Letters: we’ve forgotten the point of motherhood

The least deserving

Sir: In your leading article (‘All that glitters’, 14 October) you point out that Keir Starmer avoided mentioning inflation and illegal migration at the Labour conference because the Labour party has historically been weaker than the Conservatives on the two issues.

On the first of these issues, the current administration, and indeed the Tory party as a whole, is surely showing itself to be equally devoid of ideas on how to solve it.

On the second we were treated at the Tory conference and before to the unedifying spectacle of the Home Secretary using unpleasant and unfeeling language about asylum seekers and migrants, amounting in the minds of many who have supported the Tories in the past almost to hate speech.

Caught between the Scylla and Charybdis of a tired, divided and apparently clueless government and an opposition that is seeking to be all things to all people, it may well be the case, as you conclude, that there is little real enthusiasm for Keir Starmer among former Tory voters: but that will not stop many of them voting for a change of government. The sooner this happens, the sooner the Conservative party can start to rebuild itself, perhaps into a one-nation party that will be electable in the future. As it is, there is almost nothing to show that they deserve to be re-elected.

Patrick Rackow

How bishops vote

Sir: Andrew Roberts is wrong to think that the voting record of bishops in the Lords points to an anti-Conservative bias (‘Meddlesome priests’, 7 October). Bishops take our roles as unwhipped and independent members of a revising chamber seriously. While we do not vote often, our votes are usually for the improvement of legislation by amendment, not for party-political reasons. Behind the scenes, our relations with ministers and frontbenchers are generally good and productive.