Sculpting a solution

Sir: Noel Malcolm’s article ‘Relief fund’ (22 October) rightly suggests that legislators should consider the issue of the Parthenon sculptures seriously. Yet the article does little in the way of advancing a meaningful solution. What makes The Parthenon Project unique and not just ‘the latest in a sequence’ is that it offers a real, viable way of breaking the impasse on a centuries-old debate. Its proposal of a win-win solution involving the return of the sculptures to Athens and the establishment of a rotating exhibition of Greek artefacts in London is new but already changing minds – including my own.

A positive, collaborative solution would also say a lot about modern Britain – demonstrating that we can approach complex issues about our history with maturity and confidence in our own national identity. I strongly believe that shifting public attitudes must be taken into account. As a democratic country, should the British public not have a say about what we hold in our collections? It is also wrong to suggest that the debate about the Parthenon sculptures is just ‘being presented as a political problem’ – it fundamentally is a political problem. Without amendments to the British Museum Act of 1963, the British Museum trustees have no power to carefully consider proposals for reunification. And for that to happen, our MPs need to be made aware of the problem, and to then act.

Much of the conversation about the sculptures is rooted in their history. Of course context is important, but I believe we are unlikely to find a solution for the future if we keep looking to the past. It is too ambiguous, with conflicting recollections surrounding acquisition and ownership. The solution will not be found there.

Lord Vaizey, former culture minister and Parthenon Project chair

London W12

Vein glorious

Sir: I’d like to reply to several points raised in Mary Wakefield’s article on blood donation (‘There’s a blood crisis, so why can’t I give blood?, 22 October). As she recognises, our biggest challenge is staffing, as we are short of donor carers. When you donate, it’s usually a donor carer who takes you through every step, including putting the needle in (the venepuncture). It’s not a role which can be done by a volunteer. Donor carers don’t need a medical background, but they do have around four weeks of intensive training. They make up three-quarters of the staff on session.

When we triggered the amber alert on blood shortages, we needed to tell hospitals and the public about the possible postponement of some elective operations. We didn’t make an appeal for new donors, but we knew people would want to donate for the first time. The scale of the public response was unprecedented, and that enthusiasm did lead to online queues.

The staffing challenges mean we can’t run enough appointments, but we’re working to increase our workforce capacity. If you are unable to donate soon, please do make appointments for November and the run-up to Christmas. We still need to rebuild stocks. A donation is lifesaving to the patient who receives it at any time of year.

We’ve also had a great response from people who want to work as donor carers. We currently have around 780, but need about 60 more people in post. We’re working quickly and most of our posts are now going to interviews. We’re also working with external recruiters.

As Mary writes, saving lives by giving blood is something we can enjoy, from the free biscuits to the text message that lets you know which hospital will receive your blood. We are incredibly grateful to everyone who donates blood.

Dr Naim Akhtar

Consultant haematologist and lead in donor medicine, NHS Blood and Transplant

Power outage

Sir: Charles Moore credits Norman Lamont as the original author in 1993 of the phrase ‘in office but not in power’ (Notes, 22 October). The expression goes further back. The historian Charles Loch Mowat used those very words in his description of the short-lived 1923-24 Labour government in Britain Between the Wars 1918-1940, first published in 1955. Mowat’s use had perhaps stuck in Lord Lamont’s mind.

Dr Harry Harmer

Shrewsbury, Shropshire

Normal for Norfolk

Sir: Norfolk has produced only two prime ministers, Sir Robert Walpole and Liz Truss. Both are record-breaking as, respectively, the longest- and shortest-serving holders of the office. As such, we in the county can be proud that the average Norfolk prime minister is in office for over ten years.

James Hickman

West Raynham, Norfolk

Corvid crisis

Sir: I’m not in a position to confirm or deny what Paul Sargeantson and Bill Jackson say about the apparent transition of red kites from carrion eaters to killers of wildlife such as songbirds (Letters, 15 October). But in my part of Oxfordshire it’s not kites that are the culprits as far as songbirds are concerned, but corvids – especially jackdaws. I’ve regularly counted flocks of 200, and during the breeding season it’s a common and heartbreaking sight to see these very smart birds systematically ‘working’ the hedgerow. Once a jackdaw finds a nest, it will take all the chicks. They have also learnt to dominate birdfeeders to the exclusion of smaller birds.

David Milne

Burford, Oxfordshire

Wuthering highs

Sir: Deborah Ross (Arts, 15 October) finds it hard to believe that Emily Brontë might have got high on opium. Charlotte Brontë, in Villette, gives an account of her heroine’s opium trip that seems to come from personal experience. If Charlotte, then surely Emily, too?

Frank Upton

Solihull

Get 10 issues for just $10

Subscribe to The Spectator Australia today for the next 10 magazine issues, plus full online access, for just $10.

SUBSCRIBE 10 issues for $10 REGISTER 3 articles a month

Already a subscriber? Log in