Published: July 29, 2010
As far as he and I were concerned our relationship was trusting, exciting, ambitious and mutually supportive.”
Smith is ” deeply happy” to that someone else is taking over. Sometimes it was my rashness being tempered by Ed’s concern for practical details and frightening efficiency and, at other times, it was the reverse with Ed quietly giving us all the courage to take wing and really fly.”
Being friends for more or less 30 years had occasional drawbacks, however, as Smith recalls: “Once or twice he would say ‘I thought we were supposed to discuss these issues before things actually happened’, and sometimes I had to dig him out of a hole as he had to do with me. During that time, according to Rattle, “There were in every way two music directors – one of them with less addiction to the limelight and I can’t say too strongly how complementary we were to each other. When Smith left the Royal Liverpool Philharmonic Orchestra for the CBSO in 1978 the organisation was in a state of flux following the abrupt departure of both its conductor and its manager.
“People were very apprehensive when I suggested that Simon Rattle should become the CBSO’s new conductor He was only 23. I had to assure them that though it was a risk this appointment was only for three years.”
Their 18-year partnership at the CBSO ended only when the conductor finally moved on last year.
We were like young gymnasts who throw their bodies around without any thought of hurting themselves. And what Simon and I didn’t know in the late Seventies enabled us to take all sorts of risks which we would both think very carefully about now.”
There can be practically no risk that Ed Smith, who’s just stepped down as Chief Executive of the City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra, took with its former conductor Simon Rattle that didn’t pay off. We were like young gymnasts who throw their bodies around without any thought of hurting themselves. And what Simon and I didn’t know in the late Seventies enabled us to take all sorts of risks which we would both think very carefully about now.”
“There was no fear. “There was no fear. During the period 1992-96 in Scotland 69 people were found guilty of killing their partners: 40 males and 29 females. More than 30 per cent of the female perpetrators received non-custodial sentences amounting to admonishment or probation; the proportion of males receiving such sentences was 7.5 per cent.
Among those receiving custodial sentences, nearly 50 per cent of females were sentenced to four years or less; fewer than 10 per cent of males were similarly sentenced.
I would be surprised if patterns of sentencing by the courts of England and Wales are very different, not least because of the conclusion in Home Office Research Finding 58 (1997) that in these courts, violent offences are dealt with in such a way that “even when other factors such as previous criminal record, seriousness of offence and type of court were taken into account, women were less likely to be given a custodial sentence than men”.PHILIP PERCIVALGlasgow. It is no way to treat the poor and vulnerable.MURIEL TURNER(Baroness Turner of Camden)London NW6. Sir: While I agree with Natasha Walter that Zoora Shah’s life- sentence for killing her partner seems harsh in comparison to the six- year sentence passed on David Hampson (Comment, 1 November), one case alone cannot support her contention that the judicial system is prejudiced against women. At least in Scotland, figures provided by the Scottish Office suggest the contrary. There has been little discussion of the way in which the contributory principle is gradually being eroded and replaced by benefits dependent upon means-testing.For some reason, this is regarded as “modernising”. But means-tested benefits have a low take-up and are expensive to administer Many claimants find the process humiliating. Yet the benefit being removed is a contributory one, based on the National Insurance contributions of the deceased spouse.
Aftermath quiche is accurately used: Dame Edna’s recipe for leftovers.. Sir: Donald Macintyre is right to draw attention to the comparative lack of interest in the Government’s plan to remove the right to widows’ pensions (“Brave move, Mr Darling Pity you may not succeed”, 2 November). The Government’s case is that it is equalising rights between widows and widowers. To do so, it is removing the right to a pension for widows and replacing it with a bereavement allowance, payable to both sexes for six months only. In the Lords I made no progress with a series of amendments to try to restore widows’ pensions, but a number of us did succeed (against Government opposition) in increasing the period of the allowance from six months to two years.
The Government’s policy represents a massive transfer of resources from women to men, but this has gone largely unremarked in the media. It is, via Old English, from various Teutonic words of a m root for mow.
You must be logged in to post a comment.