
The best deer deterrent? Radio 4
One reason why nothing gets done in this country is that bureaucratic power lies in delay. A business or a private individual needs to get on because his time is his money: the bureaucracy's time is our money, so it has all the time in the world. This is an acute problem in relation to payouts for infected blood, the Post Office scandal etc. A faithful reader, Keith Miles, has an idea. Reverse the process, he says. Force the civil service to pay out £1 million to each acknowledged victim within three months unless it can be proved in that time that the money is not owed. Then the boot will be on the other foot.
On Monday, the House of Lords agreed that the bill to remove all hereditary peers from the House of Lords 'do now pass'. The thing will not be complete until the Commons has considered amendments in September, but the death sentence has now been pronounced on the practice of more than 700 years. One or two speeches noted the melancholy historical significance of the change. The House is becoming a rump, though admittedly a large one. But I was interested by a rather more basic point made by the departing Earl of Caithness. When he had first taken his seat 50 years ago, he said, the daily allowance for attending the Lords was £4.73, which is £105.14 in current values. After Labour got rid of most hereditaries and brought in more of its own appointments at the turn of this century, the allowances 'increased hugely', the maximum daily allowance going up by 50 per cent. Today, peers can claim an allowance of £371 a day. As many of us have complained, Labour is jettisoning the hereditaries without reforming the Lords on a new basis, but I think we can be perfectly confident that, as it becomes predominant there, the allowances will rise higher still.
The Nationwide, by far the country's biggest building society, is trying to be like a bank, and its customers are unhappy. Its chief executive, Dame Debbie Crosbie, earns £7 million a year and board candidates proposed by its members never get chosen. I suspect the members' fears are well founded. In the market town near us, all the high-street banks have closed, but the Nationwide branch continues. I go there from time to time because my mother is now too frail to manage the journey and so I transact her Nationwide account for her. My visits have impressed me with the social utility of the place. Almost every customer is either old or, like me, acting on behalf of the old. There is a lot of fiddling with spectacles and hearing aids and struggling with forgotten passwords. Old ladies try to sort out their late husband's financial affairs or transfer money to their daughter in New Zealand. Everything moves slowly. The staff are completely patient and, unlike the computer, very rarely say no. I can see why Dame Debbie might feel she has bigger fish to fry. And I agree with the members who therefore suspect her. What is a building society building by paying £7 million to anyone?
In the early 1970s, I used to stay with a schoolfriend whose parents lived in Old Church Street, Chelsea. In the same street was the rectory of Chelsea Old Church which was, believe it or not, occupied by the rector, and parish children could play in its two-acre garden. Not long afterwards, the Church Commissioners sold it off. Now it is offered for sale by its non-dom owner who is fleeing the Reeves-Starmer Terror. The reported price is £250 million. I sometimes wonder if anything has done more than house prices to damage our social fabric.
Although for professional reasons I feel I must sometimes listen to the Today programme, I almost never listen to anything else on Radio 4. This is a wrench for me since it was the staple of my parents and my boyhood but, like so many, I cannot stand being preached at. However, I keep in touch with the station because my wife has erected a sort of alarm to keep deer out of our garden. As the fallow or roe jump in, they trigger a burst of whatever is playing on Radio 4. My sister's partner uses the same contraption in their garden, but he tunes the alarm to Radio 2 and has much less success in frightening off the marauders. I wonder why. When I go past the alarm myself, setting it off, I do notice that most snatches of dialogue are, even now, conducted in the tones of educated men and women. Perhaps the deer are more in awe of voices 'born to command' than of popular songs.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Evening Standard
13 minutes ago
- Evening Standard
Starmer convenes Cabinet for urgent meeting on Gaza
'We are clear that the recognition of the Palestinian state is a matter of when, not if, but it must be one of the steps on the path to a two-state solution as part of a wider plan that delivers lasting security for both Palestinians and Israelis.'


Sky News
38 minutes ago
- Sky News
PM urged to take three key steps ahead of emergency cabinet meeting on Gaza
British Palestinians have called on Sir Keir Starmer to take "immediate, concrete" steps on Gaza instead of "focusing on a symbolic gesture" of recognising it as a state ahead of an emergency cabinet meeting. The prime minister has recalled his cabinet ministers from parliamentary recess for a meeting at 2pm, when they will discuss what the UK's next steps should be, after Sir Keir held meetings with Donald Trump yesterday. Ahead of the cabinet meeting, the British Palestinian Committee (BPC), which represents the experiences of Palestinians in the UK, has sent Sir Keir a letter urging him to take actions they say could make a real difference to people in Gaza. The war has now been going on for 21 months after it was sparked by Hamas militants killing 1,200 Israelis and taking 250 hostages on 7 October 2023. The militant group still holds 50 hostages, of whom only 20 are believed to be alive. The BPC said recognising Palestine as a state is now "symbolic" as it "will not end the genocide and must not be used to deflect from accountability". Sir Keir has been under pressure from his own MPs and other UK political parties, notably since France said it will recognise Palestine as a state, but has so far resisted - saying recognition needs to be part of a wider peace plan. He has so far refused to say whether "genocide" is taking place in Gaza - a claim Israel has vehemently denied. Israel has paused fighting in three areas for another 10 hours today to help aid distribution, the third day it has done so amid mounting international condemnation of the scenes of hunger unfolding in Gaza. David Mencer, a spokesperson for the Israeli government, said: "There is no intent, (which is) key for the charge of genocide... it simply doesn't make sense for a country to send in 1.9 million tonnes of aid, most of that being food, if there is an intent of genocide." 2:39 The BPC, an independent group, said the government has "not only a political and moral obligation, but a legal obligation" to take three steps. They are: • Preventing and punishing Israel's "genocide" in Gaza and to end "all complicity in it" • Apply "immediate and comprehensive sanctions on Israel" • Safeguard the rights to freedom of expression and assembly in the UK More specifically, the group has called on Sir Keir to end "all forms of military collaboration, urgently review all public contracts to ensure they are not aiding unlawful occupation or genocidal acts, and support universal jurisdiction mandates". The group said these steps would help towards ending the starvation crisis in Gaza, which it said had been made possible "due to the impunity granted to" Israel and "compounded by the active military, economic and diplomatic support from states such as the UK". The group also accused the UK government of introducing "draconian legislation to limit the rights" of British citizens campaigning to end the atrocities "and British complicity in those atrocities" - in reference to Palestine Action being designated as a terrorist organisation. 'Immediate steps' Britain can take Dr Sara Husseini, director of the BPC, said: "We wrote to the prime minister to remind the UK cabinet of their legal obligations towards the Palestinian people." She said there are a "number of immediate steps" the British government "can and should be taking", as outlined in the letter. Dr Husseini said 147 countries have already recognised Palestine as a state, and instead of "focusing on a symbolic gesture" it is essential the UK severs diplomatic ties with Israel, institutes a full arms embargo, applies comprehensive sanctions and cuts trade. "Anything short of this amounts to complicity," she added. 22:05 Ahead of the cabinet meeting, senior minister Peter Kyle told Sky News the PM had decided to call an emergency meeting "to discuss all of the actions that Britain can and should be taking at a time like this". He said recognising Palestine as a state is a manifesto commitment but the "real priority" right now is to try to get aid into Gaza.


The Independent
43 minutes ago
- The Independent
The UK could soon recognise the state of Palestine. What does that really mean?
Emmanuel Macron 's pledge to formally recognise the state of Palestine will make France the first G7 country and member of the UN Security Council to do so. The question is whether others will follow suit. The UK prime minister, Keir Starmer, is coming under mounting pressure from many of his MPs and has recalled his cabinet from their summer recess to discuss the situation in Gaza. Starmer is expected to announce a peace plan for the Middle East this week that will include British recognition of Palestinian statehood. Downing Street sources said recognition was a matter of 'when, not if'. Recognition of statehood is not merely symbolic. The Montevideo Convention of 1933 established several criteria which must apply before an entity can be recognised as a sovereign state. These are a permanent population, a defined territory, an effective government and the ability to conduct international relations. The process involves the establishment of formal diplomatic relations, including the opening of embassies, the exchange of ambassadors, and the signing of bilateral treaties. Recognition also grants the recognised state access to certain rights in international organisations. For Palestinians, such recognition will strengthen their claim to sovereignty and facilitate greater international support. Macron's announcement was met with enthusiasm in many Arab capitals, as well as among Palestinian officials and supporters of the two-state solution. It was also praised by a number of European leaders as well as several journalists and other analysts as a long-overdue step toward a more balanced approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. However, the reaction from other major powers was swift and critical. The US called it 'a reckless decision' while the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, said he 'strongly condemned' it. Italy's prime minister, Giorgia Meloni, called it 'counterproductive'. Within hours, it was clear that Macron's announcement had both shifted diplomatic discourse and reignited longstanding divisions. France's decision is significant. It signals a departure from the Western consensus, long shaped by the US and the EU, that any recognition of Palestinian statehood must be deferred until after final-status negotiations. The move also highlights growing frustration in parts of Europe with the ongoing violence in Gaza and the failure of peace talks over the past two decades. Yet questions remain: what does this recognition actually entail? Will it change the conditions on the ground for Palestinians? Or is it largely symbolic? So far, the French government has offered no details on whether this recognition will be accompanied by concrete measures. There has been no mention of sanctions on Israel, no indication of halting arms exports, and no pledges of increased humanitarian aid or support for Palestinian governance institutions. France remains a key military and economic partner of Israel, and Macron's announcement does not appear to alter that relationship. Nor is this the first time a Western country has taken a symbolic stance in support of Palestinian statehood. Sweden recognised the state of Palestine in 2014, becoming the first Western European country to do so. It was followed by Spain in 2024. However, both moves were largely symbolic and did not significantly alter the political or humanitarian situation on the ground. The risk is that recognition, without action, becomes a gesture that changes little. Macron's statement also raised eyebrows for another reason: his emphasis on a 'demilitarised Palestinian state' living side-by-side with Israel in peace and security. While such language is common in diplomatic discourse, it also reflects a deeper tension. Palestinians have long argued that their right to self-determination includes the right to defend themselves against occupation. Calls for demilitarisation are often seen by critics as reinforcing the status quo, where security concerns are framed almost exclusively in terms of Israeli needs. In the absence of a genuine political process, some analysts have warned that recognition of this kind risks formalising a state in name only – a fragmented, non-sovereign entity without control over its borders, resources or defence. Without guarantees of territorial continuity, an end to the expansion of Israeli settlements and freedom of movement, statehood may remain an abstract concept. What would meaningful support look like? If France wishes to go beyond symbolism, it has options. It could suspend arms exports to Israel or call for an independent international investigation into alleged war crimes. It could use its influence within the EU to push for greater accountability regarding illegal settlements and the blockade of Gaza. It could also support Palestinian institutions directly and engage with Palestinian civil society. Without such steps, recognition risks being viewed as a political message more than a policy shift. For Palestinians, the daily realities of occupation, displacement and blockade will not change with diplomatic announcements alone. What is needed, many argue, is not just recognition but support for justice, rights and meaningful sovereignty. France's recognition of Palestine marks a shift in diplomatic tone and reflects broader unease with the status quo in the Middle East. It has stirred debate at home and abroad, and raised expectations among those hoping for more robust international engagement with the conflict. Whether this recognition leads to meaningful changes in policy or conditions on the ground remains to be seen. Much will depend on the steps France takes next – both at the United Nations and through its actions on trade, security and aid. Malak Benslama-Dabdoub is a Lecturer in Law at the Royal Holloway University of London.