LETTER : Batting with the umpire
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.From Earl Russell
Sir: Douglas Hurd ("Malice and a failure to understand", 15 February) clearly prefers ministers to be accountable to Parliament than to judges. Could this be because Parliament, lacking the power to compel full answers to questions, is less effective than judges.
Mr Hurd believes discontent with the present system is "a failure to understand". Can he answer John Stuart Mill's question: "When has there been a dominion which does not appear natural to those who possess it?"
The rest of us may wonder whether a system which makes ministers accountable to a Parliament which they control, allows them to double the jobs of batsman and umpire. No wonder they play such long innings.
Yours sincerely,
Russell
House of Lords
London, SW1
15 February
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments