Erect statue of Vera Lynn to commemorate VE Day heroes, say Tories
The Tories are urging the Prime Minister to throw Downing Street's backing behind a campaign to put up a monument to her in Dover.
Before last year's election, Rishi Sunak pledged to commit £1 million in funding to the project, but campaigners say they now need only £350,000.
Sir Keir said in the Commons last week that he supported the campaign for a statue, saying that Dame Vera was 'sewn into our nation's soul'.
Dame Vera is best known for her wartime songs, including We'll Meet Again, which helped boost the nation's morale in the fight against the Nazis.
She died five years ago and will be commemorated this summer in a special set of stamps to mark the 80th anniversary of victory in Europe.
Campaigners are also trying to raise funds for a statue to the singer to be situated in Dover, the title location for one of her most famous songs.
Writing for The Telegraph, Stuart Andrew, the shadow culture secretary, and Mims Davies, the shadow minister for women, said it was 'truly time' the project happened.
'The planned statue would be powerful – it displays Dame Vera singing, with brave soldiers dotted in the background, while bombs rain on Westminster,' they said.
'The statue is urgently needed to ensure future generations continue to remember the warmth and joy Dame Vera spread to households, not just in Britain, but across the entire world.
'Dame Vera was not just an icon, she was a female icon and, with a lack of female statues in our country, having one to the late singer would more than help remedy this error.'
The pair urged Sir Keir to stump up the final tranche of cash for the statue, which is expected to cost around £1.5 million to construct.
They said: 'If the current prime minister, like his predecessor, Rishi Sunak, committed to the charity's aim, we will meet again and Dame Vera can – and will – be remembered forever.'
Campaigners have been fundraising since 2021 and are aiming to hit their target ahead of June 18, which will be the fifth anniversary of Dame Vera's death.
The drive also comes with Britain set to celebrate VE Day on Thursday, with the Government allowing pubs to stay open for an extra hour.
Sir Keir said in the Commons last week that he supported the campaign for a statue, which was 'particularly timely' given VE Day.
'Dame Vera is sewn into our nation's soul by providing the soundtrack for our greatest generation,' he told MPs.
Referencing VE Day, the Prime Minister added: 'It is particularly timely, so I will support the campaign.'
Dame Vera was not just an icon – she was a female icon
By Mims Davies and Stuart Andrew
Very few people have successfully rallied and mobilised an entire nation to come together during an existential crisis – and continued to bring us together over many decades by being there to tell the tale.
But Dame Vera Lynn managed it, almost exclusively with the power and beauty of her voice.
She made a truly invaluable contribution in sustaining and boosting morale during some of the darkest periods our nation endured in the Second World War. Dame Vera, who died five years ago aged 103, also contributed to the nation with her long-standing charitable work.
She once said: 'Perseverance and never giving up have been the secret of my success. Now, I am reminded of the importance of perseverance regularly through my special charity which helps young children affected by cerebral palsy and associated disorders.'
It is certainly no exaggeration to firmly state Dame Vera was one of the greatest British popular singers to have ever lived, with her immaculate singing voice, with We'll Meet Again, The White Cliffs of Dover and many more continuing to radiate in households nation-wide to this very day.
This is rightly being recognised by the release of a commemorative stamp to Dame Vera's legacy – a move that is long overdue but crucially is happening as we commemorate VE Day 80 years on.
Granted, while wholeheartedly supporting this wonderful initiative, we believe something of an equal substantive nature is vital to preserve Dame Vera's vast legacy – and it's truly time this happened.
The Dame Vera Lynn memorial statue team has, for several years, heroically left no stone unturned in its tireless quest to secure a permanent sculpture of the late singer to be suitably sited in Dover.
The planned statue would be powerful: it displays Dame Vera singing, with brave soldiers dotted in the background, while bombs rain on Westminster.
At present, the charity has raised crucial funds – but is around £350,000 short.
The outstanding monies needs desperately raising before June, which will mark the fifth anniversary of Dame Vera's passing.
We met Susan Fleet OBE – Dame Vera's long-standing friend and assistant – this week in Westminster and she is frustrated there is no permanent statue.
The charity has concluded that it's now or never, for raising the last amount of money.
The statue is urgently needed to ensure future generations continue to remember the warmth and joy Dame Vera spread to households, not just in Britain, but across the entire world.
Dame Vera was not just an icon, she was a female icon and, with a lack of female statues in our country, having one to the late singer would more than help remedy this error.
The novelist George Eliot once said: 'Our dead are never dead to us, until we have forgotten them.'
It is incumbent upon us all to ensure Dame Vera's words and deeds achieve immortality.
To conclude, as Mark Francois MP last week pointed out in the House of Commons chamber: if the current Prime Minister, like his predecessor, Rishi Sunak, committed to the charity's aim, we will meet again and Dame Vera can – and will – be remembered forever.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Belfast Telegraph
an hour ago
- Belfast Telegraph
Reeves will not be only one crying if Labour's U-turn on welfare reform leads to a rise in income tax
Had Jacinda been on the scene yesterday, she would undoubtedly have hugged the Chancellor in the actual Commons chamber because the politics of empathy is her thing. And it's that notion – the more emotion in politics the better – which I think we should see off right now. It is forgivable for the Chancellor to cry. It's a human trait. Whether she was tearful because of a spat with the Speaker, or because of a standoff with Angela Rayner about welfare or because the PM didn't seem terribly confident about her future is anyone's guess. Certainly she told the Speaker that she had been 'under a lot of pressure', which is something of an understatement. Lots of her colleagues hate her, or rather, her perceived fiscal rectitude – a difference in approach which surfaced dramatically during the debate about welfare reform. Few business leaders feel warmly about her after her imposition of national insurance increases. Rachel Reeves was seen in tears during PMQs today Most political commentators think she's toast – the PM's assurances that she'll be Chancellor for years to come shouldn't deceive anyone. Her tough stance on budgetary discipline has been undermined; her fiscal headroom is gone after the collapse of the welfare reforms. Given all the above, it's small wonder she cried. And yes, of course, politicians cry. Men as well as women. As the historian Andrew Roberts observed, Winston Churchill was often given to tears without anyone thinking the worse of him. In the ancient world, big tough men were forever crying. In the Iliad, the entire Greek army broke down more than once. In Roman politics and in public trials, crying, or evoking sympathy or tears from your listeners – miseratio – was one of the arts of rhetoric, a way of moving your audience. If you read any medieval chronicle or poem, you're likely to encounter any number of public displays of emotion from men as well as women. But it all depends on the context: a strong man crying is moving; a woman politician crying looks like the job is getting to her. Now that may be sexist but such are the perceived notions of the day. A strong man crying is moving; a woman politician crying looks like the job is getting to her Lots of us cry when things get too much; I weep myself. But the difference between me and Rachel Reeves is that the bond markets are cruelly indifferent to my shows of emotion but react immediately to hers. I'd say then that it's fine for her to cry once but she shouldn't make a habit of it; still less should we make a virtue of it. She should think – what would Jacinda do? – and then do the opposite. Of all the offices of state, that of the Chancellor is the one you want to go to someone who looks as if she will stop at nothing to keep the national debt down. Sir Keir Starmer says Rachel Reeves will remain as Chancellor 'into the next election' and for years after No one looked at her yesterday and thought, ah, how very Churchillian of her. Her vulnerability seemed more like an expression of the government's weakness, as it does one handbrake turn after another, on welfare, on winter fuel, on immigration. So, the Chancellor might not want to make a habit of giving way to emotion. It's human and forgivable but it doesn't inspire confidence in a role where projecting confidence is part of the deal. She has got a formidable task ahead, to maintain the confidence of the markets when the underpinning for her policies is looking more and more shaky. The problem for Rachel R after the scuppering of the welfare reforms which were meant to provide substantial savings is that she has so little room for manoeuvre left. In fact, come the autumn statement, she may find that she's announcing increases in taxation, including income tax. If so, there'll be lots of us crying. Myself included.
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
After Labour's first year, Starmer could still learn from ‘one-term Attlee'
On the first anniversary of Keir Starmer's general election win, there will no doubt be much comment about what his government has achieved in its first year – and, more likely, where it has fallen short of expectations. The general feeling appears to be one of disappointment, with Starmer's net approval rating at a record low, after the first double-digit decline in public support since a general election since John Major's Conservative administration in the 1990s. Starmer's first year as prime minister has been characterised by a series of U-turns, following rebellion within his own ranks. But it is the following day, this Saturday, 5 July, that will mark a far more consequential anniversary: the general election of 1945, which – after a count lasting several weeks – made Clement Attlee the first Labour prime minister with a majority government. Eighty years on, it seems fitting to revisit that government – its style and achievements, as well as the qualities of Attlee – who was to lead the nation in succession to the great war leader, Winston Churchill. What, if anything, can Starmer and his team learn from that post-war administration? Although many people were surprised by Labour's success in July 1945, the writing had already been on the wall for Churchill's Tories. The monthly Gallup opinion poll which, while not scrutinised in the forensic way that polls are today, had consistently pointed to a strong Labour showing throughout the war years. And ideas of how to build a better post-war nation in areas such as health, welfare and education, dominated thinking and debate – not least among servicemen and women overseas. Attlee's Labour campaign offered a clear blueprint based on their manifesto, Let Us Face the Future, and the people voted for it. By contrast, in 2024, while nearly everyone expected Starmer's Labour Party to win last year, it was far less clear what Labour might be offering in government, except the rather nebulous concept of 'change'. Even before the election, Starmer had been criticised for abandoning many of the planks of the platform on which he won the party leadership. His government has, so far at least, struggled to articulate a clear vision and sense of direction. At times, Starmer, unlike Attlee, has even appeared to be blaming the system for the government's shortcomings, and using the allegation (also made by Tony Blair) that the supposed levers of power do not seem to be connected to anything. This is a poor substitute for looking to his ministers to roll up their sleeves, address the issues and deliver. The second factor in the success of the 1945 government was the quality of the team assembled and led by Attlee. The government front bench included many experienced political heavyweights with substantial ministerial experience gained during the wartime coalition – people like Ernest Bevin, the former trade union leader and wartime minister of Labour, who led the Foreign Office, and Herbert Morrison, who had been home secretary during the war. Attlee himself had been deputy prime minister to Churchill, with a wide-ranging brief. By contrast, Starmer, like Blair in 1997, arrived in No 10 with no ministerial experience whatsoever. And, of his cabinet, only three members – Hilary Benn, Yvette Cooper and Ed Miliband – have ever been full cabinet ministers before. But the most striking factor of the Attlee government was its output. From day one, the government was relentlessly focused on the demobilisation of over 3 million returning servicemen and women, and their reintegration into post war life in Britain. The economy became far more centralised, with the nationalisation of the Bank of England only seven months after the election, and later of the 'commanding heights of the economy'. There were also big changes through expanding the social role of government, by implementing the recommendations of the 1942 Beveridge Report and, most notably, through the creation of the National Health Service by the health secretary, Aneurin Bevan, three years after the election. Add to that the Festival of Britain – Morrison's brainchild – which brought a sense of energy and enthusiasm to the country after the dark days of the war. The government even finally achieved universal suffrage, with the abolition of the university vote, which had given some people at certain universities two votes rather than one. All in all, it was quite a record of domestic policy which, so far at least, does not look like being matched by the current government. Internationally, Attlee's administration helped shape the post-war world, too. From the Potsdam conference to the new economic framework based on the Bretton Woods agreement, to the oversight of the transition to independence for India in 1947 his government was at the forefront. And, in 1949, Nato was founded with Bevin heading UK negotiations. This, coupled with Attlee's determination to procure a UK nuclear capability, designed the nation's post-war defence framework, which is now under such strains. Starmer so far seems much more comfortable operating on the international front, where his legalistic approach and attention to detail have worked in his favour. But it is on the domestic front where he needs to up his game. None of the achievements of the 1945 government would have been possible without Attlee's leadership: quiet, undemonstrative, yet ruthlessly efficient and intolerant of poor performance. The phrase about not suffering fools gladly could have been made for him. He was determined to raise living standards and respond to the aspirations of everyone. He was committed to abolishing the poverty that he had witnessed in east London some 30 years previously. He strove to build a new world order so that, never again, would young men have to fight – as he had done in the First World War – or to defeat Nazism as the nation had just done in the Second World War. Attlee was the leader who made this happen. Why, then, with such a body of achievement delivered in only six years, was Attlee defeated in 1951? On one level, his government simply 'ran out of steam'. There was no new programme of work designed for the 1950s. Most of his ministers were exhausted – some were ill or dying. Ellen Wilkinson, his education minister, and Bevin, both died in office. Nevertheless, in the 1951 election, Labour achieved the highest percentage vote of any party in post-war history, with 48.8 per cent. However, the Conservatives, with a smaller 48.0 per cent of the vote, won more seats in the House of Commons and Churchill returned as prime minister. By way of contrast, last year Keir Starmer's Labour Party won only 33.7 per cent of the vote. Had someone asked Attlee in 1946 what had been his successes and failures of his first year – a question that Starmer has faced – the election-winner of 1945 might have struggled to choose from his many achievements during his first 12 months in office. He would certainly have been very unlikely to have said that his greatest failure had been 'not telling our story as well as we should'.
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
UK politics live: Rachel Reeves says she was ‘clearly upset' but it was her job to support government at PMQs
Rachel Reeves has appeared in public with Sir Keir Starmer a day after breaking down in tears alongside the prime minister in the Commons. The pair were both at the launch of the government's 10-year plan for the NHS in London. Speaking to broadcasters following following the launch, Ms Reeves declined to give the reason behind her tears. 'Clearly I was upset yesterday and everyone could see that. It was a personal issue and I'm not going to go into the details of that,' the chancellor said. 'My job as chancellor at 12 o'clock on a Wednesday is to be at PMQs next to the prime minister, supporting the government and that's what I tried to do. 'I guess the thing that maybe is a bit different between my job and many of your viewers' is that when I'm having a tough day it's on the telly and most people don't have to deal with that.' She appeared to reject suggestions that her tears at PMQs were related to a conversation with Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle or another member of government. Welfare reform has been postponed, but it isn't going away Welfare reform has been postponed, but it isn't going away Editorial: Labour's overhaul of the benefits system failed because it was clearly a raid by the Treasury looking for savings at speed. The government should produce a Beveridge report for the 21st century – or risk a future, right-wing government taking up the challenge Holly Evans4 July 2025 05:00 Rachel Reeves's brave face cannot mask the challenges she now faces If there were any doubts about Sir Keir Starmer 's plans for Rachel Reeves, the prime minister and his chancellor have gone all out to try and put them to bed. A day after she sat crying through Prime Minister's Questions on live television, the chancellor sat smiling and cheering through the prime minister 's speech outlining a 10-year plan for the NHS. For his part, Sir Keir shouted 'wahey' as Ms Reeves got to her speech to lay the financial framework for the plan. Reeves's brave face cannot mask the challenges she now faces The chancellor has come out fighting after her teary PMQs moment... but much tougher challenges now await Holly Evans4 July 2025 04:00 For crying out loud: Are you ready for the 'politics of pain' about to hit us? Keir Starmer promised that the last Budget would be 'painful'. In a speech in the Downing Street garden in August, two months earlier, he tried to manage expectations, saying that the state of the public finances was 'worse than we ever imagined', and asked people to 'accept short-term pain for long-term good'. It was a forlorn hope. Far from 'accepting' the pain, public opinion turned against the government further after Rachel Reeves announced £25bn a year of tax increases, rising to £40bn a year by the end of this parliament. Business leaders reacted particularly badly to the rise in employers' national insurance contributions, causing the chancellor to over-correct when she addressed the CBI the following month. She told representatives that she was 'not coming back with more borrowing or more taxes'. Read the full analysis from John Rentoul here: For crying out loud: are you ready for the 'politics of pain' about to hit us? I once accused the PM and his chancellor of being too gloomy, writes John Rentoul. Turns out they were not gloomy enough – and they'll have to lead the nation through another vale of tears Holly Evans4 July 2025 03:00 Which tax rises could Rachel Reeves introduce to pay for the £5bn welfare U-turn? This week's embarrassing climbdown on welfare saw the government's benefits reforms gutted almost entirely, while savings from the bill were slashed from £5bn to nothing. In the wake of the U-turn, there are now growing questions over how the government will raise the money to fill the black hole in the public finances. Ministers have already squeezed significant savings out of their departments in cuts that were unveiled at last month's spending review, meaning there is now a mounting expectation that the chancellor will be forced to raise taxes instead. Which tax rises could Rachel Reeves introduce to pay for the £5bn welfare U-turn? Labour's pledge not to raise taxes on 'working people' leaves the chancellor with a limited number of workable options to fill the £5bn hole in the public finances left by this week's welfare climbdown Holly Evans4 July 2025 02:00 Ex-Labour MP Zarah Sultana to set up new party with Jeremy Corbyn A former Labour MP has announced her intention to co-lead the formation of a new political party with Jeremy Corbyn, the ex-Labour leader. Zarah Sultana, whose Labour whip was suspended last year, confirmed her resignation from Sir Keir Starmer 's party. In a statement posted on X, Ms Sultana, who represents Coventry South, stated the initiative would also involve "other independent MPs, campaigners and activists across the country". Ex-Labour MP Zara Sultana to set up new party with Jeremy Corbyn The independent MP lost the Labour whip last year when she voted to abolish the two-child benefit cap Holly Evans4 July 2025 01:00 Kemi Badenoch's lack of empathy over Rachel Reeves's tears will come back to haunt her The trouble with Kemi Badenoch is that if she sees someone lying on the ground, she can't resist the temptation to kick them. She lacks empathy, to put it politely. There she was at Prime Minister's Questions, facing an open goal for a change, and attacking the prime minister, who, even three days later, can look after himself. Then she spots the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, her lip quivering, seemingly on the brink of crying. Straight in goes the Badenoch boot – she said Reeves looked 'absolutely miserable' and described her as Starmer's 'human shield'. After Starmer failed to confirm Reeves in post for the rest of the parliament – a tall order for any appointee – Badenoch piled on the punishment: 'How awful for the chancellor that he did not confirm she would be in post.' Badenoch's lack of empathy over Reeves's tears will come back to haunt her Neither her party nor the public seems to like the Badenoch style, writes Sean O'Grady. Her tasteless lack of empathy for the chancellor is indicative of a leadership marked by arrogant dismissiveness Holly Evans4 July 2025 00:00 The markets have spoken – and it is they, not the prime minister, that saved Rachel Reeves The markets have delivered their verdict. They want Rachel Reeves, and no one else will do. If the chancellor needed saving, they've done the job, boosting her political clout in the process. The events of the last 24 hours have been quite remarkable, almost on a level with the Truss mini-Budget, when the City's appalled reaction resulted in the near collapse of several big pension funds, and ultimately led to the end of a premiership before a now-infamous lettuce had rotted. The tearful expression on the face of a visibly upset Reeves, and a less than ringing endorsement from a prime minister who had previously said she would be in place for the full parliament, triggered a panic, with some of the biggest movements in UK government bond prices recorded since the 'Trussterf***' Budget. The markets have spoken – and it is they, not the PM, that saved Rachel Reeves In its response to the chancellor's possible resignation, in the face of market jitters the City has made it clear that she is Labour's only candidate for No 11, says James Moore – and any attempt to replace her could prove very expensive for the country Holly Evans3 July 2025 23:00 Labour respond to Zarah Sultana resignation Responding to Ms Sultana's statement, a Labour spokesperson said: 'In just 12 months, this Labour government has boosted wages, delivered an extra four million NHS appointments, opened 750 free breakfast clubs, secured three trade deals and four interest rate cuts lowering mortgage payments for millions. 'Only Labour can deliver the change needed to renew Britain.' Holly Evans3 July 2025 22:28 MP Zarah Sultana resigns from the Labour Party MP Zarah Sultana has said that she is resigning from the Labour Party to 'co-lead the founding of a new party' with Jeremy Corbyn. Ms Sultana, who has sat in the Commons as an independent MP since she had the Labour whip withdrawn last year, represents the Coventry South constituency. She said in a statement posted on X that she was 'resigning from the Labour Party'. 'Jeremy Corbyn and I will co-lead the founding of a new party, with other independent MPs, campaigners and activists across the country.' She said that 'Westminster is broken but the real crisis is deeper' and the 'two-party system offers nothing but managed decline and broken promises'. She added: 'A year ago I was suspended by the Labour Party for voting to abolish the two-child benefit cap and list 400,000 children out of poverty. I'd do it again. I voted against scrapping winter fuel payments for pensioners. I'd do it again. Now, the Government wants to make disabled people suffer; they just can't decide how much.' She urged people to 'join us'. Holly Evans3 July 2025 21:33 MP likens Government to flat-earthers over refusal to compensate Waspi women Sir Keir Starmer's Government has been likened to flat-earthers by one of its own MPs, over its refusal to compensate women affected by state pension age changes. Labour's Rebecca Long Bailey said the arguments against compensation for the 1950s-born women are 'bizarre' and akin to those made by people who believe the Earth is flat. The Government last December ruled out a compensation package for women born in the 1950s, whose state pension age was raised so it would be equal with men. This is despite Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Chancellor Rachel Reeves being among the senior ministers to support the Waspi campaign when Labour was in opposition. A report by the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) had recommended the UK Government pay compensation to women born in the 1950s whose state pension age was raised so it would be equal with men. The watchdog also said the women should be paid up to £2,950 each, a package with a potential total cost of £10.5 billion to the public purse, as poor communication meant they had lost out on the chance to plan their retirement finances. Holly Evans
