Sir Keir Starmer was inconsistent to the end.
He informed us three years ago that he would not hand out resignation honours when he left Number 10, and yet here he is, creating yet more peers to the undemocratic, costly House of Lords.
Known as ‘Never here Keir’ because of all his numerous trips abroad, he can now also be labelled ‘More peers Keir’. I wonder how long it will be before he joins them?
Ruth Marr, Stirling.
More letters...
Keir Starmer is getting more like Margaret Thatcher every day
SNP has much to be proud of when it comes to infrastructure projects
A Biden victory would see the UK’s global standing decline even further
Starmer: consistently inconsistent
Twenty six new unelected cronies to join the noble hoards in the Lords.
It is not long since Labour were talking of reforming or abolishing this anachronistic throwback to the Middle Ages, and Sir Keir Starmer pledged that he would not hand out any resignation honours.
No one could say that he was inconsistent - performing this final flip-flop as he left office.
David Hay, Minard.
Burnham new Blair?
Third time lucky for Andy Burnham, and that tells its own story.
Far from being an outside, Mr Burnham is the consummate Westminster insider, starting as a parliamentary researcher age 24, then as a special advisor to a cabinet minister. Tony Blair fast-tracked him to a safe seat in Greater Manchester by age 31.
He supported the Iraq war, and in cabinet was an advocate for rebuilding hospitals with the ruinously expensive PFI (Private Finance Initiative) scheme.
He stood for leader and came fourth; stood again and lost to Jeremy Corbyn. After which his ambition to be a boss led him to become mayor of Greater Manchester, when shed-loads of money landed in the ‘North’.
He seems to be a Blairite of the traditional centre-right, but no one seems to know what he will do in office.
I doubt it will be a fiscal or social revolution and we will just have more of the same as 2029 looms larger and larger.
GR Weir, Ochiltree.
Don’t cut foreign aid
It is not only the welfare budget at home that Labour is threatening to cut. Foreign aid is the latest to be slashed (“Mary’s Meals chief hits out at ‘devastating’ UK plans for foreign aid cuts”, The Herald, July 18).
That is foreign aid to some of the most deprived and needy parts of the world, and all in an effort to raise the UK defence budget. Where does this decision sit morally ?
This action by the Labour government could see aid to Mozambique and Malawi being cut by nearly 90% by 2029. An outrage.
Such decisions are a false economy and have consequences.
Poverty makes people desperate to put food on the table, to provide shelter and medication when required. Often it is charities who are filling the gap.
This shameful decision to cut the foreign aid budget is effectively cutting health care and vital food supplies to some of the world’s poorest, in areas that are most affected by climate change.
It will, in turn, increase the desperation for a better life, forcing many into the hands of illegal human traffickers.
Catriona C Clark, Banknock, Falkirk.
Democracy in action
William Loneskie encapsulates, albeit inadvertently, the beauty of our democracy (Herald Letters, July 15). Any “Tom, Dick, or Harry”, any “fool”, can stand for election, and that is the electorate's opportunity for “scrutiny of their past, persona, or what they hope to achieve”.
Mr Loneskie seems to imply that some body, other than the people, should “prevent this sort of thing happening”.
Who are they? Were they elected?
Dr Hamish Maclaren, Stirling.
Draconian legislation
Expressing support for Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps now carries a possible jail sentence of 14 years. So does expressing support for Palestine Action.
The law now imputes that both of these entities are equally evil. Many would beg to differ, but cannot say so, or they end up imprisoned.
If such legislation had been in place in the 1930s, then support for fascists (‘Hurrah for the Blackshirts’ as a still-popular newspaper proclaimed at the time) or for Hitler's Nazis would have boosted the social mix among the general prison estate.
Including, if contemporary accounts are to be trusted, royals, lords and ladies, members of the Cabinet and the owners of the press.
AJ Clarence, Prestwick.
Capital punishment: different responses
Two letters about capital punishment over recent days display the difference between those who argue for and against.
The first was from Alan Fitzpatrick (Letters, July 15), then another (Letters, July 17) from David Logan.
One side engages their emotions, the other consults their intellect.
John Jamieson, Ayr.
Recession pending
While Scotland is not in a technical economic recession (a fall in GDP over two consecutive quarters) we are showing all the signs of recession, with thousands of Scottish graduates unable to find work, even in the hospitality industry.
And our industries are in dangerous decline.
Taxation in Scotland is the highest in the UK and our commercial business rates have increased by up to 200%.
The combination of these two things is the straw that breaks the back of the Scottish economy.
The Scottish government must move to stimulate the economy by reducing taxation and business rates. Otherwise we will be in a deep recession within the next 12 months.
Dennis Forbes Grattan, Bucksburn, Aberdeen.
Independence: economy matters most
A fine word salad from Herbert Petrie (Letters, July 17) along the lines of ‘Union bad so independence good’. And without an inkling of what independence would mean for the man in the Scottish street.
The transactional aspects of independence would have a huge negative impact on jobs, taxes, pensions, mortgages, savings and public services.
These would include debt; deficit; currency; a hard border for people and goods with our largest (60%) by far trading partner; trading arrangements.
Given the starting point of an independent Scotland - the latest Scottish government figures show a deficit of 11.6%, over twice the UK deficit, and close to the point when Greece had its painful bailout - we would inevitably be facing higher taxes (although many of our high value taxpayers would have already left) and a drastic reduction in public spending, also known as ‘austerity on stilts’.
But at least it would be Scottish austerity.
As always, the relevant determinator remains ‘it’s the economy, stupid’.
Douglas Templeton, Isle of Arran.
MAGA influencing NATO?
Dr. Russell Miller's correspondence (Letters, July 16) gave a very good analysis of where NATO is being directed in terms of the needed spending on relation to the GDP of its members.
I think that Dr. Miller has left out one element of his mathematical comparison, in that the beneficiaries of this spending are the arms manufacturing companies.
Would those that are owned, or partially owned by US businesses regardless of the location of the manufacturing bases, not be the main producers of whatever armaments and delivery systems?
Again, is this push to upgrade NATO's capabilities in the face of perceived threats from Russia and others solely to the benefit of the US?
Are President Trump's demands, while justified in some measure, another example of his MAGA policy?
Ian Gray, Croftamie.
Share