We need to talk about nepo babies in politics

Having had to navigate my own way in a career as a solicitor where there were many “nepo babies”, I read the article about Jamie Lee Curtis with a lot of interest. There are many NBs like her: talented in their own right, but who simply wouldn’t be there if it were not for their connections.

In the arts world, it is annoying when you see a run-of-the-mill person in a role and suspect the only reason they broke through was because of family ties. But in other areas of work, it can be more that just an annoyance as grievously untalented people start to impact on our lives.

I am sure many readers have often wondered what our political world would look like if seriously talented people were brought to the fore based on merit, rather than who they know. A pipe dream I know – but at Christmas one is allowed some hope…

Kerry Larbalestier

Address supplied

The United Kindom urgently needs to rejoin the EU, if they will have us back before any further damage is done. We cannot carry on like this for much longer. I would never have believed the damage that as been done in such a short time to the UK economy causing poverty and unhappiness.

Once these political that at present in power have finally bankrupted the country they will disappear with all their millions that they have made out of people’s misery, it’s no good to keep saying the war in Ukraine and Covid are to blame, it is the incompetent and bad management from the government that’s been in power for twelve years from day one to blame. Apply to rejoin the EU.

John B

Address supplied

Oh the irony. As part of the EU, all government contracts, like supply of ministerial cars had to go to Europe-wide competitive tender. Now we have taken back control, we can decide to buy the necessary vehicles from a UK source. In the meantime, however, we have allowed our automotive industry to decline so much we will have to go to Europe for these where the industry has not so declined.

G Forward

Stirling

Adam Forrest in his article “Reverse banking tax cuts to feed children, say Lib Dems” reports that Sunak and Hunt are actioning a “cut to the bank surcharge on profits from 8 per cent to 3 per cent” from April 2023. We also learn that one week’s worth of cuts could provide food vouchers for 1.9 million children in poverty over the Christmas period.

The banks were bailed out by the public and released from their debts to the country, primarily to the benefit of their shareholders, in a way that no bank I know of would free its own debtors. This latest offering is a further and unjustifiable gift of funds. Tax deductions handed out in a period of austerity to be applied perhaps in increasing recently unshackled bonuses and shareholder dividends – trickle down economics, Mr Sunak? This ugly policy is entirely in line with the Tory party philosophy that “to them that hath shall be given” notwithstanding the season.

The commercial banks have had more than their fair share of state-sponsored magnanimity. This example of the opportunity cost of the latest unjustifiable Tory bounty should be a matter of national shame.

David Nelmes

Caerleon, Newport

A strong and large – not just wealthy – consumership is required for a long-term functional economy. And that fundamentally means those consumers collectively need to be properly housed and nutritionally fed for the long term.

Or is the corporate unlimited-profit objective/nature somehow irresistible, including the willingness to simultaneously allow an already squeezed consumer base to continue so — or even squeezed further?

Maximising profits by risking the wellbeing of people will likely always be a significant part of the nature of the big business beast. And successive governments mostly dare not intervene, lest they get labelled anti-business in our avidly capitalist culture – not to mention a blaring mainstream news media that’s naturally critical of incumbent governments, especially in regards to job and capital transfers and economic weakening.

Meantime, corporate CEOs shrug their shoulders and defensively say their job is to protect shareholders’ bottom-line interests. The shareholders, meanwhile, shrug their shoulders while defensively stating that they just collect the dividends and that the CEOs are the ones to make the moral and/or ethical decisions.

But the status quo — where already huge corporate profits and untaxed superfluous wealth are maintained or increased while many people are denied even basic necessities — likely will end up hurting big business’s own monetary interests.

Frank Sterle Jr.

Canada