Jacob Rees-Mogg and his government should be ashamed – austerity has had catastrophic consequences

Please send your letters to letters@independent.co.uk

Friday 18 December 2020 11:42 EST
Comments
Jacob Rees-Mogg said the UN agency feeding the UK’s hungry children was a 'political stunt’
Jacob Rees-Mogg said the UN agency feeding the UK’s hungry children was a 'political stunt’ (Getty Images)

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.

Jacob Rees-Mogg thinks that Unicef should be “ashamed” for offering help to families living in poverty in the UK.

I would counter that Mr Rees-Mogg and his government colleagues should be ashamed. Ten years of politically motivated austerity has had catastrophic consequences for the poorest in our society. 

Mr Rees-Mogg and his colleagues chose to make the poor pay for the banking crash brought on by greed. 

This is typical of the gaslighting that he and this government engage in. Trying to divert attention from the fact that families are starving in cold, unheated homes because of his government’s policies, and instead pointing at an outside agency for daring to offer assistance. 

Karen Brittain 

Leeds

A tier four is needed

Tier 3, far from being too heavy-handed as some right-wing Tories claim, is not even close to being firm enough in terms of sufficiently reducing Covid. Indeed, in a tier 3 area, some of which have confirmed weekly infection rates fast approaching 1,000 per 100,000, one can go to school, get their hair cut, go to the gym and pop to a spa for good measure. 

Queuing up inside a packed Primark is, likewise, permitted. 

It is outrageous that such things are allowed in areas that are quite literally full of coronavirus, and where Covid-19 is spreading like wildfire. What is essential about getting one’s nails done? To me, what’s truly essential is staying safe from Covid-19 which is, let us not forget, a dangerous disease. A stricter tier 4 should be initiated immediately. 

Sebastian Monblat 

Sutton

Not for turning

Headlines like “Millions more are trapped in the highest tier” can come as no shock to the public due to the increasing number of coronavirus cases.  

The government comes across as contradictory due to the further relaxation of the tier system next week for Christmas. 

Arguably, it is the right thing to put restrictions on regions with increasing cases. But prime minister Boris Johnson is concerned about doing a U-turn on the temporary Christmas relaxations in fear of losing popularity and control over UK citizens? 

If the virus is on the steep rise, where is the logic in relaxing the restrictions next week?


Johnson has a Thatcherite approach that he is “not for turning” when making Covid-19 decisions. The relaxation of the tier system will only cause more damage to both the economy and livelihoods in the long term, resulting in further lockdowns. 

When will these current contradictions that impact lives end? 

Alice Van Onselen 

Oxford 

Brexit was a draw

Erm... is it just me or wasn’t the result of the Brexit referendum a 2-2 draw? Two nations (Scotland and Northern Ireland) Remain and two nations (England and Wales) Leave.

With more than 76 per cent of the electorate English, the referendum was always going to be how England voted, with whatever votes they scooped up from like-minded voters from the other three nations.

Every year we take part in the Six Nations Championship Rugby Union competition. All nations have an equal opportunity to compete from the same starting point ie no points and five nations to beat. Nobody has ever argued about whether Wales and Scotland are nations or not. 

As far as I know, there are no plans to rename the competition “The Two Nations and Four Regions of the UK” as the BBC described all four home nations in their “how the nation voted” graphic.

Nobody has ever argued that the World Cup is undemocratic. Regardless of the population of the countries involved, all teams start on an equal footing.

If Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales and England had found themselves in the same group in the World Cup, all four Nations would have finished with equal points, with the top two teams going through to the next round based on goal/vote difference. England and Wales would have been knocked out in the group stage and sent home, and we would be looking for new managers.

But somehow we end up in the knockout phase of the competition with the EU facing a team called Leave. We have had extra time and extra, extra time until it boils down to a penalty shootout, which Leave lose by an unprecedented 10 nil. 

The player nominated to take the first penalty, David Cameron, is nowhere to be found. While the rest of the team go in search of him, it turns out that nobody has seen him for months and the penalty is awarded to the EU. 

Being the only player left during this search Theresa May takes the next three penalties and manages to score three own goals. Then Side Show Boris takes the fifth, and despite having moved the goal posts several times, still cannot get past the EU goal keeper, the unbeaten Barnier.

Personally, I don’t care whether people call me English, British or European. It just gives me a rough idea of who to support in the World Cup, the Olympics and the Ryder Cup, respectively.

As we look at the permanent backlog of 10,000 HGVs and stir-crazy drivers trying to cross the Channel and 10 per cent tariffs that seem to be the initial benefits of leaving the EU, is not too late for the prime minister to say: “Er... terribly sorry old bean. Bit of a cock-up on the ballot count. Can’t we just forget the whole thing?"

Oh, and if anybody can explain the democratic structure of the Eurovision Song Contest, can they please explain it to the rest of us?

Richard Stuart

Cumbria

Did 2020 bring us closer?

This was an extremely challenging year in myriad ways. However, 2020 opened our eyes to the inextricable link between humans and non-humans, and proved unequivocally that a bat flapping its wings in Wuhan, China, can engender horrendous repercussions across the world. 

Also, it brought us closer at a time when the entire world is navigating through economic turbulence, social, political and cultural upheavals, through climate chaos, ecocide, social death, widening health and economic inequalities, a pandemic and human deaths. Let us hope 2021 will be a better year. 

I wish you all a Merry Christmas and a prosperous and healthy new year.

Dr Munjed Farid Al Qutob

London

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in