labourlist--2020-06-21--Sunday shows: Reeves and Ashworth on schools, 2m rule, Labour 2019 election review

Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Rachel Reeves said the Education Secretary failed “ miserably ” to reopen schools for most children before September , and she called for a ‘ back-to-work Budget ’ in July to save jobs .
• On shopping : “ I went to the shops yesterday to buy Father ’ s Day presents… I did that , I wore a face mask , I tried as best as I could to be socially distanced from other people in the shop .
We all want the economy to get back up and running.
” • @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gavin Williamson ] should have been using this period of lockdown to prepare schools to ensure that the space is available because many schools are cramped – particularly in inner-city areas.
” • She added : “ Williamson was set a test .
He has failed it miserably and now the government are trying to blame other people for their failure.
” • Asked what could have been done : “ Labour put forward constructive proposals like using libraries and leisure centres.
” • On social distancing : “ Even with the social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in place now at two metres , more children could have been brought back into a school setting if the government had made the effort to use other buildings , bring in temporary staff to put up temporary buildings.
” • On the economy : “ We do need from the Chancellor a Budget for jobs , a back-to-work Budget in July this year to quickly get on top of this – to support people to go back to work , to protect jobs .
• On the recent 2019 election review : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the challenge… But I think also everybody can see that in the past two and a bit months that Keir Starmer has been leader of the Labour Party , we ’ ve begun to climb that mountain.
” • Asked if it was right to elect Starmer as leader given his role in shaping Labour ’ s Brexit policy in the 2019 election : “ All of the party , the previous leadership of the party , were responsible for those decisions.
” • She added : “ I don ’ t think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ even the biggest reason , for our defeat in December.
” '' The government have failed in the commitments they made to parents and to the country '' to get primary school children back before the summer holiday says @ RachelReevesMP She says libraries , community & leisure centres should have been used as temporary schools.
# Ridge pic.twitter.com/OEVxkveHpf TUC general secretary Frances O ’ Grady called for the government to take equity stakes in firms , and warned that the Covid-19 economic crisis could be as bad as the 1930s if “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ together ” .
• On the economy : “ The jobs market is on red alert… The government can ’ t afford to stand on the sidelines and watch good firms go bust and jobs go to the wall.
” • On government support so far : “ What we ’ ve seen too often is a pattern of dithering : a PR announcement , rushed last-minute consultation , no planning , poor delivery – and instead what we need is a real , laser-like focus.
” • Asked about the government ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What we need now is to make sure we can reopen the economy by making sure firms are safe… But also to have a jobs guarantee and targeted support for industries.
” • On equity stakes : “ One thought that we want the government to consider is taking equity stakes in firms… Too many firms are afraid of getting loaded up with debt , we don ’ t want to see them go to the wall.
” • She added : “ This is not the time to take the foot of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do is make sure that we avoid the costs of long-term unemployment.
” • On the recovery effort : “ This could be as bad as the 1930s if we don ’ t get our act together and come together .
We want to see the government setting up national councils – this should be a national effort for recovery.
” • On the test , trace and isolate scheme : “ Where is it ?
We need it up and running , that ’ s absolutely critical to the infrastructure to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On risk assessments : “ We ’ ve argued , and the government have agreed , that risk assessments should be published… Too many firms and big high-profile names have not published their risk assessments.
” • On schools not reopening until September for most children : “ I would trace some of these problems , at least , back to that basic issue of meaningful consultation.
” Matt Hancock also appeared on the show .
He would not confirm that the next stage of lockdown would end on July 4th , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plan ” and that measures to ease the lockdown will be set out then if “ safe to do so ” .
The Health Secretary also suggested that people could have to register before going into a pub in the future , as part of measures that the government is considering introducing to ensure it is safe for the hospitality sector to reopen .
With guest presenter Nick Robinson , Shadow Health Secretary Jon Ashworth discussed Labour ’ s view on changing the two-metre distancing rule and on schools returning , as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and how to win again .
• On the news from Reading : “ Absolutely terrible scenes and our thoughts are obviously with those who have lost loved ones to what looks like horrific murder.
” • On changing the two-metre rule and ‘ Independence Day ’ : “ Two metres is quite clearly marginally better than one metre .
Other countries around the world have imposed a one-metre rule , but those countries have tended to go for a broader range of mitigation measures… usually insisted on greater wearing of face masks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ facing with face shields , they ’ ve usually got a better test and trace system up and running and an app up and running.
” • On whether Labour would back the change to one-metre : “ Yes , under certain circumstances .
We also need to see a greater use of face masks , greater use of face shielding , let ’ s get testing and tracing up and running… .
We can not be complacent .
If we ’ re going to relax some measures , we need to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” • On children returning to school : “ The reason children have not been going back to school in full in all years is not because of what Labour has said .
It ’ s because the government and Gavin Williamson have failed.
” • He added : “ We want to work with the government to make sure all schools are safe .
We want children back in school.
” • On what would make Labour ‘ get off the fence ’ : “ We ’ re not on the fence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ day one we want children in school because we know it ’ s hugely damaging for children not to be in school… The key things is schools putting in measures.
” • On the Labour Together 2019 election review and his assessment of Labour ’ s performance : “ Let ’ s be absolutely clear .
We got hammered in that general election… Anyone who went on the doorstep knew that we were poorly received on the issues of leadership , but also that we weren ’ t believed about the programme we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not seen as credible .
We ’ ve got to accept that .
But we ’ ve also got to ask ourselves as a party why the Conservative party have increased their vote share four elections in a row.
” • On what Labour needs to do to turn around its chances : “ I think we ’ ve got to show we ’ re in touch with the country .
That we ’ re putting forward policies that the country wants and needs.
” Matt Hancock said the government would set out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be asked to take when reopening .
On the app , he said : “ We ’ ll get there.
” On breaking the distancing rules in the Commons by patting a colleague on the back : “ It was just totally natural .
This shows how difficult social distancing is .
I know these rules inside out , I hadn ’ t seen my colleague for weeks and I really like him !
” He added : “ All I can do is say I ’ m terribly sorry for this momentary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ favours ’ story of Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick , who watched a promotional video on the mobile of developer Richard Desmond at a Tory fundraiser before overruling a planning inspector to approve the plans : “ Mr Jenrick has put out a statement that is perfectly reasonable ” .

Ridge on Sunday
Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Rachel Reeves said the Education Secretary failed “miserably” to reopen schools for most children before September, and she called for a ‘back-to-work Budget’ in July to save jobs.
On shopping: “I went to the shops yesterday to buy Father’s Day presents… I did that, I wore a face mask, I tried as best as I could to be socially distanced from other people in the shop. We all want the economy to get back up and running.”
On reopening schools: “He [Gavin Williamson] should have been using this period of lockdown to prepare schools to ensure that the space is available because many schools are cramped – particularly in inner-city areas.”
She added: “Williamson was set a test. He has failed it miserably and now the government are trying to blame other people for their failure.”
Asked what could have been done: “Labour put forward constructive proposals like using libraries and leisure centres.”
On social distancing: “Even with the social distancing measures that we’ve got in place now at two metres, more children could have been brought back into a school setting if the government had made the effort to use other buildings, bring in temporary staff to put up temporary buildings.”
On the economy: “We do need from the Chancellor a Budget for jobs, a back-to-work Budget in July this year to quickly get on top of this – to support people to go back to work, to protect jobs.
On the recent 2019 election review: “No one underestimates the scale of the challenge… But I think also everybody can see that in the past two and a bit months that Keir Starmer has been leader of the Labour Party, we’ve begun to climb that mountain.”
Asked if it was right to elect Starmer as leader given his role in shaping Labour’s Brexit policy in the 2019 election: “All of the party, the previous leadership of the party, were responsible for those decisions.”
She added: “I don’t think that is the only reason, or even the biggest reason, for our defeat in December.”
"The government have failed in the commitments they made to parents and to the country" to get primary school children back before the summer holiday says @RachelReevesMP She says libraries, community & leisure centres should have been used as temporary schools.#Ridge pic.twitter.com/OEVxkveHpf — Sophy Ridge on Sunday (@RidgeOnSunday) June 21, 2020
TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady called for the government to take equity stakes in firms, and warned that the Covid-19 economic crisis could be as bad as the 1930s if “we don’t get our act together”.
On the economy: “The jobs market is on red alert… The government can’t afford to stand on the sidelines and watch good firms go bust and jobs go to the wall.”
On government support so far: “What we’ve seen too often is a pattern of dithering: a PR announcement, rushed last-minute consultation, no planning, poor delivery – and instead what we need is a real, laser-like focus.”
Asked about the government’s ‘retraining revolution’: “What we need now is to make sure we can reopen the economy by making sure firms are safe… But also to have a jobs guarantee and targeted support for industries.”
On equity stakes: “One thought that we want the government to consider is taking equity stakes in firms… Too many firms are afraid of getting loaded up with debt, we don’t want to see them go to the wall.”
She added: “This is not the time to take the foot of the pedal… What we’ve got to do is make sure that we avoid the costs of long-term unemployment.”
On the recovery effort: “This could be as bad as the 1930s if we don’t get our act together and come together. We want to see the government setting up national councils – this should be a national effort for recovery.”
On the test, trace and isolate scheme: “Where is it? We need it up and running, that’s absolutely critical to the infrastructure to ensure that people are safe.”
On risk assessments: “We’ve argued, and the government have agreed, that risk assessments should be published… Too many firms and big high-profile names have not published their risk assessments.”
On schools not reopening until September for most children: “I would trace some of these problems, at least, back to that basic issue of meaningful consultation.”
Matt Hancock also appeared on the show. He would not confirm that the next stage of lockdown would end on July 4th, but said that the UK is “on plan” and that measures to ease the lockdown will be set out then if “safe to do so”.
The Health Secretary also suggested that people could have to register before going into a pub in the future, as part of measures that the government is considering introducing to ensure it is safe for the hospitality sector to reopen.
The Andrew Marr Show
With guest presenter Nick Robinson, Shadow Health Secretary Jon Ashworth discussed Labour’s view on changing the two-metre distancing rule and on schools returning, as well as Labour’s 2019 election performance and how to win again.
On the news from Reading: “Absolutely terrible scenes and our thoughts are obviously with those who have lost loved ones to what looks like horrific murder.”
On changing the two-metre rule and ‘Independence Day’: “Two metres is quite clearly marginally better than one metre. Other countries around the world have imposed a one-metre rule, but those countries have tended to go for a broader range of mitigation measures… usually insisted on greater wearing of face masks, provided workers who are very public facing with face shields, they’ve usually got a better test and trace system up and running and an app up and running.”
On whether Labour would back the change to one-metre: “Yes, under certain circumstances. We also need to see a greater use of face masks, greater use of face shielding, let’s get testing and tracing up and running…. We cannot be complacent. If we’re going to relax some measures, we need to make sure other mitigation measures are in place.”
On children returning to school: “The reason children have not been going back to school in full in all years is not because of what Labour has said. It’s because the government and Gavin Williamson have failed.”
He added: “We want to work with the government to make sure all schools are safe. We want children back in school.”
On what would make Labour ‘get off the fence’: “We’re not on the fence. We’ve been saying from day one we want children in school because we know it’s hugely damaging for children not to be in school… The key things is schools putting in measures.”
On the Labour Together 2019 election review and his assessment of Labour’s performance: “Let’s be absolutely clear. We got hammered in that general election… Anyone who went on the doorstep knew that we were poorly received on the issues of leadership, but also that we weren’t believed about the programme we were offering the country – it was not seen as credible. We’ve got to accept that. But we’ve also got to ask ourselves as a party why the Conservative party have increased their vote share four elections in a row.”
On what Labour needs to do to turn around its chances: “I think we’ve got to show we’re in touch with the country. That we’re putting forward policies that the country wants and needs.”
Nick Robinson: Will Labour back a change to the 2m social distance rule? Shadow Health Secretary Jonathan Ashworth: “Yes, under certain circumstances”#Marr https://t.co/s8Qjiz1QhA pic.twitter.com/6gynhpSBWT — BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) June 21, 2020
Matt Hancock said the government would set out the details of mitigation measures businesses will be asked to take when reopening. On the app, he said: “We’ll get there.”
On breaking the distancing rules in the Commons by patting a colleague on the back: “It was just totally natural. This shows how difficult social distancing is. I know these rules inside out, I hadn’t seen my colleague for weeks and I really like him!” He added: “All I can do is say I’m terribly sorry for this momentary breach.”
On the ‘cash for favours’ story of Housing Secretary Robert Jenrick, who watched a promotional video on the mobile of developer Richard Desmond at a Tory fundraiser before overruling a planning inspector to approve the plans: “Mr Jenrick has put out a statement that is perfectly reasonable”.


labourlist--2020-06-22--Our local parties are dull. They must be reimagined

At the start of this year , I stood to be youth officer of my Constituency Labour Party ( CLP ) .
I can ’ t say I had any intention , let alone chance , of winning – but rapidly approaching the age when the party no longer considers you to be ‘ young ’ , it was worth a last hurrah for my youth .
More importantly , though , it gave me the opportunity to get something off my chest that I ’ ve been holding onto for a decade of party membership .
What the hell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pointed out to my Walthamstow comrades , Labour now has around 100,000 young members .
But looking around the halls in which we have local meetings , you wouldn ’ t be able to see any evidence of that .
The party seen by millennials and Zoomers on Instagram , which looks exciting and dynamic , is a far cry from what they ’ ll find if they rock up to a branch or general committee meeting .
Our local parties are too often dull , lifeless and , frankly , pointless .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ I don ’ t know how many times I have heard someone standing in an internal party election say : “ We joined Labour to change the world , not approve last month ’ s minutes ” .
Yet I ’ m not sure what we ’ ve done to deal with that frustration .
In 2011 , we apparently ‘ refounded ’ the party , but it was more tweaks than transformation .
In its review of the 2019 election defeat , Labour Together wrote that “ membership had been hollowed out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many places , particularly in those non-urban seats which we lost .
Local parties lacked guidance on how to induct and integrate the influx of members since 2015 , and new members were turned off by “ party rules , procedures , techniques and structures ” .
Eager new activists found that the limited ways to get involved , either standing for a CLP post or canvassing , were unappealing and didn ’ t allow the local party to harness their skills and enthusiasm .
This may be a mere point of annoyance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in big cities .
For local parties in small towns and semi-rural communities , however , building a bigger , reliable base of active members will be critical to winning the next election .
Our current structures and ways of working are turning away even those who are engaged enough to want to join .
Many CLPs with membership in the low hundreds just can not afford to be in that situation .
The way the party exists on the ground has to be making the most of those members we ’ ve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these local parties .
The Labour Together report points to two concrete proposals for local parties .
Firstly , opening up party meetings to the public .
Secondly , creating a volunteer bank for party members to offer their skills .
Both should be considered , the latter particularly .
But I feel this approach is still far too limited .
What the party really needs to ask is the fundamental question of what it is seeking to achieve through its local presence and how it can best do that .
Clearly , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ parties to have : providing a local face for the party to members and the community ; engaging members in party democracy and decision-making ; selecting candidates and giving them the campaign infrastructure to get elected ; maintaining our link with trade unions at the grassroots ; political education ; embedding ourselves in our local communities and campaigning for change , even when out of power .
I don ’ t believe anyone can honestly say that continuing with organisational methods and structures from the late 19th century is still the best way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an open-minded and unsentimental reimagining and reconstituting of local parties .
This should explore the innovations of parties , campaigns and social movements around the world and be unafraid to look outside of political organisations too .
It should draw on outside expertise , while also seeking to gain a deep understanding for why so many members are inactive and why others have walked away altogether .
According to the party constitution , we exist to maintain Labour in parliament and in the country .
Continuing to get things wrong locally will mean @ @ @ @ @ @

At the start of this year, I stood to be youth officer of my Constituency Labour Party (CLP). I can’t say I had any intention, let alone chance, of winning – but rapidly approaching the age when the party no longer considers you to be ‘young’, it was worth a last hurrah for my youth. More importantly, though, it gave me the opportunity to get something off my chest that I’ve been holding onto for a decade of party membership. What the hell is a CLP for?
As I pointed out to my Walthamstow comrades, Labour now has around 100,000 young members. But looking around the halls in which we have local meetings, you wouldn’t be able to see any evidence of that. The party seen by millennials and Zoomers on Instagram, which looks exciting and dynamic, is a far cry from what they’ll find if they rock up to a branch or general committee meeting. Our local parties are too often dull, lifeless and, frankly, pointless.
This is not a novel insight. I don’t know how many times I have heard someone standing in an internal party election say: “We joined Labour to change the world, not approve last month’s minutes”. Yet I’m not sure what we’ve done to deal with that frustration. In 2011, we apparently ‘refounded’ the party, but it was more tweaks than transformation.
In its review of the 2019 election defeat, Labour Together wrote that “membership had been hollowed out or disengaged from party work” in many places, particularly in those non-urban seats which we lost. Local parties lacked guidance on how to induct and integrate the influx of members since 2015, and new members were turned off by “party rules, procedures, techniques and structures”. Eager new activists found that the limited ways to get involved, either standing for a CLP post or canvassing, were unappealing and didn’t allow the local party to harness their skills and enthusiasm.
This may be a mere point of annoyance for members in CLPs with huge memberships in big cities. For local parties in small towns and semi-rural communities, however, building a bigger, reliable base of active members will be critical to winning the next election. Our current structures and ways of working are turning away even those who are engaged enough to want to join. Many CLPs with membership in the low hundreds just cannot afford to be in that situation. The way the party exists on the ground has to be making the most of those members we’ve got, and bringing new ones into these local parties.
The Labour Together report points to two concrete proposals for local parties. Firstly, opening up party meetings to the public. Secondly, creating a volunteer bank for party members to offer their skills. Both should be considered, the latter particularly. But I feel this approach is still far too limited. What the party really needs to ask is the fundamental question of what it is seeking to achieve through its local presence and how it can best do that.
Clearly, there are many functions we want local parties to have: providing a local face for the party to members and the community; engaging members in party democracy and decision-making; selecting candidates and giving them the campaign infrastructure to get elected; maintaining our link with trade unions at the grassroots; political education; embedding ourselves in our local communities and campaigning for change, even when out of power. I don’t believe anyone can honestly say that continuing with organisational methods and structures from the late 19th century is still the best way to achieve these goals.
We need an open-minded and unsentimental reimagining and reconstituting of local parties. This should explore the innovations of parties, campaigns and social movements around the world and be unafraid to look outside of political organisations too. It should draw on outside expertise, while also seeking to gain a deep understanding for why so many members are inactive and why others have walked away altogether. According to the party constitution, we exist to maintain Labour in parliament and in the country. Continuing to get things wrong locally will mean we fail on both counts.


labourlist--2020-06-22--The government departments creating a hostile environment with a culture of disbelief

It is National Windrush Day , marking the 72nd anniversary of the first big post-war migrants group arriving in Britain on HMT Empire Windrush .
The campaign of former Labour councillor Patrick Vernon to get this observed day recognised by the government only succeeded when details of the Windrush scandal emerged .
Two years later , there has been a review concluding that the Home Office showed “ ignorance and thoughtlessness ” and perpetuated “ foreseeable and avoidable ” injustices while operating a “ culture of disbelief ” .
Its recommendations have not been implemented .
Wendy Williams , an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lessons learned ’ review .
In an interview with BBC Radio 4 ’ s Westminster Hour last night , she issued a predictable but stark warning : there is a “ grave risk of something similar happening again ” if government inaction continues .
The compensation scheme is “ not demonstrating the benefits that it should ” , she said , and the police use of stop and search powers is “ far from satisfactory ” .
As Keir Starmer and David Lammy have highlighted , announcing another review on race inequality without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reports on the same subject is deliberate procrastination and simply insulting .
Many of the criticisms levelled against the Home Office can also be applied to the Department for Work and Pensions , which similarly creates a hostile environment for already marginalised people while operating a “ culture of disbelief ” .
The work and pensions committee has released a report this morning on the DWP ’ s response to coronavirus .
While the department should be commended for a swift reaction , it concludes , the increased demand has further exposed flaws @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wait for Universal Credit to the problems around legacy benefits .
The cross-party report recommends that legacy benefit rates are lifted and such changes are made easier , as people will be claiming them until at least 2024 according to the government , that the no recourse to public funds policy is suspended during the crisis , and that Universal Credit is made more flexible .
Labour ’ s Jonathan Reynolds said : “ This report reinforces what Labour has said since the beginning of this crisis : our social security system is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the problems are integral to the system , which is why Labour has pledged to scrap and fully replace Universal Credit .
If you ’ re interested in discussing the findings and recommendations of the Labour Together 2019 general election review , join us tonight at 7pm for an online panel and participatory workshop where you can do just that .
Sign up here .
Sign up to LabourList ’ s morning email for everything Labour , every weekday morning .

It is National Windrush Day, marking the 72nd anniversary of the first big post-war migrants group arriving in Britain on HMT Empire Windrush. The campaign of former Labour councillor Patrick Vernon to get this observed day recognised by the government only succeeded when details of the Windrush scandal emerged. Two years later, there has been a review concluding that the Home Office showed “ignorance and thoughtlessness” and perpetuated “foreseeable and avoidable” injustices while operating a “culture of disbelief”. Its recommendations have not been implemented.
Wendy Williams, an inspector of constabulary, conducted this ‘lessons learned’ review. In an interview with BBC Radio 4’s Westminster Hour last night, she issued a predictable but stark warning: there is a “grave risk of something similar happening again” if government inaction continues. The compensation scheme is “not demonstrating the benefits that it should”, she said, and the police use of stop and search powers is “far from satisfactory”. As Keir Starmer and David Lammy have highlighted, announcing another review on race inequality without first implementing the recommendations of many existing reports on the same subject is deliberate procrastination and simply insulting.
Many of the criticisms levelled against the Home Office can also be applied to the Department for Work and Pensions, which similarly creates a hostile environment for already marginalised people while operating a “culture of disbelief”. The work and pensions committee has released a report this morning on the DWP’s response to coronavirus. While the department should be commended for a swift reaction, it concludes, the increased demand has further exposed flaws in the system – from the five-week wait for Universal Credit to the problems around legacy benefits.
The cross-party report recommends that legacy benefit rates are lifted and such changes are made easier, as people will be claiming them until at least 2024 according to the government, that the no recourse to public funds policy is suspended during the crisis, and that Universal Credit is made more flexible. Labour’s Jonathan Reynolds said: “This report reinforces what Labour has said since the beginning of this crisis: our social security system is not fit for purpose.” It shows that the problems are integral to the system, which is why Labour has pledged to scrap and fully replace Universal Credit.
If you’re interested in discussing the findings and recommendations of the Labour Together 2019 general election review, join us tonight at 7pm for an online panel and participatory workshop where you can do just that. Sign up here. Sign up to LabourList’s morning email for everything Labour, every weekday morning.


labourlist--2020-06-22--Labour Together 2019 election review welcomed by party across factions

Labour Together published a 2019 general election review of the 2019 general election on Friday .
It concluded that the party needs a “ major overhaul ” of its “ political strategy , organisation and campaigning infrastructure ” to win again .
Since its release , figures and organisations from across the labour movement – spanning the political spectrum within the party , from Progress and Labour First to Momentum and Owen Jones – have welcomed the 140-page report .
Labour First tweeted : “ We welcome the publication of such a frank and comprehensive report into Labour ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ everyone reads it .
At its heart is rigorous analysis of data and evidence and concrete recommendations for action .
“ It provides the incoming general secretary David Evans with a properly researched blueprint for overhauling the party and turning it back into an effective general election winning machine.
” Former frontbencher and current Socialist Campaign Group secretary Richard Burgon MP said : “ What I do think is good is that the report doesn ’ t see 2019 in isolation , but looks at the long-term problems the Labour Party has faced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want from this report , but I think it would be a mistake to draw from it that we should never have a manifesto of what could be characterised as left , socialist , redistributive policies of public ownership .
I think that in the era we ’ re going into , those kinds of policies will be more relevant than ever.
” Left-wing activist Owen Jones took to social media and wrote : “ The report into Labour ’ s catastrophic defeat is a must-read .
It ’ s deeply uncomfortable reading @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the party ’ s terrible strategic failures .
“ But it emphasises the party mustn ’ t abandon a transformative economic agenda .
The report poses questions that , frankly , all of Labour ’ s wings are going to struggle to answer , so ignore selective quoting for factional advantage .
“ Labour ’ s plight isn ’ t unique – most European left-of-centre parties are in crisis .
But this report helps point to a way back.
” Progress co-founder Paul Richards tweeted : “ The Labour Together report is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remain voters , 1.8m leave voters and 950,000 who didn ’ t vote in the referendum .
The manifesto was a major factor in defeat .
Plus the lack of a realistic seat targeting strategy or coherent message.
” Centre for Labour and Social Studies director and 2019 Labour parliamentary candidate Faiza Shaheen said : “ I agree with a lot of what I ’ ve seen from the Labour Together report and thank the team .
For me , one of the hardest things was dealing with the factionalism on top of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ actually really awful.
” Corbynite activist network Momentum tweeted : “ An important read for the movement .
We need to : deal with the wrecking revealed in the leaked report ; empower members through community organising ; offer a bold programme of economic transformation .
Now , time to get to work !
” Progress director Nathan Yeowell concluded on social media that the report was a “ forensic and systematic piece of research and exposition on what Labour has to do if we are ever to win national office again ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Ian Lavery said : “ The report rightly points out the disconnect between the party and its diverse coalition of working and middle-class people from cities , towns and villages .
We must urgently address this issue .
“ The report ’ s praise of community organising is to be welcomed – alongside our ambitious and transformational policy platform , the community organising unit is a legacy of the past five years that we must stick to.
” Labour Together will be holding an online event – including a panel and participatory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discussion about the key findings and recommendations of the review .
Those interested can register for the meeting before it is held at 7pm tonight .

Labour Together published its 2019 general election review last Friday. It concluded that the party needs a “major overhaul” of its “political strategy, organisation and campaigning infrastructure” to win again.
Since its release, figures and organisations from across the labour movement – spanning the political spectrum within the party, from Progress and Labour First to Momentum and Owen Jones – have welcomed the 140-page report.
Labour First tweeted: “We welcome the publication of such a frank and comprehensive report into Labour’s general election campaign, and recommend that everyone reads it. At its heart is rigorous analysis of data and evidence and concrete recommendations for action.
“It provides the incoming general secretary David Evans with a properly researched blueprint for overhauling the party and turning it back into an effective general election winning machine.”
Former frontbencher and current Socialist Campaign Group secretary Richard Burgon MP said: “What I do think is good is that the report doesn’t see 2019 in isolation, but looks at the long-term problems the Labour Party has faced.
“People will draw what they want from this report, but I think it would be a mistake to draw from it that we should never have a manifesto of what could be characterised as left, socialist, redistributive policies of public ownership. I think that in the era we’re going into, those kinds of policies will be more relevant than ever.”
Left-wing activist Owen Jones took to social media and wrote: “The report into Labour’s catastrophic defeat is a must-read. It’s deeply uncomfortable reading, from long-term trends hitting Labour, to the party’s terrible strategic failures.
“But it emphasises the party mustn’t abandon a transformative economic agenda. The report poses questions that, frankly, all of Labour’s wings are going to struggle to answer, so ignore selective quoting for factional advantage.
“Labour’s plight isn’t unique – most European left-of-centre parties are in crisis. But this report helps point to a way back.”
Progress co-founder Paul Richards tweeted: “The Labour Together report is devastating. In 2019 Labour lost 1.9m remain voters, 1.8m leave voters and 950,000 who didn’t vote in the referendum. The manifesto was a major factor in defeat. Plus the lack of a realistic seat targeting strategy or coherent message.”
Centre for Labour and Social Studies director and 2019 Labour parliamentary candidate Faiza Shaheen said: “I agree with a lot of what I’ve seen from the Labour Together report and thank the team. For me, one of the hardest things was dealing with the factionalism on top of local Tories & racism. It was actually really awful.”
Corbynite activist network Momentum tweeted: “An important read for the movement. We need to: deal with the wrecking revealed in the leaked report; empower members through community organising; offer a bold programme of economic transformation. Now, time to get to work!”
Progress director Nathan Yeowell concluded on social media that the report was a “forensic and systematic piece of research and exposition on what Labour has to do if we are ever to win national office again”.
Writing for Tribune, Jon Trickett and Ian Lavery said: “The report rightly points out the disconnect between the party and its diverse coalition of working and middle-class people from cities, towns and villages. We must urgently address this issue.
“The report’s praise of community organising is to be welcomed – alongside our ambitious and transformational policy platform, the community organising unit is a legacy of the past five years that we must stick to.”
Labour Together will be holding an online event – including a panel and participatory workshop with commissioners – to facilitate a discussion about the key findings and recommendations of the review. Those interested can register for the meeting before it is held at 7pm tonight.


labourlist--2020-06-22--In conversation with… Ian Murray MP

In conversation with… Ian Murray MP

Join us at 6pm on Thursday , June 25th , for our next “ In conversation with… ” online event @ @ @ @ @ and Labour ’ s Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland Ian Murray .
The conversation @ @ @ @ @ raised in the Edinburgh South MP ’ s recent LabourList article about the Scottish government @ @ @ @ @ , plus Labour ’ s chances of winning back support in Scotland and more .
@ @ @ @ @ questions , please feel free to email them to us .
The page will refresh @ @ @ @ @ below when the event starts .
You will also be able to view it directly @ @ @ @ @ .

Join us at 6pm on Thursday, June 25th, for our next “In conversation with…” online event featuring LabourList editor Sienna Rodgers and Labour’s Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland Ian Murray.
The conversation will touch on the subjects raised in the Edinburgh South MP’s recent LabourList article about the Scottish government’s handling of coronavirus, plus Labour’s chances of winning back support in Scotland and more.
If readers have suggestions for questions, please feel free to email them to us. The page will refresh automatically to show the livestream below when the event starts. You will also be able to view it directly on YouTube by clicking here.


labourlist--2020-06-19--Labour Tenants United: Put the right to housing above landlord profits

Decades of piecemeal reforms in an unreformable private rented sector has created a complex and daunting market .
With the Covid-19 crisis comes a potential catalyst for tenants ’ revolution , as the raw deal for renters is exposed as a scam .
Tenants unions , charities and a variety of left think tanks have been quick to call for swift action such as a moratorium on evictions .
But the Tories ’ record shows that they will be more than willing to unravel this short-term safety net than craft it into a new normal for renters .
With government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ school meals , the Tories are again at risk of revealing their weakness on welfare issues and compassion for ordinary people .
If the opposition frontbench decides to put the needs of renters first , Keir Starmer ’ s success at the despatch box can help us expose this record to ensure renters are protected from the fallout of the crisis .
It also provides an opportunity for Labour to reimagine a bold , long-term policy package that puts renters ’ right to shelter and housing above landlords wanting to own property and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the support of hundreds of activists and in solidarity with tenants ’ unions , we founded Labour Tenants United – a campaign to ensure that Labour is as representative of tenants as possible , and to have policy proposals that reflect that representation .
In this modern age of rentier capitalism , in a market that reflects the domination of those privileged enough to own property at the expense and welfare of everyone else , we should be acting as the political wing of tenants ’ unions in the same spirit in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of trade unions .
Rental prices have increased by over 7 % since January 2015 according to the Office for National Statistics .
Combined with stagnation in wages and coupled with a pandemic and recession , you can see why you would expect us to see further hardship for renters across the country .
A recent poll by Opinium found that one in five of those who had been financially affected by the Covid lockdown had been forced to choose between food and bills or paying rent .
One in four said that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their home , move in with friends or parents , or request an earlier end to their tenancy due to the crisis .
If the everyday maliciousness of unscrupulous transaction fees and lack of concern for maintenance are also factored in , we believe that it is time to propose a brighter vision for a housing sector .
A vision that concentrates on the needs of its occupants as its core value , instead of uniquely protecting landlords ’ pockets .
As such , we ’ ve brought together policy proposals that reflect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of coronavirus , as well as presenting a bold , long-term package of support to bail out the rented sector .
Among other ideas , our proposals include policies to : • immediately extend the moratorium on possession claims and evictions ; • suspend the obligation to pay rent to landlords by tenants for the duration of the coronavirus crisis ; • and introduce controls so that landlords can not keep tenants paying for the cost of the pandemic for years down the line .
These are policies that can focus on supporting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reflecting the duties that landlords owe in providing safe and affordable homes , with the bonus that it could attract many of the voters we lost in 2019 .
As such , this ought to be a relatively basic but essential approach for the Labour Party to support and develop as we continue to expose the Tories ’ lack of action for renters .
You can see and support the full Labour Tenants United policy proposals , and Labour members can vote and comment on them , on the national policy forum website @ @ @ @ @ @ @ follow us on Twitter and sign up to our mailing list here .

Decades of piecemeal reforms in an unreformable private rented sector has created a complex and daunting market. With the Covid-19 crisis comes a potential catalyst for tenants’ revolution, as the raw deal for renters is exposed as a scam. Tenants unions, charities and a variety of left think tanks have been quick to call for swift action such as a moratorium on evictions. But the Tories’ record shows that they will be more than willing to unravel this short-term safety net than craft it into a new normal for renters.
With government U-turns on the furlough scheme and free school meals, the Tories are again at risk of revealing their weakness on welfare issues and compassion for ordinary people. If the opposition frontbench decides to put the needs of renters first, Keir Starmer’s success at the despatch box can help us expose this record to ensure renters are protected from the fallout of the crisis. It also provides an opportunity for Labour to reimagine a bold, long-term policy package that puts renters’ right to shelter and housing above landlords wanting to own property and earn profit.
That is why, with the support of hundreds of activists and in solidarity with tenants’ unions, we founded Labour Tenants United – a campaign to ensure that Labour is as representative of tenants as possible, and to have policy proposals that reflect that representation. In this modern age of rentier capitalism, in a market that reflects the domination of those privileged enough to own property at the expense and welfare of everyone else, we should be acting as the political wing of tenants’ unions in the same spirit in which we organise as the political wing of trade unions.
Rental prices have increased by over 7% since January 2015 according to the Office for National Statistics. Combined with stagnation in wages and coupled with a pandemic and recession, you can see why you would expect us to see further hardship for renters across the country. A recent poll by Opinium found that one in five of those who had been financially affected by the Covid lockdown had been forced to choose between food and bills or paying rent. One in four said that they had already had to voluntarily leave their home, move in with friends or parents, or request an earlier end to their tenancy due to the crisis.
If the everyday maliciousness of unscrupulous transaction fees and lack of concern for maintenance are also factored in, we believe that it is time to propose a brighter vision for a housing sector. A vision that concentrates on the needs of its occupants as its core value, instead of uniquely protecting landlords’ pockets. As such, we’ve brought together policy proposals that reflect this need for action in the context of coronavirus, as well as presenting a bold, long-term package of support to bail out the rented sector. Among other ideas, our proposals include policies to:
immediately extend the moratorium on possession claims and evictions;
suspend the obligation to pay rent to landlords by tenants for the duration of the coronavirus crisis;
ban all evictions under Section 21 permanently;
and introduce controls so that landlords cannot keep tenants paying for the cost of the pandemic for years down the line.
These are policies that can focus on supporting the most vulnerable in our society through reflecting the duties that landlords owe in providing safe and affordable homes, with the bonus that it could attract many of the voters we lost in 2019. As such, this ought to be a relatively basic but essential approach for the Labour Party to support and develop as we continue to expose the Tories’ lack of action for renters. You can see and support the full Labour Tenants United policy proposals, and Labour members can vote and comment on them, on the national policy forum website. For updates on the campaign, follow us on Twitter and sign up to our mailing list here.


labourlist--2020-06-22--Why the DfID and FCO merger is a mistake

The Department for International Development ( DfID ) was created under a Labour government in 1997 as an independent department with a strong and unabashed focus on global poverty alleviation .
Separate from the aims of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office ( FCO ) , DfID developed its reputation as a world-class organisation , leading the market in global development and influencing governments and other aid and development agencies .
In 2008 , ten years after the creation of the department , it led a global coalition to demand that 0.7 % of the national income of G7 countries be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the Labour government under Tony Blair and a target championed by his successors .
Indeed , last week ’ s announcement that DfID was to merge with the FCO was met with criticism from former Prime Ministers .
There is no long-term rationale for the merger .
In an era where influence is gained from technical expertise rather than generalised diplomacy , this appears to be a scramble to secure DfID ’ s £15.2bn budget , against the FCO ’ s £1.7bn , and a distraction from the diminished influence of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ merger will not create more influence for Britain globally – far from it .
Any nation ’ s soft power and influence diminishes considerably if it is pumped out of the hard power engines of the FCO and its military objectives .
This is one of the reasons that the British Council , the UK ’ s cultural relations agency , strove to maintain an arms-length relationship from the formal government machine .
The merger also diminishes Britain ’ s development impact , built up over 20 years of experience – from evidence-based @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to progressing health and education outcomes , advocating for the elimination of violence against women and girls and pushing for more action on climate justice and the protection of human rights and human security .
DfID was part of a coalition of global players in the early 2000s that convinced the World Bank and other agencies to de-link human rights conditions from aid and investment , a move welcomed in the global south .
The protection of human rights was a precious goal – but not if ultimately to be used as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , causing more harm than good to developing countries .
The Prime Minister ’ s comparison of aid to Tanzania , Zambia and the Ukraine makes a mockery of the principles of targeting the poorest in the world .
This is widely understood and supported by UK taxpayers who prefer to see their tax spent on the poorest countries and those most in need .
Ukraine and the Balkans are not the poorest nations in the world ; they are clearly linked to the UK ’ s diplomatic and military interests .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ties between development , trade and foreign policy is already happening at a practical level , with the FCO delivering more traditional aid programmes without the technical skills required to implement large-scale operations .
The Labour government and its aid allies played a smart game in 2008 , anticipating this day in 2020 when the department would come under attack from inside government .
DfID ’ s budget is still protected by the 0.7 % aid commitment enshrined in law and , while different parts of the UK government machinery have already eaten @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to redistribute the budget in a wholesale manner will be open to legal challenge .
Nevertheless , the DfID budget is still being reduced in real terms by 40 % as national income shrinks due to Covid-19 – a situation that was already causing mild panic inside DfID as early as March .
The decision to merge the departments could not come at a worse time , as the word ’ s poorest suffer during the pandemic .
The Labour Party has criticised the merger , and it is encouraging to see it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ achievements of the 20th century by pledging to re-establish the department .
The independent and world-class development organisation reflects the best of Britain and enjoys widespread public and cross-party support .
If this government persists in the erratic and irresponsible decision to alter the future of UK global aid during the midst of a global pandemic , a Labour government will firmly put DfID back where it belongs in the 21st century .

The Department for International Development (DfID) was created under a Labour government in 1997 as an independent department with a strong and unabashed focus on global poverty alleviation. Separate from the aims of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO), DfID developed its reputation as a world-class organisation, leading the market in global development and influencing governments and other aid and development agencies. In 2008, ten years after the creation of the department, it led a global coalition to demand that 0.7% of the national income of G7 countries be spent on aid; a proud achievement of the Labour government under Tony Blair and a target championed by his successors. Indeed, last week’s announcement that DfID was to merge with the FCO was met with criticism from former Prime Ministers.
There is no long-term rationale for the merger. In an era where influence is gained from technical expertise rather than generalised diplomacy, this appears to be a scramble to secure DfID’s £15.2bn budget, against the FCO’s £1.7bn, and a distraction from the diminished influence of the FCO across the globe. But the merger will not create more influence for Britain globally – far from it. Any nation’s soft power and influence diminishes considerably if it is pumped out of the hard power engines of the FCO and its military objectives. This is one of the reasons that the British Council, the UK’s cultural relations agency, strove to maintain an arms-length relationship from the formal government machine.
The merger also diminishes Britain’s development impact, built up over 20 years of experience – from evidence-based interventions on reducing poverty and stimulating growth to progressing health and education outcomes, advocating for the elimination of violence against women and girls and pushing for more action on climate justice and the protection of human rights and human security. DfID was part of a coalition of global players in the early 2000s that convinced the World Bank and other agencies to de-link human rights conditions from aid and investment, a move welcomed in the global south. The protection of human rights was a precious goal – but not if ultimately to be used as a stick to control the flow of aid, causing more harm than good to developing countries.
The Prime Minister’s comparison of aid to Tanzania, Zambia and the Ukraine makes a mockery of the principles of targeting the poorest in the world. This is widely understood and supported by UK taxpayers who prefer to see their tax spent on the poorest countries and those most in need. Ukraine and the Balkans are not the poorest nations in the world; they are clearly linked to the UK’s diplomatic and military interests. The Prime Minister’s preference for closer ties between development, trade and foreign policy is already happening at a practical level, with the FCO delivering more traditional aid programmes without the technical skills required to implement large-scale operations.
The Labour government and its aid allies played a smart game in 2008, anticipating this day in 2020 when the department would come under attack from inside government. DfID’s budget is still protected by the 0.7% aid commitment enshrined in law and, while different parts of the UK government machinery have already eaten into the aid pot, any attempt to redistribute the budget in a wholesale manner will be open to legal challenge. Nevertheless, the DfID budget is still being reduced in real terms by 40% as national income shrinks due to Covid-19 – a situation that was already causing mild panic inside DfID as early as March. The decision to merge the departments could not come at a worse time, as the word’s poorest suffer during the pandemic.
The Labour Party has criticised the merger, and it is encouraging to see it defend one of Britain’s finest achievements of the 20th century by pledging to re-establish the department. The independent and world-class development organisation reflects the best of Britain and enjoys widespread public and cross-party support. If this government persists in the erratic and irresponsible decision to alter the future of UK global aid during the midst of a global pandemic, a Labour government will firmly put DfID back where it belongs in the 21st century.


labourlist--2020-06-22--Labour calls for “comprehensive look at deradicalisation in prisons” after Reading attack

Nick Thomas-Symonds has called for a “ comprehensive look at deradicalisation in our prisons ” , and for the government to “ never again cut the numbers of community police ” in the wake of the Reading terror incident .
Responding to a ministerial statement on the attack from Priti Patel in the House of Commons this afternoon , Labour ’ s Shadow Home Secretary warned that “ legislation alone is not enough ” .
The MP for Torfaen also said : “ Let the message go out from this House today , that we stand alongside the wider community @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say that those who have lost their lives will never be forgotten.
” Thomas-Symonds said that “ we have to ensure that there is due process ” in the case , but added that “ the country will want answers ” .
He asked Patel to commit to further updating the House on the investigation in the future .
Addressing some specific points , the Shadow Home Secretary said : “ Legislation alone is not enough .
We need a comprehensive look at deradicalisation in our prisons – how people who pose a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ different agencies can work together to safeguard against tragedies in the future .
“ Community police are the eyes and ears of our societies .
The intelligence gathering they do is vital .
Can the Home Secretary assure me that the government will never again cut the numbers of community police and will instead build the capacity that is required for law enforcement ?
“ Can she also assure me that the serious violence task force , which has not met since 26th June last year , will meet soon and on a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ We know that the intelligence and security committee has not met in over six months .
Can the Home Secretary confirm when the committee will have all its members in place and exactly when it will meet next ?
” The statement today followed the incident in a park in Reading on Saturday , in which three people were killed .
A 25 year-old man has been arrested – initially for murder , but has since been rearrested under the Terrorism Act 2000 .
Labour leader Keir Starmer released a video message @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the attack as “ horrific ” and said that the party would “ work in the national interest to support the response ” .

Nick Thomas-Symonds has called for a “comprehensive look at deradicalisation in our prisons”, and for the government to “never again cut the numbers of community police” in the wake of the Reading terror incident.
Responding to a ministerial statement on the attack from Priti Patel in the House of Commons this afternoon, Labour’s Shadow Home Secretary warned that “legislation alone is not enough”.
Thomas-Symonds said: “Let the message go out from this House today, that we stand alongside the wider community in Reading at this dark moment and say that those who have lost their lives will never be forgotten.”
He added that “we have to ensure that there is due process” in the case but “the country will want answers”. He asked Patel to commit to further updating the House on the investigation in the future.
The Shadow Home Secretary said: “Legislation alone is not enough. We need a comprehensive look at deradicalisation in our prisons – how people who pose a threat are risk assessed, and how different agencies can work together to safeguard against tragedies in the future.
“Community police are the eyes and ears of our societies. The intelligence gathering they do is vital. Can the Home Secretary assure me that the government will never again cut the numbers of community police and will instead build the capacity that is required for law enforcement?
“Can she also assure me that the serious violence task force, which has not met since 26th June last year, will meet soon and on a regular basis?”
He added: “We know that the intelligence and security committee has not met in over six months. Can the Home Secretary confirm when the committee will have all its members in place and exactly when it will meet next?”
“We need a comprehensive look at deradicalisation in our prisons” Labour's shadow home secretary Nick Thomas-Symonds says there are questions that need addressing in wake of Reading attackhttps://t.co/q9f8VVu3qi pic.twitter.com/g8gUFdYenE — BBC News (UK) (@BBCNews) June 22, 2020
The statement today followed the incident in a park in Reading on Saturday, in which three people were killed. A 25 year-old man has been arrested – initially for murder, but has since been rearrested under the Terrorism Act 2000.
Labour leader Keir Starmer released a video message on Twitter this morning. He described the attack as “horrific” and said that the party would “work in the national interest to support the response”.


labourlist--2020-06-22--Labour must shape a positive and inclusive national story for England

Labour Together ’ s 2019 general election report is an important and impressive piece of work that correctly identifies both the short-term factors and long-term trends behind our party ’ s worst defeat since the 1930s .
It rightly attributes the loss to Jeremy Corbyn ’ s lack of popularity , Labour ’ s confused Brexit position , and a bloated manifesto that simply wasn ’ t credible when taken as a package despite containing some popular policies .
It also recognises Labour ’ s long-term decline in support amongst older voters , in towns , and from people who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
And , importantly , it points out how social conservatives have been moving away from Labour over the past decade .
This analysis is critical .
In 2018 , Stephen Kinnock and I wrote about divides in age , education , place and culture at length in Spirit of Britain , Purpose of Labour – a book that featured contributions from a range of Labour MPs and thinkers , and was designed to wave a red flag about what might be to come .
We described ‘ communitarians ’ rather than social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ voters aren ’ t inherently illiberal or anti-progress – they just typically tend to put more value on familiarity , security , stability and community than the liberal , individualist , rights-focused graduates who are so influential in the Labour Party .
Increasingly , we are seeing a radical left , largely situated in big cities , pulling so far ahead of the rest of the country that the agenda becomes alien to most people .
It ’ s time for campaigners to examine whether it is useful to label voters as ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ radical left ’ s positions on issues such as sex and gender , historic statues or offensive comedy .
Regressive , anti-minority viewpoints are out there , but they do not represent the majority .
What is perhaps most critical in the report , but explored in little detail , is how patriotism and national identity will be core to winning over voters outside of Labour ’ s left , liberal comfort zone .
Labour Together ’ s review rightly concludes that national pride , place and family will be critical to building @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it stops short of telling Labour the brutal truth : the party has been seen as unpatriotic for at least a decade and has had no idea how to talk about national identity .
Any political party that wants to govern simply must show that they believe in Britain as a force for good in the world .
Corbyn failed massively here .
His response to the Salisbury poisonings and his dithering over NATO were indicators that he could not pass that test .
The report mentions “ national security ” once , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ terrorist sympathiser ” , but could have done far more to illustrate the broader lesson that patriotism will be a critical ingredient to any future electoral success .
Some on the left try to reframe ‘ patriotic ’ to mean adoring British institutions like the NHS and the welfare state .
But Labour does not get to choose the non-negotiable foundations of patriotism – strong on security , defence and crime and a willingness to fight Britain ’ s corner on the global stage .
And if we fail on these measures @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be heard on pretty much any other issue .
Not that any of this should really be a problem ; these basic facets of patriotism should go hand in hand with Labour ’ s historic internationalist values .
Labour is uncomfortable enough with British identity – but when it comes to English and Scottish identities , the party fares even worse .
In 2015 , the Scottish nationalist surge stunned Labour , but the 20-year decline in England amongst votes who identify as ‘ strongly English ’ or ‘ more English than British @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the damage caused at the ballot box .
The English Labour Network ’ s submission to Labour Together illustrated how Boris Johnson ’ s gains in the 2019 election came almost entirely in England , and almost entirely from voters who see themselves as ‘ more English than British ’ .
The report fails to reflect on this damaging trend , which has had an impact far wider than party politics .
England outside the major cities – particularly ‘ English more than British ’ identifiers – delivered Brexit .
Meanwhile , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the far right , particularly at the recent so-called ‘ counter-protest ’ in Westminster .
But the left need not surrender Englishness in that way .
There is an inclusive England out there for Labour to shape , reflected by England ’ s multi-ethnic sports teams and the fact that 90 % of England knows you don ’ t need to be white to be English .
Now , as we enter a new decade that will be defined by the coronavirus recovery , it is time for Labour to shape a new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ England .
Labour must be willing to engage with English people , English identity and English political issues .
We should start by saying ‘ England ’ when we mean England , by delivering an English manifesto at the next election to sit alongside the Welsh and Scottish manifestos , and by developing a new plan for the governance of England – the most centralised nation in Europe .
Keir Starmer has stressed on a couple of occasions recently that he is deeply patriotic , so it feels as if our party is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another crucial message from the Labour Together report is that elections are won over four years , not four weeks .
This is about the mood music around Labour , as much as policy , so shifting the party ’ s language and approach to national identity in the longer term will be important .
We have a mountain to climb , but if we are honest about the challenges and requirements it need not be insurmountable .

Labour Together’s 2019 general election report is an important and impressive piece of work that correctly identifies both the short-term factors and long-term trends behind our party’s worst defeat since the 1930s. It rightly attributes the loss to Jeremy Corbyn’s lack of popularity, Labour’s confused Brexit position, and a bloated manifesto that simply wasn’t credible when taken as a package despite containing some popular policies. It also recognises Labour’s long-term decline in support amongst older voters, in towns, and from people who left education at the age of 16. And, importantly, it points out how social conservatives have been moving away from Labour over the past decade.
This analysis is critical. In 2018, Stephen Kinnock and I wrote about divides in age, education, place and culture at length in Spirit of Britain, Purpose of Labour – a book that featured contributions from a range of Labour MPs and thinkers, and was designed to wave a red flag about what might be to come. We described ‘communitarians’ rather than social conservatives, because the majority of non-Labour voters aren’t inherently illiberal or anti-progress – they just typically tend to put more value on familiarity, security, stability and community than the liberal, individualist, rights-focused graduates who are so influential in the Labour Party.
Increasingly, we are seeing a radical left, largely situated in big cities, pulling so far ahead of the rest of the country that the agenda becomes alien to most people. It’s time for campaigners to examine whether it is useful to label voters as ‘socially conservative’ whenever they challenge the radical left’s positions on issues such as sex and gender, historic statues or offensive comedy. Regressive, anti-minority viewpoints are out there, but they do not represent the majority.
What is perhaps most critical in the report, but explored in little detail, is how patriotism and national identity will be core to winning over voters outside of Labour’s left, liberal comfort zone. Labour Together’s review rightly concludes that national pride, place and family will be critical to building the coalition that Labour needs. But it stops short of telling Labour the brutal truth: the party has been seen as unpatriotic for at least a decade and has had no idea how to talk about national identity.
Any political party that wants to govern simply must show that they believe in Britain as a force for good in the world. Corbyn failed massively here. His response to the Salisbury poisonings and his dithering over NATO were indicators that he could not pass that test. The report mentions “national security” once, and references a woman calling Corbyn a “terrorist sympathiser”, but could have done far more to illustrate the broader lesson that patriotism will be a critical ingredient to any future electoral success.
Some on the left try to reframe ‘patriotic’ to mean adoring British institutions like the NHS and the welfare state. But Labour does not get to choose the non-negotiable foundations of patriotism – strong on security, defence and crime and a willingness to fight Britain’s corner on the global stage. And if we fail on these measures, we understandably lose the right to be heard on pretty much any other issue. Not that any of this should really be a problem; these basic facets of patriotism should go hand in hand with Labour’s historic internationalist values.
Labour is uncomfortable enough with British identity – but when it comes to English and Scottish identities, the party fares even worse. In 2015, the Scottish nationalist surge stunned Labour, but the 20-year decline in England amongst votes who identify as ‘strongly English’ or ‘more English than British’ has largely gone unnoticed – despite the damage caused at the ballot box.
The English Labour Network’s submission to Labour Together illustrated how Boris Johnson’s gains in the 2019 election came almost entirely in England, and almost entirely from voters who see themselves as ‘more English than British’. The report fails to reflect on this damaging trend, which has had an impact far wider than party politics.
England outside the major cities – particularly ‘English more than British’ identifiers – delivered Brexit. Meanwhile, we’ve seen English culture captured by the far right, particularly at the recent so-called ‘counter-protest’ in Westminster. But the left need not surrender Englishness in that way. There is an inclusive England out there for Labour to shape, reflected by England’s multi-ethnic sports teams and the fact that 90% of England knows you don’t need to be white to be English.
Now, as we enter a new decade that will be defined by the coronavirus recovery, it is time for Labour to shape a new, positive and inclusive national story for England. Labour must be willing to engage with English people, English identity and English political issues. We should start by saying ‘England’ when we mean England, by delivering an English manifesto at the next election to sit alongside the Welsh and Scottish manifestos, and by developing a new plan for the governance of England – the most centralised nation in Europe.
Keir Starmer has stressed on a couple of occasions recently that he is deeply patriotic, so it feels as if our party is moving in the right direction. Yet another crucial message from the Labour Together report is that elections are won over four years, not four weeks. This is about the mood music around Labour, as much as policy, so shifting the party’s language and approach to national identity in the longer term will be important. We have a mountain to climb, but if we are honest about the challenges and requirements it need not be insurmountable.


labourlist--2020-06-22--Labour demands return of arms exports scrutiny

Labour has called for the government to re-establish the parliamentary committee on arms export controls ( CAEC ) , and warned that the continued failure to do so could have a “ huge impact on conflicts around the globe ” .
In a letter to Jacob Rees-Mogg today , the shadow minister for peace and disarmament Fabian Hamilton highlighted that the CAEC has not been convened in over six months since the 2019 general election .
He argued that a nine month period in which the committee failed to sit in 2015 resulted in a lack of scrutiny over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – a decision later ruled to be unlawful .
The Leeds MP suggested that “ existing standing orders may need to be amended in order to rectify the deficiency in establishing permanent oversight over the executive in an area vital to human rights ” .
Hamilton wrote that “ our weapons are our responsibility and the decisions where we sell them really must be allowed to be thoroughly scrutinised by MPs ” .
He put a number of specific questions to the House of Commons leader : • “ When will the government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ select committees to choose members to sit on it ?
• “ Does the government believe the CAEC should itself become a select committee ?
• “ Will the government accept any recommendations the CAEC makes on future arms sales licences ?
• “ What arrangements – if any – is the government making to align itself with the arms control processes of the European Union as part of the ongoing trade negotiations ?
” Commenting on the letter , Shadow Foreign Secretary Lisa Nandy tweeted : “ It ’ s been six @ @ @ @ @ @ @ committee that scrutinises arms exports hasn ’ t yet been re-established .
“ We ’ re calling on government to get it up and running with delay .
Our weapons are our responsibility .
We must not be kept in the dark any longer.
” The CAEC scrutinises the government ’ s decisions to grant licenses for the sale of British weapons .
This letter from Labour comes amid reports that licenses have continued to operate for Saudi Arabia , despite having been ruled unlawful .
Last year three court of appeal judges @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson – had signed off on the sale of British arms to Saudi Arabia in 2016 without properly assessing the risk to civilians .
In a letter to the government , Shadow Secretary of State for International Trade Emily Thornberry said : “ We are left to assume that – despite being ordered to review these licences by the courts , and having 12 months to do so – your department has simply chosen not to comply .
”

Labour has called for the government to re-establish the parliamentary committee on arms export controls (CAEC), and warned that the continued failure to do so could have a “huge impact on conflicts around the globe”.
In a letter to Jacob Rees-Mogg today, the shadow minister for peace and disarmament Fabian Hamilton highlighted that the CAEC has not been convened in over six months since the 2019 general election.
He argued that a nine month period in which the committee failed to sit in 2015 resulted in a lack of scrutiny over the decision to sell weapons to Saudi Arabia – a decision later ruled to be unlawful.
The Leeds MP suggested that “existing standing orders may need to be amended in order to rectify the deficiency in establishing permanent oversight over the executive in an area vital to human rights”.
Hamilton wrote that “our weapons are our responsibility and the decisions where we sell them really must be allowed to be thoroughly scrutinised by MPs”. He put a number of specific questions to the House of Commons leader:
“When will the government re-constitute the CAEC and request its constituent select committees to choose members to sit on it?
“Does the government believe the CAEC should itself become a select committee?
“Will the government accept any recommendations the CAEC makes on future arms sales licences?
“What arrangements – if any – is the government making to align itself with the arms control processes of the European Union as part of the ongoing trade negotiations?”
Commenting on the letter, Shadow Foreign Secretary Lisa Nandy tweeted: “It’s been six months since the general election and the committee that scrutinises arms exports hasn’t yet been re-established.
“We’re calling on government to get it up and running with delay. Our weapons are our responsibility. We must not be kept in the dark any longer.”
The CAEC scrutinises the government’s decisions to grant licenses for the sale of British weapons. This letter from Labour comes amid reports that licenses have continued to operate for Saudi Arabia, despite having been ruled unlawful.
Last year three court of appeal judges said that ministers – including the then Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson – had signed off on the sale of British arms to Saudi Arabia in 2016 without properly assessing the risk to civilians.
In a letter to the government, Shadow Secretary of State for International Trade Emily Thornberry said: “We are left to assume that – despite being ordered to review these licences by the courts, and having 12 months to do so – your department has simply chosen not to comply.”


labourlist--2020-06-22--Julian Perry Robinson – inspiration in turbulent times

Covid-19 has exacerbated the social exclusion already experienced by those amongst us who live with disability or ill health , and brought particular suffering to Black , Asian and minority ethnic communities .
Across the Labour and trade union movement , frontline workers delivering health , care , transport , retail and education services have endured searing personal loss .
Many others in our membership will feel the devastating impact of the pandemic for years .
Highlighting the death from Covid of a lifelong Labour supporter may seem counter-intuitive to encouraging hope , which for so many right now feels @ @ @ @ @ @ @ below on the life of Julian Robinson , who died in April , I hope will inspire all .
They show how much one individual – powered by a principled determination to make the world a better , safer , place – can achieve .
The following comes from a eulogy given by George Papandreou ( MP and former Prime Minister of Greece ) at an online memorial to Julian Robinson held on June 4th by members of Symi , an annual symposium of intellectuals , politicians , Nobel laureates , scientists and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ member .
These words are reproduced with the kind permission of Mr Papandreou and Mary Kaldor – Labour activist and peace campaigner , herself an internationally renowned professor at the LSE and Julian ’ s life partner of over 50 years .
In the strangest of times , our family lost a very special human being… We have all wished to honour his life and his legacy .
To attempt , in these virtual moments , to capture the essence of who Julian has been , what he has stood for , his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Born in Jerusalem in 1941 .
The year that Hitler began Operation Barbarossa – the invasion of Russia .
The year when the Blitz targeted Britain ’ s major cities .
When Japan attacked Pearl Harbour and the US entered the War .
Julian Perry Robinson , left us , in 2020 , just as the world was hit – paralysed by the worst catastrophe since the second World War , the pandemic of Covid-19 .
Julian ’ s life was associated with big moments of history .
But in many ways , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with forethought of what is to come .
He devoted his life work to protect humanity from the destruction that could be wrought by biological and chemical weapons .
As a key advisor to the World Health Organisation , his report was a strong voice for the strengthening of disease surveillance in public health as well as highlighting the need for a robust global health system .
Yet in an irony suited only to Greek tragedies , he was one of the many victims of this malicious virus .
I ’ ve been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s achievements , commitment and struggle to better humanity .
Yet his soft-mannered presence at our gatherings gave me no clue as to his remarkable work .
Today , as he has left us , he emerges as a role model , one of an anti-hero , in the academic world .
Key to the negotiations on the Biological Weapons Convention and the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention .
His colleagues at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute ( SIPRI ) said that he had “ an unparalleled influence in the shaping and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helped prevent chemical and biological warfare from breaking out during our lifetime ” .
He wrote a masterpiece , six-volume study on ‘ The Problem of Chemical and Biological Warfare ‘ .
And he first warned of the creeping use of chemical weapons by military establishments as well as in the conflicts experienced in the Balkans , Afghanistan , Africa and recently in Syria .
Aristotle might have concluded that he had the three elements of the best of politics .
Scientific knowledge on the one hand ; a rational yet wise approach @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – as in the famous incident of the “ yellow rain ” when he was able to diffuse a conflict between the US and the Soviet Union ; but also emotion , pathos , a courage in expressing his indignation and sense of injustice , as he pushed for dialogue and international cooperation .
He was considered for a Nobel Prize in 2013 but he suggested it would be better to give this Award to the ‘ Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons ’ .
A rare example of selflessness , avoiding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their narcissism or sense of genius .
What a contrast to so many who today like to call themselves leaders in this world .
I regret we did not hear more of his voice , not only on the all-important subject of warfare but also of his hobbies – classic sports cars , English pubs and cooking .
I myself , I am sure all of us , have had time to reflect during this pandemic .
The small things in daily life , the deep friendships , the simple things we often @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more meaning in my life .
Lives so fleeting in the eons of time .
Somehow , thinking back at our shared moments with Julian , it seems he knew these meanings , and this , long before the pandemic took him away from us all .
Obituaries to Julian Robinson appeared also in The Times and The Guardian .

Covid-19 has exacerbated the social exclusion already experienced by those amongst us who live with disability or ill health, and brought particular suffering to Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities. Across the Labour and trade union movement, frontline workers delivering health, care, transport, retail and education services have endured searing personal loss. Many others in our membership will feel the devastating impact of the pandemic for years.
Highlighting the death from Covid of a lifelong Labour supporter may seem counter-intuitive to encouraging hope, which for so many right now feels in short supply. But the reflections below on the life of Julian Robinson, who died in April, I hope will inspire all. They show how much one individual – powered by a principled determination to make the world a better, safer, place – can achieve.
The following comes from a eulogy given by George Papandreou (MP and former Prime Minister of Greece) at an online memorial to Julian Robinson held on June 4th by members of Symi, an annual symposium of intellectuals, politicians, Nobel laureates, scientists and activists of which Julian Robinson was a member.
These words are reproduced with the kind permission of Mr Papandreou and Mary Kaldor – Labour activist and peace campaigner, herself an internationally renowned professor at the LSE and Julian’s life partner of over 50 years.
In the strangest of times, our family lost a very special human being… We have all wished to honour his life and his legacy. To attempt, in these virtual moments, to capture the essence of who Julian has been, what he has stood for, his remarkable achievements.
Julian Perry Robinson. Born in Jerusalem in 1941. The year that Hitler began Operation Barbarossa – the invasion of Russia. The year when the Blitz targeted Britain’s major cities. When Japan attacked Pearl Harbour and the US entered the War.
Julian Perry Robinson, left us, in 2020, just as the world was hit – paralysed by the worst catastrophe since the second World War, the pandemic of Covid-19. Julian’s life was associated with big moments of history. But in many ways, he was also a prometheus. One with forethought of what is to come.
He devoted his life work to protect humanity from the destruction that could be wrought by biological and chemical weapons. As a key advisor to the World Health Organisation, his report was a strong voice for the strengthening of disease surveillance in public health as well as highlighting the need for a robust global health system. Yet in an irony suited only to Greek tragedies, he was one of the many victims of this malicious virus.
I’ve been both deeply impressed and moved by Julian’s achievements, commitment and struggle to better humanity. Yet his soft-mannered presence at our gatherings gave me no clue as to his remarkable work.
Today, as he has left us, he emerges as a role model, one of an anti-hero, in the academic world. Key to the negotiations on the Biological Weapons Convention and the 1993 Chemical Weapons Convention.
His colleagues at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) said that he had “an unparalleled influence in the shaping and implementation of the international conventions that have helped prevent chemical and biological warfare from breaking out during our lifetime”.
He wrote a masterpiece, six-volume study on ‘The Problem of Chemical and Biological Warfare‘. And he first warned of the creeping use of chemical weapons by military establishments as well as in the conflicts experienced in the Balkans, Afghanistan, Africa and recently in Syria.
Aristotle might have concluded that he had the three elements of the best of politics. Scientific knowledge on the one hand; a rational yet wise approach to enforcing the implementation of international law – as in the famous incident of the “yellow rain” when he was able to diffuse a conflict between the US and the Soviet Union; but also emotion, pathos, a courage in expressing his indignation and sense of injustice, as he pushed for dialogue and international cooperation.
He was considered for a Nobel Prize in 2013 but he suggested it would be better to give this Award to the ‘Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons’. A rare example of selflessness, avoiding the hubris of those caught up in their narcissism or sense of genius. What a contrast to so many who today like to call themselves leaders in this world.
I regret we did not hear more of his voice, not only on the all-important subject of warfare but also of his hobbies – classic sports cars, English pubs and cooking.
I myself, I am sure all of us, have had time to reflect during this pandemic. The small things in daily life, the deep friendships, the simple things we often overlook, took on more beauty and more meaning in my life. Lives so fleeting in the eons of time. Somehow, thinking back at our shared moments with Julian, it seems he knew these meanings, and this, long before the pandemic took him away from us all.
Obituaries to Julian Robinson appeared also in The Times and The Guardian.


labourlist--2020-06-23--Labour Bristol mayor backs debt cancellation for local authorities

The Labour mayor of Bristol has called on the government to “ underwrite the true costs of the pandemic to local authorities ” and backed a campaign for the cancellation of local government debt .
Marvin Rees has joined 187 signatories , including eight MPs and 16 council leaders , in backing a statement by the Labour Campaign for Council Housing calling for the cancellation of debt owed to the Public Works Loan Board .
The campaign has argued that the government set a precedent by cancelling the debt owed by NHS trusts to ease the pressure they faced during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sum total of £13.4bn .
It has also stressed that cancelling the £82bn of local authority debt held by the PWLB would provide councils with an additional £4.5bn spending power each year , by removing the annual spending on servicing the debt .
Commenting on the campaign , Labour mayor Marvin Rees said : “ I have called on national government to underwrite the true costs of the pandemic to local authorities , including lost income .
“ My Labour administration supports debt cancellation , including through the Public Works Loan Board , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We have also highlighted changes to the funding formula which saw Bristol and other councils lose out.
” The campaign has stressed in its statement that local authorities entered the crisis “ grossly underfunded ” , and highlighted that the National Audit Office reported a real-terms budget reduction of 49.1 % between 2010 and 2018 .
Commenting on the demands , the Labour Campaign for Council Housing director Martin Wicks said : “ The financial crisis of local authorities is spiralling out of control as councils struggle to respond to the pandemic .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and collapse of income , comes after ten years of austerity , which has severely weakened local authorities .
Austerity is to councils what ‘ underlying conditions ’ are to people who are vulnerable to the virus.
” The group has warned that the income of local councils has fallen significantly during the pandemic , with council tax collection falling and revenue from community facilities like leisure centres hit during the lockdown period .
The campaign added that the “ income of council housing revenue accounts is declining as tenants , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , will be unable to pay the rent ” .
Councils across the country have been effected by the virus .
Research by the Special Interest Group of Municipal Authorities found that its membership of 44 councils will be in debt to the tune of £2.2bn by the end of the financial year .
The group described how central government is falling short on covering the costs .
It reports that Liverpool Council , for example , has an estimated £78m in Covid-19 expenses and loss of income – but has been awarded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the warning issued by the Local Government Association that councils will go bust without a “ cast-iron commitment ” from central government to cover the cost of coronavirus .
Supporters of the campaign include Labour left MPs John McDonnell , Richard Burgon , Zarah Sultana , Paula Barker , Ian Byrne , Clive Lewis , Claudia Webbe and Mick Whitley .

The Labour mayor of Bristol has called on the government to “underwrite the true costs of the pandemic to local authorities” and backed a campaign for the cancellation of local government debt.
Marvin Rees has joined 187 signatories, including eight MPs and 16 council leaders, in backing a statement by the Labour Campaign for Council Housing calling for the cancellation of debt owed to the Public Works Loan Board.
The campaign has argued that the government set a precedent by cancelling the debt owed by NHS trusts to ease the pressure they faced during the pandemic, which amounted to a sum total of £13.4bn.
It has also stressed that cancelling the £82bn of local authority debt held by the PWLB would provide councils with an additional £4.5bn spending power each year, by removing the annual spending on servicing the debt.
Commenting on the campaign, Labour mayor Marvin Rees said: “I have called on national government to underwrite the true costs of the pandemic to local authorities, including lost income.
“My Labour administration supports debt cancellation, including through the Public Works Loan Board, as part of a funding solution. We have also highlighted changes to the funding formula which saw Bristol and other councils lose out.”
The campaign has stressed in its statement that local authorities entered the crisis “grossly underfunded”, and highlighted that the National Audit Office reported a real-terms budget reduction of 49.1% between 2010 and 2018.
Commenting on the demands, the Labour Campaign for Council Housing director Martin Wicks said: “The financial crisis of local authorities is spiralling out of control as councils struggle to respond to the pandemic.
“The deadly combination of increased expenditure, and collapse of income, comes after ten years of austerity, which has severely weakened local authorities. Austerity is to councils what ‘underlying conditions’ are to people who are vulnerable to the virus.”
The group has warned that the income of local councils has fallen significantly during the pandemic, with council tax collection falling and revenue from community facilities like leisure centres hit during the lockdown period.
The campaign added that the “income of council housing revenue accounts is declining as tenants, who lose their jobs or are stood down, will be unable to pay the rent”.
Councils across the country have been effected by the virus. Research by the Special Interest Group of Municipal Authorities found that its membership of 44 councils will be in debt to the tune of £2.2bn by the end of the financial year.
The group described how central government is falling short on covering the costs. It reports that Liverpool Council, for example, has an estimated £78m in Covid-19 expenses and loss of income – but has been awarded only £34m.
The campaign also highlighted the warning issued by the Local Government Association that councils will go bust without a “cast-iron commitment” from central government to cover the cost of coronavirus.
Supporters of the campaign include Labour left MPs John McDonnell, Richard Burgon, Zarah Sultana, Paula Barker, Ian Byrne, Clive Lewis, Claudia Webbe and Mick Whitley.