Why is it that George Eaton (Cover Story, 13 September), in common with so many others, appears to be unaware that the £460 increase in the state pension from April is only for younger pensioners? Those of us on the “old” pension (women born before April 1953 and men before April 1951) will get the same percentage increase, but as our pension is distinctly lower, and with the gap getting greater with the percentage increase each year, the rise for us will be £350.
That’s about three-quarters of pensioners getting the lower amount, and then only if they qualify for full pension. This is a scandal in itself and it’s infuriating that this difference is so often ignored.
Alice Bondi, Alston Moor, Cumbria
It AI-n’t right
Wolfgang Münchau (Lateral View, 13 September) writes that the EU’s data protection laws are “an obstacle” to AI development. Why must we view this as a bad thing? While GDPR may be annoying, this is a small price to pay for sensibly developed, possibly even ethical, artificial intelligence. We have already seen the dangers of unregulated AI, not to mention the environmental impact of powering and cooling the necessary computers. Münchau, as a critic of neoliberalism, should know better than to prioritise economic growth over human well-being.
Freddie Russell, East Sussex
Fatal error
As a neurologist, I am always delighted when the New Statesman features articles about medicine. As such, Michael Barrett’s excellent commentary on the elimination of sleeping sickness (Comment, 13 September) immediately drew my eye. However, I was a little dismayed when he described a lumbar puncture as “sticking a needle into the spinal cord”. Having performed this procedure many hundreds of times, be assured that if the needle is placed into the spinal cord (a solid structure that normally terminates in the middle to lower back), it has gone horribly wrong. Rather, a more accurate description for the target is the spinal canal (a fluid-filled structure at the base of the spine). This may seem pedantic, but I come across such misconceptions when gaining patients’ consent, often the result of misrepresentation in the media.
Dr Duncan Street, Birmingham
V is for Vorderman
I must say I have time for Carol Vorderman (Encounter, 13 September) – she is not averse to speaking her mind – so I was interested to read Will Dunn’s interview with her. And it wasn’t pretty about the new Labour government. She is not alone in her ire towards Rachel Reeves and the unfathomable winter fuel allowance cut. I still can’t get my head around the decision, with yet more pain for that demographic coming down the line with the potential scrapping of the council tax single-person discount. I am pleased she is taking Labour on “full throttle”; I myself have morphed from a “critical friend” to a condemnatory one. How have we come to this so soon?
Judith A Daniels, Great Yarmouth, Norfolk
Jury’s out on integrity
She may be right to be dismissive of doubts raised about the Lucy Letby case, but it is worth reminding Alison Phillips (Media Notebook, 13 September) that a conviction must be achieved “beyond reasonable doubt”. Phil Hammond MD, in Private Eye, is one of the sleuths to whom she refers. He has raised questions that should be answered in this awful case. He has been at pains not to champion Letby’s case but to identify failings in procedure. That must be allowed to continue. Private Eye, as Phillips mentions, tenaciously pursued the Post Office scandal.
Dr Cormac A Farnan, Ballycastle, Co Antrim
Stuck in a Vance
Much of JD Vance’s message, such as his desire for “a post-liberal order that [serves] the ‘common good’” (Letter from America, 6 September), comes directly from Catholic social teaching. The Republican vice-presidential candidate has identified a rich and largely untapped seam of public opinion, one that respects tradition while also desiring a fairer, more equal society.
With Christians in the US apparently obsessed with policing sexuality rather than promoting social justice (Vance himself has made outrageously chauvinist statements), it is understandable that progressives want little to do with God or the church. However, the left would do well to shake off its reservations about such a discourse and develop its own appeal to this sector of the electorate.
Twentieth-century history provides examples of how teachings originating in scripture have served progressive causes. In Chile between 1964 and 1970, the Christian Democrat government of Eduardo Frei was elected on policies such as widespread land redistribution, based on the same intellectual sources that inspired Vance and the communitarian thinkers he admires. Their campaign slogan, “the land for those that work it”, was derived from Thomas Aquinas’s philosophy that social goods and personal flourishing were more important than private property ownership. Catholic labour organisations in Franco’s Spain, with their emphasis on the “working-class Jesus”, were key to the formation of the Workers Commissions that formed the basis of anti-regime protest and the right to strike. This was one of the main factors in the rapid and relatively peaceful Spanish transition to democracy in the mid-1970s.
The electorate of the 21st-century US will of course have other priorities, such as restoring cohesion to an atomised and divided society, or how to guarantee basic material security for all. Communitarian politics has some good answers to both. This is the centre-ground the left needs to capture if it is to achieve reliable majorities and push back the tide of right populism.
Daniel Carter, Cambridge
Picture perfect
“The Rise of Cultural Christianity” by Madeleine Davies (Cover Story, 23 August) was interesting and provocative. However, I write about the accompanying picture: the grand nave of Worcester Cathedral. Images can set the frame for an article and inform the reader, even if subliminally. This one is interesting, because it says so much: the massive architecture; grand, lofty, formal and rich, a space created for the theatre of worship. Full – but empty. There are no people in sight, just stone, glass and wood. It was at once a contradiction and a confirmation of the article, and spoke volumes about our time.
Mark Angus, Graz, Austria
Write to letters@newstatesman.co.uk
We reserve the right to edit letters
[See also: Letter of the week: Starmer’s rhetoric gap]
Content from our partners
Related
