Letters: Party funding

Instead of funding the Labour Party, let it die a natural death

Sir: Andrew Grice put considerable effort into trying to persuade us that state funding for political parties is a sensible and democratic proposal ("Love them or hate them, parties need state funding", 6 January). Unfortunately, the ahistorical approach that he took undermined his argument. Political parties are creatures of their time: they come into being, thrive, decay and die in response to social change. For example, the Labour Party was born as a response to the frustration of the large number of industrial workers who lacked political representation of their own.

Throughout the bulk of the 20th century, Labour was the focus for working-class political ambitions. In government, the party did introduce some important measures to achieve these aims - nationalisation of coal, and the founding of the NHS, for example - even though Labour governments were usually a disappointment to their supporters.

However, the victory of neo-liberalism throughout the west at the end of the century was a major change which had huge effects on the parties. The Labour Party was taken over by New Labour, which made no secret of its ambition to be the party of big business in place of the Conservatives. In that at least, Tony Blair has been completely consistent, barely bothering to hide his contempt for the organised working class. It is no coincidence that since the honeymoon period of his first administration, Blair's Labour Party has seen a catastrophic decline in membership, and a huge drop in those willing to vote for it.

The fact is that Labour no longer represents working people. Unless it can find fresh supporters, it should follow its natural life cycle and decline and die. Why should those of us who used to support the party, but are no longer able to, continue to do so through our taxes? Grice wants to freeze our system of political representation in its current configuration. Apart from being grossly offensive to hard-pressed taxpayers, this proposal would actually undermine democracy. Propping up parties which can no longer command support denies space to new political formations, and frustrates the will of the electorate.

P ALLEN

LONDON E17

Liberia needs help more than ever

Sir: Your interview with President Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf of Liberia (3 January) rightly identifies that this country is on a knife-edge. As it moves from armed conflict to stability, Liberia risks being deserted by donors just when it needs them most.

Particularly acute is the healthcare situation. With NGOs such as Save the Children supporting 80 per cent of health services in the country, there is an urgent need for increased funding to ensure that Liberia can start to provide health services of its own. These services must be free for the patients of one of the poorest countries in the world. If clinics have to start charging, thousands of people will be unable to afford even the simplest treatments.

World leaders have promised to write off debt and assist countries to improve their healthcare systems, including by providing free health services. This has yet to happen in Liberia. In order to stop children and poor people paying with their lives, donors must deliver on their pledges and invest resources to rebuild the social sector.

There is a real opportunity this year. Donors are meeting in Washington in February to discuss the country's future, and Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany has promised to put African healthcare again at the top of the G8's agenda. Much hangs in the balance here, and this time, Liberia must not be forgotten.

SUSAN GRANT

LIBERIA COUNTRY DIRECTOR, SAVE THE CHILDREN UK, MONROVIA, LIBERIA

Sir: You are right to say Liberia has been poorly treated in not having its $3.7bn debts written off as promised at the G8 in 2005 (Leading article, 3 January). In fact, only 21 countries have so far had their debts cancelled under the deal - far short of the 67 countries that Gordon Brown has said need full cancellation.

To get debt relief, Liberia is not only being asked to pay off $1.5bn in arrears up front, but it will also have to comply with conditions, some relating to sensitive economic policies such as privatisation and trade liberalisation, dictated by the IMF and World Bank. This undemocratic and often harmful process has taken the last three countries to undergo it - Sierra Leone, Cameroon and Malawi - between four and six years to complete; they had to continue paying for their debts for all this time.

It is unjust that the rich countries lent the Liberian dictators Charles Taylor and Samuel Doe billions of dollars in the full knowledge of the nature of their regimes and their corruption, and now demand that the people of the newly established democracy of Liberia pay back the debts rather than satisfying their huge needs for health and education. It is time for debt cancellation not only to be faster and unaccompanied by damaging conditions, but for the rich world to admit its responsibility for creating unjust and unpayable debts in the first place.

TRISHA ROGERS

DIRECTOR, JUBILEE DEBT CAMPAIGN, LONDON N1

Irresponsibility of UK aviation policy

Sir: Your report on the rise in rail fares (3 January) highlighted the Government's so-called concern on climate change. Despite warnings from Stern on the future economic effects of not tackling carbon emissions, added to those of the recent Oxford report Predict & Decide, about current aviation expansion plans, still the Government talks but takes little decisive action on the issue.

If Mr Brown claims we have a moral obligation to tackle climate change, Mr Blair states we may have less than seven years to control and reduce global carbon emissions before runaway climate change bites, and the Government's chief scientific advisor, Sir David King, says climatic change is the greatest threat this planet faces, why is it still cheaper to fly from London to Manchester than to go by train?

Your excellent reporting on the issue showed how other EU countries, with their ultra-efficient rail networks, have few, if any, internal domestic flights compared to the UK. Until there is an economic incentive not to fly distances which could easily be covered by rail, people will continue to take advantage of cheap flights.

I cannot see how this Government, intent on expanding aviation, can also meet carbon-emission targets. Mr Pearson may have recently called Ryanair "the irresponsible face of capitalism", but is it not the Government which is being irresponsible, by not regulating the industry more effectively?

R RYAN

FOLKESTONE, KENT

Sir: The Stern Report confirmed that the airline industry accounts for just 1.6 per cent of global greenhouse emissions, yet the Government has seized upon this report as the basis for increasing the tax on flights.

On the one hand we have Gordon Brown saying that to protect the environment he will increase taxes on flights to deter people from flying. In the same breath he proposes building an additional runway and terminal at Heathrow because the UK "needs at least an additional 90,000 flights per year to retain its competitiveness." So what is the Government's position?

The simple answer is that it has no idea of what it is doing. Green taxes are an ideal way for this morally bankrupt government to fund their illegal war in Iraq. It is far easier for the government to target individuals with punitive taxes than it is for them to tackle the real causes of environmental damage - big business and the pursuit of profit above all else.

THOMAS MICHAELS

LONDON SW15

Wilful amnesia and the Cambridge spies

Sir: Attlee's apparent ignorance about the Cambridge spies Burgess and Maclean (report, 3 January) was probably wilful.

Before the war Burgess had been a BBC radio producer responsible for The Week in Westminster programme. His job, his gregarious homosexuality and his predilection for throwing outrageous parties brought him into contact with most of the important figures in Westminster. It wasn't only the Labour Party with which he maintained excellent relations. He ran personal errands for Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, and shortly after the disastrous Munich agreement spent the day at Chartwell in private conversation with Winston Churchill.

Churchill was so impressed with Burgess that he told him that he would be happy to find him a useful job in the forthcoming war. Yet when Churchill became Prime Minister shortly after the defection was confirmed and was responsible for answering parliamentary questions about Burgess and Maclean, he professed similar ignorance to that of Attlee. Jock Colville, Churchill's private secretary, recorded in his diary that he had to press Churchill to take the slightest interest in the matter.

There were many in those days who had once shared the company of Burgess and Maclean, yet after their defection couldn't remember sharing so much as a bus queue with them.

MICHAEL DOBBS

SALISBURY, WILTSHIRE

Subsidise farmers to ensure food security

Sir: I used to be of the opinion that there was no food-security issue and that food subsidies for farmers were no longer justifiable ("Subsidies must end, Miliband tells farmers", 4 January). But the global climate of the planet is starting to change quite rapidly and the effects this has on faming are going to be very difficult to determine. With the more arid climate that is predicted worldwide it is likely the world's soils are going to be a lot less productive, including in places we now depend on for large imports of food. Is this not, therefore, a food-security issue?

Perhaps David Miliband should be supporting food subsidies for this reason rather than getting behind the unproven technology of biofuel production. Biofuels are likely to fail in the long run because of their massive expense and inefficiency compared to fossil fuels, and the fact that we would need at least three more planet earths to have enough cultivated land to run our transport on.

If we want to make transport in this country more carbon neutral we may have to go down a path that is perhaps too radical for our current government to contemplate. This would be the path of investment in public transport. Trains could make a dramatic difference as they have the potential to be powered by carbon-neutral sources via electricity.

And if we want to use our land to cut carbon emissions we would be much better off planting deciduous forest for the reason that these absorb a lot more carbon than the biofuels plants that they would substitute. Furthermore, the light-reflective surfaces of their leaves would help to reflect heat back into space, helping to cool the planet.

SAMUEL BOLTON

CARDIFF

Airgun community is law-abiding

Sir: I am a regular member and contributor to the internet-based bulletin board AirgunBBS and I found the article "Cumbrian nights lit up by poachers feeding demand for venison" by Ian Herbert (9 December) both personally offensive and inaccurate.

He references the AirgunBBS as a haunt of poachers and criminals. The AirgunBBS, through its moderators and members, takes criminality of all forms very seriously and opposes it vigorously and consistently. The vast majority of BBS members are strongly opposed to the inhumane treatment of animals from whatever cause. The BBS exists to support the legal and safe use of airguns and to offer support to the sport.

ANDY MCLEAN

FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE BBS BOARD, NEWTON-LE-WILLOWS, MERSEYSIDE

Gaelic speakers are rare

Sir: The assertion (report, 3 January) that 40 per cent of the Irish population speak Gaelic is a gross exaggeration. In fact extremely few people do; such a percentage may have a smattering of "school Irish" but in this, the semi-official 51st state of the American Union, the overwhelming majority use English. Myths to the contrary can no doubt be ascribed to the master illusionists of the Irish Tourist Board.

DERMOT O'DOWDA

CORK

Israeli death penalty

Sir: There was an interesting juxtaposition in your paper on 5 January. Dominic Lawson (Opinion) wrote, "there is only one country throughout the Middle East which has abandoned capital punishment ... the State of Israel". In a report of the same day, Eric Silver wrote: "Israeli undercover troops, backed by helicopters, armoured cars and bulldozers, killed four Palestinians and wounded 25 others in Ramallah." With such continued extra-judicial state assassinations, no doubt the death penalty is considered superfluous.

SARA WOOD

LONDON NW3

Support for scientists

Sir: We are appalled to learn that the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority is planning to refuse permission for licences to be granted for "hybrid" embryos in response to "public unease" (report, 5 January). We are led to wonder how such opinion was sought, of whom and with what explanation as to the possible benefits of such research. Our clear view, as members of the public, is that this research is essential. We are sure we cannot be alone in supporting the scientists involved. How fortunate for "the public" that Pasteur and others were not similarly constrained.

PHIL AND GILL JOHNSON

CHELTENHAM, GLOUCESTERSHIRE

Hygienic beer

Sir. Jane Gibbs writes (letter, 6 January) regarding the hygiene issues of nurses arriving at work in their uniforms. When I worked at a brewery in the late 1990s, one regulation was that all uniforms were laundered and changed into on site, for health and hygiene reasons. Given the current climate regarding MRSA etc, surely we can afford to treat our sick and infirm with as much care as we do our beer?

BRIAN COOKE

ADDLESTONE, SURREY

True believers

Sir. Richard Ingrams notes that Catholics are traditionally described as "devout" (6 January), but that there is no such adjective for Protestants. I have often heard them described as "staunch"; or, as my Compact Oxford Dictionary has it "Very loyal and committed".

REV PATRICK CREAN

NETHERTON, MERSEYSIDE