logo
Letter of the week: Keep the faith

Letter of the week: Keep the faith

Photo by Robin Weaver / Alamy
As a Catholic, I was most interested to read Finn McRedmond's Newsmaker (25 April) on whether Pope Francis's liberal reformation can survive. I profoundly hope that it will. To put the future pope back in the remote Vatican box would be an entirely retrograde step with untold repercussions. I am hoping and, yes, praying, that the conclave will be discerning and appreciate the bigger picture. Young people responded to Pope Francis in their droves and there is indeed a youth renaissance in attendance.
Of course, there are divisions as in any large organisation, and Pope Francis didn't always get things right – especially on the role of women in the Church. But for all that religious hesitancy, his reaching out to the poor, marginalised and disenfranchised in our febrile and often callous world was his innate quality. He was a humble and unassuming pontiff, but one whose humanitarian reach extended far and wide.
Judith A Daniels, Great Yarmouth, Norfolk
To the power of four
I agree with Andrew Marr's conclusion (Cover Story, 25 April) that we must brace for the Chinese century. However, he misses the most compelling reason this is so highly likely. China has over four times the population of the US – which means that for each highly intelligent and creative American scientist, China has four.
Dr Peter Williams, Malton, Yorkshire
State of the nation
Rachel Cunliffe's excellent article (Inside Westminster, 25 April) made some interesting points about where Reform's weaknesses could be, particularly Farage's ties with America. Labour should look at the victory of the Liberal Party in Canada and realise that siding with Donald Trump is not a vote-winner. It should also stop proposing policies that alienate core Labour voters and put more energy into calling out the threat Farage poses to the NHS and our relationship with Europe, and his bragging about his ties to someone who could give us second-rate chicken in our supermarkets. I fear the local elections will show us that Keir Starmer's current direction isn't working.
Rob Grew, Birmingham
Rachel Cunliffe's piece on the fortunes of Reform, whose undermining of the Tory vote at the last election brought calamity to that party and a resulting boost for Labour, makes a glaring omission: the impressive advance of the Liberal Democrats (72 seats won in 2024 compared to 11 in 2019).
Paul Watkins, London NW1
Across the Pond
Jill Filipovic's columns on American politics were already required reading, but she surpassed herself in her latest one about how the American legal elites have bowed down to Trump (American Affairs, 25 April). Its last three sentences exhibit a cold anger that you rarely see in journalism today – and the piece was all the better for it.
Jeff Howells, London SE25
We should be worried by Jill Filipovic's analysis of the Trumpian highjacking of the US democratic and legal process. The United States still? Margaret Atwood's brilliantly foreseen Gilead looms ever more.
Steve Rothery, Clitheroe, Lancashire
Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe
Last orders
I was about to research whether the bars in both Houses of Parliament were still subsidised when I read the final paragraph of Catherine Ashton's Diary (25 April). I thank her for saving my time. That this practice continues during an era when households struggle to buy food astounds me. Taxpayers fund our representatives' alcohol consumption while NHS expenditure on alcohol-related disease rises. If politicians want to avert cynicism about their profession, they should pay the same prices as their voters.
Gabrielle Palmer, Cambridge
Cycles of failure
Pippa Bailey's cover story in your 4 April edition has deservedly elicited a lot of reader approval (Correspondence, 11 April). It was undoubtedly a well-written, insightful survey of the content of and fallout from the Gove reforms.
It poses several, persisting questions, including: why do we examine so much at secondary and how does this impact on the nature and quality of teaching and learning? Why, despite years of reforms, do the same sort of kids continue to be 'failed' by schools? Why, despite what we know about creativity and how children learn, do we persist with ways of teaching that stress memorisation?
The French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, as Bailey rightly says, gave us – more than 40 years ago! – some analytical tools to address such questions. But the answers his approach anticipated have largely been ignored. Why oh why does education policy seem impervious to research, both empirical and analytical? It's hard to think of any other area of policy that makes a virtue of floating so aggressively free of it.
Now there's a fresh challenge: how to attract back into secondary school the 10 per cent of children who don't regularly attend and who show few signs of wanting to. Perhaps they've learned a truth about the system it won't face up to: 'We've got better things to do with our time than learn a curriculum that routinely 'fails' us.'
David Halpin, Wetherby, Yorkshire
Beer, glorious beer
At last the New Statesman acknowledges that its readers might be interested in drinks other than wine (Drink, 25 April), although Andrew Jefford could have found a brewery even closer to the Ram Inn: the excellent Burning Sky Brewery in Firle itself. More on beer, please!
Colin Cubie, Hove
Haad yer gobs
I always enjoy Hunter Davies and his offbeat take on the beautiful game (The Fan, 25 April). However, in this neck of the woods we would never say 'Away the lads' – far too English. North of the Tyne it's 'Howay', while us Mackems tend to shout 'Ha'way'. Some suggest the phrase has its origins in the pitmatic dialect when miners would shout down the shaft for the cage to come halfway up. I expect Hunter would have a view on that.
Patrick Conway, Durham
Write to letters@newstatesman.co.uk
We reserve the right to edit letters
[See also: The sounds that shape us]
Related

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Winter fuel payment U-turn in numbers
Winter fuel payment U-turn in numbers

BBC News

time32 minutes ago

  • BBC News

Winter fuel payment U-turn in numbers

The government's decision to largely reverse its cuts to winter fuel payments has raised questions about its spending and savings plans - and its fiscal Verify has been looking at the the key numbers. What has changed on winter fuel? At the time Labour won the 2024 general election, the Department for Work and Pensions was projecting that 10.8 million pensioners in England and Wales would be eligible for winter fuel payments in payments are worth either £200 or £300 per household. The new government, in order to save money, decided that only pensioners in receipt of pension credit (a separate benefit aimed at low-income pensioners) would receive winter fuel payments that winter - and said that would reduce the number of individual recipients to 1.5 the government has changed course - after widespread criticism - and said that, from 2025-26, all pensioners will get it, although it will be clawed back in the following tax year from individuals earning £35,000 and claims this means about 9 million pensioners will now be eligible.. The effect of this is largely to undo the impact of its initial policy in terms of the numbers affected. How much will this cost? The government estimated that the cost of the winter fuel payment system it inherited in 2024-25 would have been £ estimated that its initial reform last year would cut this bill by £1.4bn in 2024-25 (rising to £1.5bn in 2025-26) taking the cost of the system down to £0.5bnNow the government says the cost of the system after its latest change will be £1.25bn - a saving of £450m relative to a system in which all pensioners were eligible to receive the government added that this £450m saving has not yet been certified by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) - the government's official if it transpired, this saving would be only a third of the original £1.5bn savings target. And some analysts think the overall net saving for the government could actually be lower Labour's initial 2024 reform, winter fuel payments were only available to those in receipt of a separate benefit aimed at low-income pensioners, called pension year, the government initiated a campaign to encourage the hundreds of thousands of pensioners who are eligible for pension credit, but who do not claim it, to start doing latest data shows almost 60,000 more pension credit claims were awarded than otherwise might have been, likely because of the government's awareness campaign. With each annual pension credit claim costing the government £3,900 a year on average, the former Lib Dem pensions minister Steve Webb has calculated that the total annual cost of these new claims could be about £ additional cost would offset around half of the £450m savings claimed by the government for its latest changes to winter fuel eligibility. How can the government afford this U-turn? When Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced the tightening of winter fuel payments in 2024, she said the £1.5bn per year savings were needed to stabilise the public those savings were entered into the OBR's budget calculations. Now the savings will only be £450m per year - or even lower - a gap of at least £1bn will open up in the government's Treasury said it will address this gap in the next Budget in the Autumn of 2025 and said "it will not lead to permanent additional borrowing".Assuming the OBR does not raise its GDP growth and tax revenue forecasts in the Budget, giving the government more money to fill the gap, this will imply ministers would either have to raise additional taxes or cut spending elsewhere to close this roughly £1bn gap .However, it should be noted that £1bn is a relatively low sum in the context of the public 2025-26 the government is projected by the OBR to spend £1,347bn and to borrow £ is also worth noting that the projected savings from the government's working age welfare reforms, announced earlier this year, are considerably higher than the savings from changing eligibility for winter fuel changes in eligibility for personal independence payments and the cuts to universal credit incapacity payments are projected by the OBR to save the government £4.8bn a year by 2029-30. If the government were to reverse or water down those reforms, as some Labour MPs are urging, it would create a considerably larger financial headache for the chancellor in terms of meeting her fiscal rules specify that she has to be projected to be on course to balance the government's day-to-day spending budget (which excludes spending on infrastructure) by March 2025, the OBR projected that she had just £9.9bn of "headroom" against this rule, a very small amount of leeway given the size of overall government spending and the welfare cuts would wipe out around half of many economists expect the chancellor's projected headroom to be further eroded by the OBR in any case in the Autumn Budget as a result of downgraded growth forecasts and an increase in government market borrowing costs in recent months. What do you want BBC Verify to investigate?

Government facing ‘walk of shame' over Chinese embassy decision
Government facing ‘walk of shame' over Chinese embassy decision

South Wales Guardian

time36 minutes ago

  • South Wales Guardian

Government facing ‘walk of shame' over Chinese embassy decision

Sir Iain Duncan Smith said response by the Government to the proposed embassy near the the capital's financial district had become 'Project Kowtow', as he criticised the Government for 'one denial after another (and) one betrayal after another'. Sir Iain referred to the warnings reportedly issued by the White House and Dutch government to Downing Street over the plans, which is set to be scrutinised by ministers. The worries stem from the close proximity of the proposed embassy's Royal Mint Court site to data centres and communication cables. The Sunday Times said the US was 'deeply concerned' about the plans, quoting a senior US official. In response, planning minister Matthew Pennycook said he could not give a full response as the matter was still to come before the department for a decision, and any verdict could be challenged by the courts. Sir Iain said: 'Beijing has a recent history of cutting cables and confirmed infrastructure hacks, including embedding malware capable of disabling all that infrastructure. 'Minister Peter Kyle yesterday on television said surprisingly that this was in the planning process and could be managed. Will the minister correct this record? The planning inquiry has concluded, no changes can be made to the Chinese planning application at all. 'I'll remind him the application contains nothing about cabling. Indeed to the inquiry, the Chinese have rejected only two requests, which he referred to actually, made by the Government in the letter from the foreign and home secretaries, despite ministers regularly saying that this letter, and I quote, should give those concerned, 'comfort'.' The Conservative MP said rerouting the cables would cost millions of pounds, and asked Mr Pennycook why the Government had denied the existence of cables until the White House confirmed it. He asked Mr Pennycook to deny reports by Chinese state media, saying the UK had given the Chinese assurances that it would allow a development 'no matter what'. He added: 'I see this as Project Kowtow, one denial after another, one betrayal after another. No wonder our allies believe that this Chinese mega embassy is now becoming a walk of shame for the Government.' Mr Pennycook replied because of the 'quasi-judicial nature' of his role, he could not comment on details of the application. He also said it would not be 'appropriate' for him to comment on the cabling or national security issues. He said he did not 'recognise the characterisation' by the Sunday Times of the embassy being raised in talks between the UK and China on trade. 'It is important to also emphasise that only material planning considerations can be taken into account in determining this case,' he said. 'But, as I say, I cannot comment in any detail on a case and it is not yet before the department.' Tory shadow communities secretary Kevin Hollinrake said Parliament had been treated with disdain by the Government. Mr Hollinrake said: 'Question after question, letter after letter, the Government has consistently treated Parliament with complete disregard on this matter. Stonewalling legitimate inquiries about national security, about ministerial discussions, and warnings about security bodies.' He added: 'Why won't the Government follow the examples of the US, Australian, and Irish governments which veto similar embassies that threaten their national security? 'The Government is on the verge of making a decision that will lead to huge risk, that will persist for decades. Will they change course before it is too late?' Mr Pennycook replied: 'No decision has been made on this case. No application is yet before the department.' Marie Rimmer, Labour MP for St Helens South and Whiston, said: 'China has a track record of aggressive state-backed espionage, and surely this country cannot afford to make a massive underestimation of what risk if this would go ahead?' She added: 'We cannot not say anything in this House. We must comment on what we see, and please understand that we must do so.' Meanwhile, former security minister, Conservative MP Tom Tugendhat, asked whether the Government believed the Chinese would treat a similar application in the same way. He said: 'Do you honestly believe that thr minister thinks that the Chinese would look at this proposal in the same way? 'Do we actually in this House believe that our economic security being threatened, as highlighted by the Americans and the Dutch, would go through a bureaucratic planning process with no ability to vary it because, frankly, them's the orders? 'I don't think that's the way China would do it, and it's certainly not the way we should.' Mr Pennycook replied: 'I'm very glad that we have a different and more robust planning system than the People's Republic of China.' Later in the session, Conservative MP Lincoln Jopp (Spelthorne) asked if the officer considering the case is 'cleared to receive top secret information'. Mr Pennycook replied: 'A planning inspector is assessing the case as part of a public inquiry. 'And I'm afraid, while I recognise why (Mr Jopp) has asked the question, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on national security matters.'

Restart coal mining and bring back traditional steelmaking to Wales, says Nigel Farage
Restart coal mining and bring back traditional steelmaking to Wales, says Nigel Farage

ITV News

timean hour ago

  • ITV News

Restart coal mining and bring back traditional steelmaking to Wales, says Nigel Farage

Nigel Farage has called for the blast furnaces at Port Talbot's steelworks to reopen as Reform UK sets its sights on the Welsh Senedd elections in 2026. On a visit to the town, the party leader said the resumption of traditional steelmaking should be the ambition. Farage has also suggested some coal mines could re-open in Wales to power the production of steel in Port Talbot. Speaking at a press conference, the Reform UK leader said he believes his party has a chance of ending Labour's long-standing dominance in Wales during the Senedd elections next May amid opinion poll momentum and gains made at the local polls last month. The Labour UK government has backed plans for a new £1.25 billion electric arc furnace at the Tata steelworks, with the switch-on due in 2027 as part of the push towards greener production. The plant's last blast furnace was shut down in September 2024, and nearly 2,000 people in Port Talbot have lost their jobs. Criticising the government's current plans, Farage said: "The electric arc is fine for recycling steel, it doesn't produce the virgin steel needed for military hardware, but the problem is that it uses vast amounts of electric in the the most expensive industrial electric prices in the world. "I very much doubt that furnace will ever be switched on . Our ambition is to reindustrialise Wales. Our belief is that we should make our own steel. Our belief is - for what uses coal still has - we should use our own coal. "I'm not saying let's open up all the pits, what I am saying is there are specific types of coal for certain uses that we still need in this country and we need for the blast furnaces here that we should produce ourselves." Tata Steel had been working to fully decommission and strip most of the iron and steelmaking assets across the Port Talbot site by the end of 2024, leaving little possibility of restarting the blast furnaces in their current company said many of the existing 'heavy end' assets - such as blast furnaces and coke ovens - had reached the "end of their operational life."Tata Steel CEO Rajesh Nair has previously said that there was "no way" the blast furnaces could be kept going, for both technical and financial Cameron Pleydell-Pearce, a steel expert and professor at Swansea University, told ITV Wales it would not be as straightforward as simply reopening the furnace in isolation, saying that there would be a need to import iron ore due to its low availability in the Pleydell-Pearce said: "One of the things that's important to remember is the furnace in Port Talbot was not shut down with the mind to restart it.""If you want to open any steel plant, you're going to have to invest hundreds of millions, if not billions, depending on the configuration that you want.... Because we're in a position where this furnace is going to be hard to restart, just from a technical perspective, it has to factor into it as well. So it's not just the investment that you're making, but the technical complexity of restarting."He continued: "It's not impossible, but the question is whether or not that fits into the strategy that's right for the UK. We have an abundance of scrap in the UK, so a scrap-recycling strategy makes sense. In other locations, there are plentiful supplies of iron ore and lower energy costs, so it might make sense for those locations to go with more ore-based steelmaking." Speaking about Farage's proposals, Chris Bryant, MP for the Rhondda and Ogmore, said: "This is really cruel politics from Nigel Farage, trying to pretend he's got a plan and he hasn't got a plan at all. "He couldn't afford what he's saying and the truth is the mines aren't going to re-open, they shouldn't re-open, these would be dangerous jobs and would be economically unviable. He should go home and be ashamed of himself."It makes me really cross that somebody waves this kind of flag, populism at its absolute worst. He knows he can't achieve it, he knows it wouldn't be right for climate change, for the economy, he knows he's on a hiding to nothing." A spokesperson for Community Union, one of the largest unions representing steelworkers at Tata's Port Talbot site, said: 'We will always support credible policies that create more well-paid jobs in the steel sector, but our steel communities deserve better than to be used as a political football. If Reform have serious plans for the future of our steel sector in Wales, they should set them out in full.' A Welsh Labour spokesperson has accused the Reform UK leader of bringing "fantasy politics" and a "magic money tree" to the town. They said: 'The people of Wales will see through the false hope and false promises of a public-school boy from England who does not understand them and does not understand Wales. In a wide-ranging press conference, Farage also announced a number of policies of immigration in Wales if Reform UK topped the polls next May: A pledge to put local people at the front of the social housing queue and to stop the use of any building for asylum seeker accommodation To scrap nation of sanctuary status for Wales To stop funding for "woke" policies including: £10.5 million for Equality, Inclusion and Human Rights budget, £440,000 on developing insects for food, including insect-based food for children and to end funding to the Wales Refugee Council. Farage's speech comes as Reform seeks to draw a line under internal clashes after chairman Zia Yusuf quit the party on Thursday only to return 48 hours later, saying the resignation had been 'born out of exhaustion'. He referenced this disagreement in his speech saying: "We hit a speed bump- it could've been that we were driving more than 20mph", jibing at the Welsh Government's default speed limit policy - something he has pledged to scrap if Reform UK were in power in the Senedd. It followed a row in which Yusuf described a question to the Prime Minister concerning a ban on burkas from his party's newest MP, Sarah Pochin, as 'dumb'. During his speech Farage also welcomed two independent Merthyr Tydfil Councillors who have defected to Reform UK - Andrew Barry and David Hughes. When pressed on whether there would be more high-profile defections in the Senedd or in Parliament, and if he'll name any candidate to stand as First Minister in Wales, he insisted "we very much want to look at Reform Wales being autonomous. There are names in Wales that I am talking to."

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store