Letters to the Editor – week ending 20th September 2026

Read what people have been writing to our editor about this week. Find out how to share your own views here.

Editors note: due to all staff being at Labour Party Conference next week, there will be no ‘Letters to the editor’ feature on Sunday 27th September. However, expect a bumper crop on its return the following week.

A harmonious union?

There is a serious danger when one considers the low turnout in Union’s and Labour members’ internal elections. It is bad enough in most local government elections, but the risk to this government is greater now than before.

If leaders do not regularly communicate and consult with their membership, they will feel isolated from policy. When important external elections occur, they might drift away to other parties, or give up voting altogether. 

Even worse, and that applies more widely, they might succumb to the £millions that Farage will use to buy them. It’s a bit like Donald Trump offering $5,000 to each American who ensures Republican success in the mid-terms.

It really is time to stop the talk of future manifestos, and provide action on political donations and electoral reform.

David Murray

*****

Hi LabourList,

The trade unions in this country should be at the heart of the Labour Party. Unfortunately they have become the bogeymen of the party.

The glaring example is the Unite/Council bin strike. How anyone will ever vote Labour again in Birmingham is beyond me.

Having worked with Unite on many occasions as an employer and listened to their adversarial tone at Labour conferences I cannot see the bright future for the relationship which you seem to predict.

Improving working conditions and benefits is a two way street with employers and unions working together not against one another. 

I do wish that discussion in the party was based on data. How many tonnes of waste was not collected, how many infestations of rats appeared in Birmingham.

Stop being so nice to each other and address the elephants in the room.

Regards

John Gill
Labour member

*****

Assisted Dying Bill

Dear Emma,

 A persistent refrain from pro-assisted suicide campaigners over recent months has been that the House of Lords stymied unreasonably and unacceptably the will of the Commons in failing to pass the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill in the last parliamentary session. It is now clear that in fact the Lords performed a great service to the Commons in ensuring that the elected chamber was given a second chance to reconsider and vote again upon this deeply flawed legislation having seen exposed in parliamentary debate and through media contributions, including in LabourList, the weaknesses of a Bill that would have placed the sick, disabled and vulnerable in the gravest peril.

Whilst there continues to be some Commons support for the principle of assisted suicide, the collapse in the vote from 330 on second reading first time around (29th November 2024), to just 270 on the comparable vote last Friday (11th September 2026) reflects the realisation that the oft-asserted “safeguards” in the Bill would, in reality, have provided as much protection for the vulnerable as a chocolate fireguard!

Hopefully, we can now put this divisive debate on a dangerous Bill, clearly settled for the rest of this parliament, behind us and instead come together, as Andy Burnham has encouraged, to focus on sorting out our broken social care, end of life and palliative care services. Now that would be a noble legacy for this parliament. 

With kind regards and all good wishes.

Chris Whitehouse

[Editors note: As we do on all issues where passions run high on all sides, LabourList published op-eds both in support of and against the Assisted Dying Bill. Our job is to provide a neutral platform for important debates within the party – however uncomfortable]

*****

Triple locked and loaded

The debate about whether the triple lock on pensions can be afforded has once again stirred amid budget speculation. Predictably, the mainstream media sets the debate in terms of intergenerational conflict, namely the elderly have it all, whilst younger generations are denied. 

So, let’s impoverish the elderly. The fifth richest economy in the world cannot afford a decent pension (the one we have compares unfavourably with other European and Scandinavian countries). 

The whole debate is a false construct. The pension is affordable – the National Insurance fund has been billions in credit for years. It only reduced when the last Tory government made crazy cuts to National Insurance contributions.

What is more, life expectancy is no longer rising – there are also huge disparities in life expectancy depending on where you live and the circumstances. The population worldwide is in decline. 

The state pension is a right, not a welfare benefit or a privilege. People have paid 35 years plus to earn that pension. There is also little mention made of benefits, like the billions saved in free care provided by grandparents for their children and grandchildren, the voluntary work undertaken and increasing numbers of the elderly who continue to work.

On the wider issues, there is AI – if it does wipe us all out the whole argument is a bit academic. If many jobs become redundant, the question will be what happens to the people? How will they earn a living? 

The obvious answer in a Universal Basic Income, levelling things up for young and old.

This is where the debate should be not on trying to impoverish the elderly and drive a wedge between young and old on pensions.

The final point is that any politician who attacks pensions and pensioners benefits is very unwise. Remember the winter fuel allowance debacle. The bottom line is that pensioners register highest amongst the cohort of citizens who vote. Alienate them at your electoral peril.

Paul Donovan
London

SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at [email protected].

• • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • BECOME A FRIEND: If you enjoyed this, why not consider becoming a Friend of LabourList? Help sustain our journalism, and of course Friends do get benefits…
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email [email protected].
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at [email protected].