DEFENDING BRITISH POLICING
Hugh Orde’s views on the policing of protest, in February’s cover story, and Jessica de Grazia’s article on law and order in New York (in the same issue), both remind us that, despite the controversy which always attends policing here, Britain’s record is admired in most parts of the world. In heaven, so the saying goes, the lovers are Italian, the engineers are Swiss, the cooks are French—and the police are British.
De Grazia is right that aspects of New York’s policing “miracle” resulted from the leadership of William Bratton, commissioner in the mid 1990s. But he left his post after only 27 months following a tenure that saw him increasingly at odds with the mayor, who did not like to be outshone. I remember Dominic Grieve, when shadow home secretary in 2008, being astonished to be told by a senior American police commander why British policing was better than in the US. So I am surprised by the government’s determination to introduce directly elected police commissioners in Britain, a decision without a shred of intellectual or historical underpinning—and based on the one feature of the US policing system widely regarded as its weakest link.
Ian BlairFormer head of the Metropolitan Police
NEW YORK WAS A SUCCESS
Jessica de Grazia (February) works hard to debunk New York’s success in cutting crime. But the facts speak for themselves: rapidly falling crime under two successive mayors including, more recently, over a decade when police numbers have fallen too.
There are certainly useful lessons here about the stronger accountability that direct democracy brings to policing. But we don’t have to look across the Atlantic for this. How many Londoners would like to see an invisible authority replace the mayor’s responsibility for policing?
De Grazia’s proposal to “beef up” police authorities completely misses the point. These are invisible bodies made up of appointees. In the end, politicians must hold the police to account on behalf of the people. The issue is whether the forces answer to Whitehall, or to the local communities they are meant to serve.
Nick Herbert MP (Conservative)Minister for policing and criminal justice
WHY DAVID LAWS IS WRONG
I am a great believer in the power of hope and optimism in politics, but it is hard to discern from where David Laws (February) finds his optimism about the fate of the Lib Dems in the coming May local elections.
Nick Clegg has got himself into a position where his success or failure will be judged according to how he can render less awful some pretty awful Tory policies. This was not how it was meant to be. Laws states that “forecasts of the party’s demise will be as ill-judged on this occasion as they have been over many a decade.” But the difference this time round is that the Lib Dems have tied their fate to that of a party with diametrically opposed values.
Everything Laws and his colleagues say and do is designed to persuade the public that they are having a progressive impact on the Conservative government. I sense this is a gigantic act of self-persuasion. They did not have to support the Tory policy prescriptions for the country; they chose to. They must live with the electoral consequences.
Alastair CampbellFormer head of communications and strategy to Tony Blair
SAVE THE WORLD SERVICE
I very much hope that the foreign secretary, William Hague, will reconsider the government’s decision to cut 16 per cent of the BBC World Service’s budget.
Such cuts are not required as a contribution to deficit reduction. Their full value in cash terms—£28m—can and should be found from within the Department for International Development (DfID). The total value of DfID’s budget is planned to be £11.3bn by 2013-14, a rise of £3.5bn in cash terms. This means that the needs of the World Service could be fully met with just 0.8 per cent of the increase in funding that is going to DfID.
Andrew Tyrie MP (Conservative)House of Commons
DON'T WRITE OFF AMERICA
Jim Rogers’ excited article about investing in China (February) did not contain a graph of portfolio returns in the Middle Kingdom since stock markets were re-established in 1992. Just as well. Total returns (capital gains plus dividends) over that period have been a fraction of those in Britain and the US.
At some point there will be a liquidity-driven blowout in the Chinese stockmarkets but, rather than wait for this, investors would do better to put their money in countries with Anglo-Saxon financial systems. The two safest ones in Asia are probably Hong Kong and South Korea, and the US will almost certainly still produce the best long-term returns in the world.
Joe Studwell Author of “The China Dream”
NOT CHINA'S CENTURY, YET
Jim Rogers is premature in his prediction that the 21st century will be China’s (February). Unless it fixes its politics sometime soon, the country will get stuck. Capitalism is only really comfortable in a democracy with the rule of law; even a Chinese capitalist needs to enforce rights to his property. You cannot sustain a private sector that gets only 10 per cent of the bank credit when it accounts for more than 40 per cent of the employment. Nor can you live for long with a situation where 90 per cent of the richest people are related to government or party officials.
Most people think the race between China and India is about which country will become rich and powerful. Well, both countries will be prosperous in the coming decades. The race will be won by the nation that sorts out its government first. India has liberty but poor governance. China does not have liberty, but it does have relatively good governance. A successful nation needs both.
Gurcharan DasAuthor of “The Difficulty of Being Good”
BLAME IT ON THE X FACTOR
James Purnell (January) is right about the pernicious effect of today’s dominant ideology on the power of the labour movement. He is also right that new Labour had a role in placating the working classes. However, it is not the over-theorising of scientific socialism that is to blame here. The working classes became docile and pacified with the onset of plasma televisions and The X Factor.
More importantly, the labour movement was also betrayed by the new Labour “ideologues” who invented the “ever-expanding middle class.” Conveniently for new Labour, Marxist revolutions are not incited by the middle class; even more conveniently, the increasingly impoverished middle class vents its frustrations by lynching the “undeserving poor” of the working class. Purnell is certainly correct to suggest that the social war is not over yet.
Patricia Kaszynska Policy and research co-ordinator University of the Arts, London
TAKE MY ADVICE
Poor Max Hastings. He seems fated to trust well and fare poorly—and will continue apace with the DIY investment advice offered to him by John Kay (February).
Kay is right to focus on matching, not beating, the averages, so saving large annual management costs. But investing via one online fund is like driving with the accelerator alone. An investor must consider goals, taxes, age, risk tolerance and liquidity. No one size fits all. A good planner is invaluable.
Charles H Green, CEOTrusted Advisor Associates, New Jersey
THANK YOU, DARLING
Alistair Darling (February) is right that teenagers should be taught about finance at school. I left school without the faintest idea what a mortgage was; I think I associated it with mort—perhaps appropriately, as my ignorance was deadly. Ignorance, unlike stupidity, can be remedied.
Penelope MaclachlanLondon W7
SALUTE THE PRUSSIANS
Roger Boyes’s article (February) hailing the return of Prussia should not make people nervous. A common sense of shared Prussian culture and heritage across all the areas forming part of that kingdom during its 1871-1918 heyday would be no bad thing, but rather a force for peace and stability across Germany, France, Belgium, Denmark, Poland and Russia. The best Prussian values were not only noble in themselves, but informed the first welfare state—and were a significant force for unity between Teutons and Slavs, and between Catholic and Protestant parts of Europe.
David LindsayLanchester, County Durham
A CAMEO APPEARANCE
I expect that others have already suggested additions to the “In fact” item (January) which states that “are’” is the only one syllable word in the English language to which you can add one letter and make a three-syllable word (“area”). May I propose that “came” plus “o” becomes cameo (three syllables) and “rode” plus “o” becomes rodeo?
Keila A WescombeVia the Prospect website
Have your say: letters@prospect-magazine.co.uk
Hugh Orde’s views on the policing of protest, in February’s cover story, and Jessica de Grazia’s article on law and order in New York (in the same issue), both remind us that, despite the controversy which always attends policing here, Britain’s record is admired in most parts of the world. In heaven, so the saying goes, the lovers are Italian, the engineers are Swiss, the cooks are French—and the police are British.
De Grazia is right that aspects of New York’s policing “miracle” resulted from the leadership of William Bratton, commissioner in the mid 1990s. But he left his post after only 27 months following a tenure that saw him increasingly at odds with the mayor, who did not like to be outshone. I remember Dominic Grieve, when shadow home secretary in 2008, being astonished to be told by a senior American police commander why British policing was better than in the US. So I am surprised by the government’s determination to introduce directly elected police commissioners in Britain, a decision without a shred of intellectual or historical underpinning—and based on the one feature of the US policing system widely regarded as its weakest link.
Ian BlairFormer head of the Metropolitan Police
NEW YORK WAS A SUCCESS
Jessica de Grazia (February) works hard to debunk New York’s success in cutting crime. But the facts speak for themselves: rapidly falling crime under two successive mayors including, more recently, over a decade when police numbers have fallen too.
There are certainly useful lessons here about the stronger accountability that direct democracy brings to policing. But we don’t have to look across the Atlantic for this. How many Londoners would like to see an invisible authority replace the mayor’s responsibility for policing?
De Grazia’s proposal to “beef up” police authorities completely misses the point. These are invisible bodies made up of appointees. In the end, politicians must hold the police to account on behalf of the people. The issue is whether the forces answer to Whitehall, or to the local communities they are meant to serve.
Nick Herbert MP (Conservative)Minister for policing and criminal justice
WHY DAVID LAWS IS WRONG
I am a great believer in the power of hope and optimism in politics, but it is hard to discern from where David Laws (February) finds his optimism about the fate of the Lib Dems in the coming May local elections.
Nick Clegg has got himself into a position where his success or failure will be judged according to how he can render less awful some pretty awful Tory policies. This was not how it was meant to be. Laws states that “forecasts of the party’s demise will be as ill-judged on this occasion as they have been over many a decade.” But the difference this time round is that the Lib Dems have tied their fate to that of a party with diametrically opposed values.
Everything Laws and his colleagues say and do is designed to persuade the public that they are having a progressive impact on the Conservative government. I sense this is a gigantic act of self-persuasion. They did not have to support the Tory policy prescriptions for the country; they chose to. They must live with the electoral consequences.
Alastair CampbellFormer head of communications and strategy to Tony Blair
SAVE THE WORLD SERVICE
I very much hope that the foreign secretary, William Hague, will reconsider the government’s decision to cut 16 per cent of the BBC World Service’s budget.
Such cuts are not required as a contribution to deficit reduction. Their full value in cash terms—£28m—can and should be found from within the Department for International Development (DfID). The total value of DfID’s budget is planned to be £11.3bn by 2013-14, a rise of £3.5bn in cash terms. This means that the needs of the World Service could be fully met with just 0.8 per cent of the increase in funding that is going to DfID.
Andrew Tyrie MP (Conservative)House of Commons
DON'T WRITE OFF AMERICA
Jim Rogers’ excited article about investing in China (February) did not contain a graph of portfolio returns in the Middle Kingdom since stock markets were re-established in 1992. Just as well. Total returns (capital gains plus dividends) over that period have been a fraction of those in Britain and the US.
At some point there will be a liquidity-driven blowout in the Chinese stockmarkets but, rather than wait for this, investors would do better to put their money in countries with Anglo-Saxon financial systems. The two safest ones in Asia are probably Hong Kong and South Korea, and the US will almost certainly still produce the best long-term returns in the world.
Joe Studwell Author of “The China Dream”
NOT CHINA'S CENTURY, YET
Jim Rogers is premature in his prediction that the 21st century will be China’s (February). Unless it fixes its politics sometime soon, the country will get stuck. Capitalism is only really comfortable in a democracy with the rule of law; even a Chinese capitalist needs to enforce rights to his property. You cannot sustain a private sector that gets only 10 per cent of the bank credit when it accounts for more than 40 per cent of the employment. Nor can you live for long with a situation where 90 per cent of the richest people are related to government or party officials.
Most people think the race between China and India is about which country will become rich and powerful. Well, both countries will be prosperous in the coming decades. The race will be won by the nation that sorts out its government first. India has liberty but poor governance. China does not have liberty, but it does have relatively good governance. A successful nation needs both.
Gurcharan DasAuthor of “The Difficulty of Being Good”
BLAME IT ON THE X FACTOR
James Purnell (January) is right about the pernicious effect of today’s dominant ideology on the power of the labour movement. He is also right that new Labour had a role in placating the working classes. However, it is not the over-theorising of scientific socialism that is to blame here. The working classes became docile and pacified with the onset of plasma televisions and The X Factor.
More importantly, the labour movement was also betrayed by the new Labour “ideologues” who invented the “ever-expanding middle class.” Conveniently for new Labour, Marxist revolutions are not incited by the middle class; even more conveniently, the increasingly impoverished middle class vents its frustrations by lynching the “undeserving poor” of the working class. Purnell is certainly correct to suggest that the social war is not over yet.
Patricia Kaszynska Policy and research co-ordinator University of the Arts, London
TAKE MY ADVICE
Poor Max Hastings. He seems fated to trust well and fare poorly—and will continue apace with the DIY investment advice offered to him by John Kay (February).
Kay is right to focus on matching, not beating, the averages, so saving large annual management costs. But investing via one online fund is like driving with the accelerator alone. An investor must consider goals, taxes, age, risk tolerance and liquidity. No one size fits all. A good planner is invaluable.
Charles H Green, CEOTrusted Advisor Associates, New Jersey
THANK YOU, DARLING
Alistair Darling (February) is right that teenagers should be taught about finance at school. I left school without the faintest idea what a mortgage was; I think I associated it with mort—perhaps appropriately, as my ignorance was deadly. Ignorance, unlike stupidity, can be remedied.
Penelope MaclachlanLondon W7
SALUTE THE PRUSSIANS
Roger Boyes’s article (February) hailing the return of Prussia should not make people nervous. A common sense of shared Prussian culture and heritage across all the areas forming part of that kingdom during its 1871-1918 heyday would be no bad thing, but rather a force for peace and stability across Germany, France, Belgium, Denmark, Poland and Russia. The best Prussian values were not only noble in themselves, but informed the first welfare state—and were a significant force for unity between Teutons and Slavs, and between Catholic and Protestant parts of Europe.
David LindsayLanchester, County Durham
A CAMEO APPEARANCE
I expect that others have already suggested additions to the “In fact” item (January) which states that “are’” is the only one syllable word in the English language to which you can add one letter and make a three-syllable word (“area”). May I propose that “came” plus “o” becomes cameo (three syllables) and “rode” plus “o” becomes rodeo?
Keila A WescombeVia the Prospect website
Have your say: letters@prospect-magazine.co.uk
