Starmer blew his big chance to show himself to be a statesman

That was the moment at conference where Sir Keir could have elevated himself from politician to statesman. Sadly, he chose to titillate the party sycophants... and lose that golden moment of opportunity.

Allan C Steele, Giffnock.

Change is not for the good

TWO hecklers at the Labour Party conference took just a few seconds to prove that the party has indeed changed, to use its own annoying mantra. But it's not for the good.

One young man was left bruised by security staff after daring to suggest to Chancellor Rachel Reeves that Britain shouldn't be selling arms to Israel to kill tens of thousands of innocent Palestinians. Ms Reeves actually won applause when she told conference Labour was "not a party of protests".

Then Keir Starmer wore a self-satisfied grin during his speech when a young party member shouted out about "the children of Gaza".

The PM made a crass comment about the 18-year-old having a pass for the 2019 conference (when Jeremy Corbyn was leader) saying "while he has been protesting we have been changing the party". He got some laughs.

Has he forgotten, or simply doesn't care, that a UNHR report in May concluded Israel "had committed genocidal acts in Gaza"?

But delegates were apparently banned from using the word "genocide" at conference.

Is this UK Government not going to protest about anything?

We now learn the Prime Minister accepted free accommodation worth £20,000 so his teenage son could quietly study for his GCSEs ("PM suggests £20,000 donation was for ‘son to study for GCSEs’", heraldscotland, September 25).

Now that's a laugh.

Andy Stenton, Glasgow.

Read more letters

How can Starmer, Rayner and the rest sleep at night?

Israel is stoking up dire revenge from the children of Palestine

Shocking defence of Labour conduct

I ALMOST ended up in A & E this morning after reading Carlos Alba’s justification of Keir Starmer’s freeloading - suffering from a broken jaw after it hit the floor ("What's all the fuss about? Everybody loves a freebie - including journalists", The Herald, September 25.

Our Prime Minister is a person who subscribes to the notion that those with the broadest shoulders will have to suffer most, so long as its not him or his hench people.

What world does he inhabit to think that it is okay to accept gifts of £100,000 over the course of a Parliament and then preach to us hoi polloi that we have to tighten our belts and strap ourselves in for a tough ride that he will never directly experience?

And does Rachel Reeves think it is a good look to deprive pensioners of a winter fuel allowance when claiming £4,000 to heat her second home? Margaret "milk snatcher" Thatcher was a mere novice in comparison and our Chancellor could teach Cruella De Ville a thing or two.

Angela Rayner meantime justifies her freebies as “well, all politicians do it, so why should I be different?”.

And whilst you are in Liverpool why not, Ian Murray and Anas Sarwar, dip your snouts in the trough and accept hospitality from Scottish Salmon to attend a Liverpool football match? Do you really think that no return is expected, even subconsciously, from this largesse”?

The claim is that no rules were broken. Fine; but just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should. The optics, as they say, are spectacularly bad.

For Carlos Alba to be an apologist for all of this (Starmer’s £100,000 was “only” £20,000 per year, all politicians are at it, who wouldn’t love a freebie etc) was disgraceful. His article was disingenuous in the extreme.

As a footnote, there are sections of the hoi polloi who enjoy what politicians would seem to define as "freebies". They are called benefits. Would that they were on the same level as the "freebies" these politicians who least need them are enjoying.

William Thomson, Denny.

Why not hit the rich?

LABOUR promised no tax increases after the election. In order to keep its word the Tories' financial black hole will be partially filled with OAPs' winter fuel allowances.

At Liverpool Sir Keir apologised for this solution. Why could he not offer to break his tax promise by raising only the top levels of tax as an alternative? The conference would have welcomed this in short order.

Would this have reduced his chances of freebies?

JB Drummond, Kilmarnock.

Get the Letter of the Day straight to your inbox.

Romancing the banks

THE official Labour position on the winter fuel allowance cut is both utterly determined and lacking in any sympathy. Why? Blame the Tory budgetary "black hole" ( the persistent use of black as a cultural negative needs to be re-examined in the 21st century).

But the real reason is Liz Truss. Labour looked carefully at the financial markets' reaction to her wayward initiatives and with a real sense of fear said "we must not let that happen early in our tenure".

Labour is determined to show the world financial markets, banks, hedge funds and assorted dealers that "we have changed". To demonstrate that change it took on a Labour core constituency: old age pensioners, to wave like a flag for change. There were other methods it could have found but "cold pensioners" was the near-Machiavellian stark symbol of its change manifesto.

We will wait and see if Labour will consolidate this romancing the banks when the Budget comes along.

Thom Cross, Carluke.

Biden has blood on his hands

NEITHER bombing Lebanon nor invading it will destroy Hezbollah (" Death toll from two days of Israeli strikes on Lebanon now 558", The Herald, September 25). The Israeli military occupied much of Lebanon from 1978 to 2000. Hezbollah was first formed in 1985 to oppose the Israeli occupation, with Iranian support. Fifteen years later when the IDF left Hezbollah was still there. Bombing the whole of Lebanon in the 2006 war killed many civilians but changed nothing else in the long run - just like almost 20 years of trying to eliminate Hamas by force rather than negotiate with it after it won elections, or 76 years of trying to crush Palestinian resistance by force rather than offer them a real state with the same full sovereignty as Israel.

The Israeli and US political establishment talk about putting the Lebanese government back in charge of Lebanon. But the Lebanese government can't rein in Hezbollah, because that would lead to another civil war like the last 15-year one from 1979 to 1990. So it won't try, because that would be even worse than another war with Israel, never mind Hezbollah’s political wing being an elected part of the Lebanese government.

The only thing that can end this war is an end to the Gaza war. Which will only happen if the US suspends ammunition supplies to Israel. That won't lead to Israel being "defeated" let alone "destroyed" if it gives up on its current unachievable war aims. It would still be by far the most advanced and strongest in the Middle East with the strongest in the world as a close ally. Far more hostages would return home alive and far fewer civilians would be killed.

Strategically both wars are backfiring too. Most Lebanese opponents of Hezbollah have now rallied behind it against attacks by Israel. In Jordan Islamists have made big gains in elections.

This is the fault of the Biden administration. Unconditionally arming and supporting allies no matter what they do is no more responsible foreign policy than Trump’s isolationism and contempt for other countries. Both are irresponsible. Both lead to disaster in the long run.

Duncan McFarlane, Carluke.

The aftermath of an Israeli airstrike in Akbieh, Lebanon, on Tuesday (Image: PA)

Those friends of Israel

ISN'T it time that all those Labour and Conservative Friends of Israel, including the favourite to become the next Tory leader, Robert Jenrick, spoke out about Benjamim Netanyahu's actions against the ordinary people of Gaza, the West Bank, and Lebanon who have been slaughtered in their thousands by bombing?

Why the silence about Israel's flagrant breach of international law which bans booby traps which the pagers in the Lebanon terror attack were? When every booby-trapped pager beeped the respondent looked down to see what the message was, and, if not killed outright, was blinded. Surgeons were faced with the grim task of removing hundreds of sightless eyes. How can anyone who claims to be a friend of Israel stand by and say nothing, or parrot the absurd propaganda phrase "Israel has a right to defend itself"?

Increasingly, the only friends Israel has are the arms companies supplying it with weapons.

William Loneskie, Lauder.