Letters: Labour is using the House of Lords to undermine democracy

Changed days. Now the number of Scottish Labour peers is more than three times the number of Labour MPs representing Scottish constituencies and, as a result, the non-elected members of the SPLP can easily outvote the elected representatives.

That is an affront to democracy and should not be tolerated in any party, especially one describing itself as democratic socialist.

It is well over a century since Keir Hardie, founding father of the Labour Party, called for the abolition of the House of Lords. Now Labour uses the House of Lords to undermine democracy.

Dennis Canavan, former Labour MP (1974-1999),

Sauchieburn, Bannockburn.

YOUR recent report on Ian Murray surviving a Corbynista purge perhaps reflects a true difference in emphasis between the two sides of Labour.

Boris Pasternak, once observed “those who inspired the revolution aren't at home in anything except change and turmoil ... for them, transitional periods, worlds in the making, are an end in themselves”. He concluded it was because “they haven't any real capacities, they are ungifted”. In this he expressed the profound difference between organising a protest movement to managing in government. This is perhaps the essence of the apparent split within the Labour Party.

Elizabeth Marshall,

3/13 Western Harbour Midway,Edinburgh.

YOUR reminder of the changes John Smith made in his Shadow Cabinet 25 years ago (From Our Archives, The Herald, July 25) left me thinking about how wise the man was.

Donald Dewar was tired and deserved a fresh role. With a growing elderly population even then Mr Smith saw that this called for new ideas and had Mr Dewar applied himself enthusiastically to that task – he was appointed to shadow Social Services - things might have been different. Unfortunately when Mr Dewar and his friends in the establishment orchestrated the constant undermining of Tom Clarke, history led us to the loss of both the best Prime Minister we never had as well as a man who would have been an outstanding Secretary of State and first Minister in Mr Clarke. George Robertson got it wrong when he predicted that devolution would wipe out the Nationalists.

The diaries of Tony Blair and Alastair Campbell show that when Mr Dewar got the Scottish job in government he lacked the energy and vision required and was much too loyal to second-rate politicians who got themselves close to him. Henry McLeish and McConnell were never up to the job and the separatists thrived under their watch.

How very different it would have been if Smith had lived to be PM and if the elite in Scotland had shown a fraction of the loyalty which the rank and file demonstrated in response to Clarke’s brilliant speech at Inverness following months of harassment – a tactic which became all too familiar when Jeremy Corbyn was democratically elected.

James O'Hare,

120 Gartsherrie Road, Coatbridge.

I PRESUME that David Torrance is aware of the reasons for Barnett (“Nationalists failing to use their heads over the fairness of Barnett”, The Herald, July 24). Since the 1930s the UK has become an ever more centralised economy drawing wealth into the Midlands and SE England. Barnett in its own bungling way has tried to rectify this situation which has become worse with North Sea oil revenues draining into the financial centres in London.

Against this background £1.5 billion to Northern Ireland has nothing to do with Barnett. It is a bribe and it is corrupt. I am sure that Ulster's political classes won't worry about that, and why should they?This is the kind of corruption which will weaken Britain and offer to Scotland and Wales an opportunity for some meagre pickings.

The long-term solution is not to squeeze Barnett till the pips squeak, but to stand on our own feet and choose independence. England seems determined to hold on to us, which I am sure is not for any charitable reason. So when we cut the ties which bind and seek a new partnership of mutual respect with the other nations of the British Isles let us remember charity begins at home.

George Leslie,

North Glassock, Fenwick.

THE recent national survey of literacy standards by Professor Keith Topping of Dundee University confirms yet again Scotland's declining literacy standards by comparison to both England and Northern Ireland (“Scots pupils are bottom of the class for reading”, The Herald, July 25). The SNP response, which directs a modest amount of funding to some schools, but not others, lacks focus and relevance. The improvement in England, particularly in relation to decreasing the attainment gap between the more and the less advantaged, is based firmly on resources targeted at the individual children in need and on literacy strategies which work. The Scottish school-based funding system will fail to meet the needs of deprived children who happen to attend schools in more affluent areas.

More critically, however, is the abrogation of responsibility for ensuring that literacy strategies in schools are working. Are we to assume that Scottish children are less capable than those in England or Northern Ireland? Absolutely not, so our methods are failing. The SNP response? Nicola Sturgeon has set up the Reading Challenge to encourage reading which we are told is “very successful”. Schools have been running programmes like this for years, to little effect. What is required is a radical re-think on how we teach reading and writing, adopting successful methods and abandoning fashionable techniques which have failed so many young people.

Literacy standards have an immense impact on the life chances of individuals and on society as a whole. If this Government allows the current approach to literacy to continue we can expect no improvement any time soon.

Carole Ford,

Former president, School Leaders Scotland,

132 Terregles Avenue, Glasgow.