at the Treasury, said that when he worked for government he would participate in an event involving questions most days. 'It was quite an important part of the job because many people understandably want to know what the government thinks and why, and want a chance to discuss it,' he said. A Downing Street source insisted the guidance was not heavy-handed and would be looked at on a 'case by case' basis. But No 10 said it reflected the principle that ministers were responsible for representing the government in public — rather than officials. A Cabinet Office spokesman said that the rules around media engagement were 'longstanding and established'. 'It has always been the case, and a constitutional principle, that ministers are ultimately accountable for decision-making to parliament and the public — so it is right they are routinely scrutinised by the media and MPs.'
Daily Mail
42 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Bosses hit out at PM's 'nonsense' that Labour had 'stabilised the economy' - as one in six firms runs out of cash
Business leaders last night rounded on the Prime Minister over his claim that he is backing them 'to the hilt' as grim figures laid bare the pressures firms face. Keir Starmer told bosses at the British Chambers of Commerce (BCC) conference in London that Labour had 'stabilised the economy' as he hailed his trade deals with the US and India. But his speech came amid gloomy economic data and rebellion among backbench MPs that threatened to derail Labour's fiscal plans. The Office for National Statistics yesterday revealed that 17 per cent of businesses have run out of cash – the worst figure since the pandemic. Separate figures from the Confederation of British Industry showed retail sales falling this month at the fastest pace since January 2024 – the ninth consecutive month of decline. And in a speech at the BCC following Starmer's appearance, Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey said firms across the country were slashing jobs and wages after Chancellor Rachel Reeves' National Insurance (NI) hike. Meanwhile, a leading economist warned that Starmer must face down Labour rebels by cutting welfare spending – or ministers will have to choose between a further tax raid or bond market turmoil. Starmer told the conference: 'We've stabilised the economy, and now we can go on to the next phase of government, building on that foundation, building a future of renewal that you can feel. 'And that means, of course, that we have to back you to the hilt – trust me, I'm fighting for you.' But Pimlico Plumbers founder Charlie Mullins said: 'I can't believe Starmer has the brass neck to stand in front of hundreds of struggling business owners and tell them he's on their side. It's only been a year and Labour's vicious NI hike and tax increases aimed at wealth creators have battered businesses.' Julian Jessop, economics fellow at the Institute of Economic Affairs, said that 'very little has changed for the better' under Labour. 'Underlying economic growth remains sluggish, inflation is picking up again, the labour market is deteriorating, interest rates have fallen more slowly than elsewhere, and the public finances are as fragile as ever,' he said. 'Businesses are struggling under the weight of high energy prices and additional payroll costs, and many are nervous about the extra burdens that will be imposed by the Employment Rights Bill. Other than that, it is all going swimmingly.' Karl Mason, a spokesman for distillery trade group the UK Spirits Alliance, blasted Starmer's trade deal boast as a 'nonsense narrative'. 'The punishing tax burden we face at home makes it virtually impossible to invest in export growth. Without reform to our domestic tax regime, talk of trade deals is meaningless,' he said. Pound hits near four-year high The pound yesterday hit a near four-year high against the dollar amid speculation about Trump's plans to replace US Federal Reserve chief Jerome Powell. Sterling rose by a cent to just under $1.38 – the highest since October 2021 – in a boost to British holidaymakers preparing for the summer break. The dollar fell to its lowest level since early 2022 against many major currencies.
Reuters
43 minutes ago
- Reuters
UK's Starmer offers concessions on welfare cuts to quell Labour revolt
LONDON, June 26 (Reuters) - Prime Minister Keir Starmer has made concessions to dissenting lawmakers from his Labour Party on planned welfare cuts, two lawmakers said on Thursday, as the British leader tries to avoid a damaging parliamentary rebellion at a vote next week. More than 100 Labour lawmakers opposed Starmer's welfare reforms, arguing the plans failed to provide support for disabled people and those with long-term health conditions. Those lawmakers have spearheaded an effort to kill the government's welfare bill at the vote on Tuesday, presenting a potentially major blow to Starmer a year after he won a large majority in parliament. One Labour lawmaker, who did not wish to be named, said Starmer had agreed late on Thursday evening to change the plans so that the cuts only apply to new welfare claimants, with existing recipients of so-called Personal Independent Payments (PIP) remaining unaffected. The lawmaker said he was still undecided whether the changes would convince him to back Starmer's plan at the vote. Starmer's Downing Street office did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Any climbdown on welfare by Starmer will be criticised as yet another U-turn from the government following a reversal in cuts to winter fuel payments and the decision to hold an inquiry into grooming gangs. The government has argued that cutting the ballooning welfare budget is necessary to shore up the public finances and get more people into work. Annual spending on incapacity and disability benefits already exceeds the country's defence budget and is set to top 100 billion pounds by 2030, according to official forecasts, up from 65 billion pounds now. Despite Starmer's concessions, one Labour lawmaker, Peter Lamb, said after learning of the changes that he would vote down the bill "alone" if necessary. "To me, it's insufficient when better options have repeatedly been put forward and ignored," Lamb said on X.
