labourlist--2020-12-02--Dodds to Bloomberg: “Security and opportunity for every part of the country”

Below is the full text of the speech delivered by Shadow Chancellor Anneliese Dodds to Bloomberg this morning .
This has been an extraordinary year .
As it draws to a close , and with the prospect of a vaccine on the horizon , thoughts are turning to recovery , and how we can build a better , more secure future for the United Kingdom .
That will require contributions from everyone ; public , private , mutual and voluntary sectors .
In particular it will require the support of the finance industry— where Britain is a global leader .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ honest appraisal of where our weaknesses lay , which have been so ruthlessly laid bare during this crisis .
The UK entered the pandemic with worryingly low levels of household financial resilience , after a decade that saw insecure work rise and wages flat line .
A quarter of all families had less than £100 in the bank when the crisis began .
Since March , four and a half million people have accumulated over £6 billion in debt and arrears .
We also entered the pandemic as one of the most unequal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accelerated .
As more and more economic activity was locked down , people on higher incomes , who could work from home , put money away .
Their savings have risen .
But those on the lowest incomes have been , on average , £170 a month worse off – losing 14 % of their pre-crisis income .
And we entered the pandemic after a decade of too many examples of poor corporate practice .
High profile collapses like BHS and Carillion indicated severe shortcomings in governance .
During the pandemic , most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their staff and local communities .
But coronavirus has also shone a spotlight on problems : the Boohoo ’ s supply chain , the gaping hole in Arcadia ’ s pension scheme , the ‘ fire and rehire ’ approach taken at companies from British Airways to Pret a Manger .
When we emerge from the crisis we must deal with those challenges- of financial resilience , inequality and poor corporate practice .
We all want life to return to normal .
But that can not mean a return to business as usual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country , or our economy , be so vulnerable to external shocks .
Because we count the cost of that in lost jobs and businesses gone to the wall .
Financial services have an essential role to play in the recovery , and in laying the foundations for a better , more secure future .
In fact , the recovery can not happen without them .
That ’ s one of many reasons why I ’ m so pleased to be addressing you today .
A well-functioning , responsible banking sector can help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Pension funds can take the money workers set aside for tomorrow , and put it to work , backing the businesses of today .
As the stewards of our largest businesses , asset managers can raise the standard of corporate behaviour .
And insurance companies can direct the money we all put by in case the worst happens , and make sure it builds a better , greener future .
Those aims hark back to the origins of the financial sector .
A sector that saw its role as helping build social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Often those origins lay in Scotland .
It was the Scottish minister Henry Duncan who is credited with founding the world ’ s first commercial savings bank .
( Though I have to say that there was such a bank established by a female social entrepreneur in Tottenham .
But she was not such a good publicist !
! )
And it was two other Scottish churchmen , Robert Wallace and Alexander Webster , who founded the first funded pension—the Widows Pension Fund to look after the wives and children of their fellow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ social reform threads its way through the ‘ friendly societies ’ of the nineteenth century to the origins of trade unionism and , indeed , the Labour Party .
And the purpose of financial services , helping people save , to transact , to share risk , to fund responsible business , is especially important to me .
My father was an accountant , who ran his own small business .
I saw first-hand how committed he was , to enabling his clients to do the right thing , grow their businesses and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ firms have strayed a long way from this approach .
When the finance sector stops thinking of itself as providing a means to empower individuals or businesses , but instead as an end in itself – it loses its way .
And for a country like the UK , with such a large and powerful financial services industry , it is a huge lost opportunity .
Indeed the results can be catastrophic .
By 2008 , the finance sector had lost its way .
But in 2020 , we have often seen the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ huge new systems overnight to get government-backed loans out to businesses who were desperately short of cash .
Helping those who ran into difficulty to keep a roof over their head .
Partnering with charities to support those most in need .
We must harness that sense of active commitment as we plan for the recovery- a recovery which must be environmentally productive , not destructive ; and one marked by providing additional opportunity , not wasting it .
Many in financial services are already blazing a trail here in many ways , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the London Stock Exchange having nearly tripled in the last three years .
But we know too there is much more to do .
The UK is only just over a third of the way to achieving the targets we need to hit to reach net zero , and we will not get there without the power of the finance sector to mobilise capital and put it to sustainable use .
We need to go further , faster .
That ’ s why Labour has called for it to be mandatory for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-Related Disclosures next year , when the UK hosts the COP26 conference .
And it ’ s why we sought to amend the Pension Schemes Bill – working hand in hand with pensions providers – so that pension schemes become aligned with the Paris agreement .
Sadly , the government ’ s ambition in this area still falls far short of what is needed .
Ahead of last week ’ s spending review , we called on government to bring forward £30bn of green investment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the creation of 400,000 jobs .
That in turn could stimulate more private capital .
Unbelievably , when it came to it the Chancellor actually cut £300 million of capital spending next year , compared with previous plans .
The second area where responsible finance has a critical role to play is in extending opportunity to every part of our country .
We know , of course , that the UK ’ s financial services sector is more than just the City of London – with two-thirds of the sector ’ s 2.3 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but it is telling that people continually use that shorthand .
This is symptomatic of a broader sense in which our economy is out of kilter .
Holding all else equal , people living in the North of England have been more likely to be made redundant during this crisis- and of course , many are now , along with people in the Midlands and Yorkshire , much more likely to be living under the highest additional Covid-related restrictions .
Instead of accepting that regional inequality , we need to make every single @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the world to grow up in and the best place to grow old in .
For that to happen , we need opportunities on people ’ s doorsteps –not at the other end of the country .
That means businesses in every town that people want to work for , and where they can envisage their children working .
And every part of the country must feel like a good place to set up home .
That needs decent and genuinely affordable , energy-efficient homes .
We can ’ t achieve any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money to where it needs to be .
To deliver on those two aims – a greener economy , with opportunities right across the country– requires policymakers to work hand in hand with the finance sector .
Because responsible financial services firms deserve a responsible government in return .
Too often , in recent years , we ’ ve seen precisely the opposite .
A sector which accounts for 10 % of our economic output has been almost totally left out of the government ’ s trade negotiations with the EU .
What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ services chapter in a free trade agreement , with talk of mutual recognition and super equivalence , has been watered down and watered down .
Now the Conservative Government is trying desperately to dress up a sow ’ s ear as a silk purse – their unilateral decision to grant access to UK markets , with the hope – hope , not guarantee- that we might get offered the same in return .
It is not a foregone conclusion that we will emerge with a deal , as last weekend ’ s revelations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deal , media reports suggest it will be as thin as gruel – it won ’ t contain anything for our largest exporting industry .
And along the way , having threatened to break international law as a negotiating tactic , the government has trashed our reputation with other potential trading partners .
Little wonder we ’ ve seen over 7,000 financial services jobs lost already and £1.2 trillion in assets poised to follow .
Sadly , what ’ s true of Brexit has been true of coronavirus too .
Last minute changes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in all sectors not knowing what on earth is about to happen next .
The Chancellor set out four versions of his winter economy plan in six weeks , all of them before winter had even begun .
We have come out of national lockdown today and yet the business support packages for Tier 2 and Tier 3 areas of the country are still inadequate and unfair , and we still lack clarity about what comes next .
We ’ ve still had nothing from the government on what will happen to those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and find themselves burdened with unsustainable debt , despite the finance sector ’ s best efforts to draw attention to the issue .
There ’ s still no word on the mysterious Project Birch plans to support our most strategic industries .
Above all , there is still no proper plan to see the country through to March .
That ’ s completely irresponsible , in a situation where the UK is experiencing the worst economic downturn in the G7 – and where the OECD yesterday forecast that our recovery will take longer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ too .
It doesn ’ t have to be like this .
Politicians and financial firms should be working hand in hand to lay the groundwork for our recovery .
I want us to have a genuine partnership so that together we can deliver security and opportunity for every part of the country .
I ’ ve said today what a responsible financial services industry might look like .
My promise in return is that from Labour , under new leadership , you would get responsible government .
A government that plans for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every five minutes .
A government that knows the value of one of our most important sectors and seeks to maximise it .
A government that , once it has set the regulatory framework and the operating environment , will do all it can to ensure stability .
That way , businesses and finance can plan for the future and deliver the fair and sustainable growth , and much-needed jobs , that every part of our country deserves .

Below is the full text of the speech delivered by Shadow Chancellor Anneliese Dodds to Bloomberg this morning.
This has been an extraordinary year. As it draws to a close, and with the prospect of a vaccine on the horizon, thoughts are turning to recovery, and how we can build a better, more secure future for the United Kingdom. That will require contributions from everyone; public, private, mutual and voluntary sectors. In particular it will require the support of the finance industry— where Britain is a global leader.
But it must also start with an honest appraisal of where our weaknesses lay, which have been so ruthlessly laid bare during this crisis. The UK entered the pandemic with worryingly low levels of household financial resilience, after a decade that saw insecure work rise and wages flat line. A quarter of all families had less than £100 in the bank when the crisis began. Since March, four and a half million people have accumulated over £6bn in debt and arrears.
We also entered the pandemic as one of the most unequal countries in Europe. That too has accelerated. As more and more economic activity was locked down, people on higher incomes, who could work from home, put money away. Their savings have risen. But those on the lowest incomes have been, on average, £170 a month worse off – losing 14% of their pre-crisis income.
And we entered the pandemic after a decade of too many examples of poor corporate practice. High profile collapses like BHS and Carillion indicated severe shortcomings in governance. During the pandemic, most businesses have made herculean efforts to support their staff and local communities. But coronavirus has also shone a spotlight on problems: the Boohoo’s supply chain, the gaping hole in Arcadia’s pension scheme, the ‘fire and rehire’ approach taken at companies from British Airways to Pret a Manger.
When we emerge from the crisis we must deal with those challenges- of financial resilience, inequality and poor corporate practice. We all want life to return to normal. But that cannot mean a return to business as usual. We should never again let our country, or our economy, be so vulnerable to external shocks. Because we count the cost of that in lost jobs and businesses gone to the wall.
Financial services have an essential role to play in the recovery, and in laying the foundations for a better, more secure future. In fact, the recovery cannot happen without them. That’s one of many reasons why I’m so pleased to be addressing you today.
A well-functioning, responsible banking sector can help people save and build their financial resilience. Pension funds can take the money workers set aside for tomorrow, and put it to work, backing the businesses of today. As the stewards of our largest businesses, asset managers can raise the standard of corporate behaviour. And insurance companies can direct the money we all put by in case the worst happens, and make sure it builds a better, greener future.
Those aims hark back to the origins of the financial sector. A sector that saw its role as helping build social fabric, encouraging saving and resilience. Often those origins lay in Scotland. It was the Scottish minister Henry Duncan who is credited with founding the world’s first commercial savings bank. (Though I have to say that there was such a bank established by a female social entrepreneur in Tottenham. But she was not such a good publicist!!) And it was two other Scottish churchmen, Robert Wallace and Alexander Webster, who founded the first funded pension—the Widows Pension Fund to look after the wives and children of their fellow clergymen.
The link between finance and social reform threads its way through the ‘friendly societies’ of the nineteenth century to the origins of trade unionism and, indeed, the Labour Party. And the purpose of financial services, helping people save, to transact, to share risk, to fund responsible business, is especially important to me. My father was an accountant, who ran his own small business. I saw first-hand how committed he was, to enabling his clients to do the right thing, grow their businesses and support the local economy.
Yet some firms have strayed a long way from this approach. When the finance sector stops thinking of itself as providing a means to empower individuals or businesses, but instead as an end in itself – it loses its way. And for a country like the UK, with such a large and powerful financial services industry, it is a huge lost opportunity. Indeed the results can be catastrophic.
By 2008, the finance sector had lost its way. But in 2020, we have often seen the sector at its best. Setting up huge new systems overnight to get government-backed loans out to businesses who were desperately short of cash. Helping those who ran into difficulty to keep a roof over their head. Partnering with charities to support those most in need. We must harness that sense of active commitment as we plan for the recovery- a recovery which must be environmentally productive, not destructive; and one marked by providing additional opportunity, not wasting it.
Many in financial services are already blazing a trail here in many ways, with the amount raised in green bonds on the London Stock Exchange having nearly tripled in the last three years. But we know too there is much more to do. The UK is only just over a third of the way to achieving the targets we need to hit to reach net zero, and we will not get there without the power of the finance sector to mobilise capital and put it to sustainable use.
We need to go further, faster. That’s why Labour has called for it to be mandatory for all listed companies to report in line with the recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-Related Disclosures next year, when the UK hosts the COP26 conference. And it’s why we sought to amend the pension schemes bill – working hand in hand with pensions providers – so that pension schemes become aligned with the Paris agreement.
Sadly, the government’s ambition in this area still falls far short of what is needed. Ahead of last week’s spending review, we called on government to bring forward £30bn of green investment in the next 18 months, supporting the creation of 400,000 jobs. That in turn could stimulate more private capital. Unbelievably, when it came to it the Chancellor actually cut £300m of capital spending next year, compared with previous plans.
The second area where responsible finance has a critical role to play is in extending opportunity to every part of our country. We know, of course, that the UK’s financial services sector is more than just the City of London – with two-thirds of the sector’s 2.3 million jobs being outside the capital – but it is telling that people continually use that shorthand. This is symptomatic of a broader sense in which our economy is out of kilter. Holding all else equal, people living in the North of England have been more likely to be made redundant during this crisis- and of course, many are now, along with people in the Midlands and Yorkshire, much more likely to be living under the highest additional Covid-related restrictions.
Instead of accepting that regional inequality, we need to make every single part of this country the best place in the world to grow up in and the best place to grow old in. For that to happen, we need opportunities on people’s doorsteps –not at the other end of the country. That means businesses in every town that people want to work for, and where they can envisage their children working. And every part of the country must feel like a good place to set up home. That needs decent and genuinely affordable, energy-efficient homes. We can’t achieve any of that without the finance sector getting money to where it needs to be.
To deliver on those two aims – a greener economy, with opportunities right across the country– requires policymakers to work hand in hand with the finance sector. Because responsible financial services firms deserve a responsible government in return.
Too often, in recent years, we’ve seen precisely the opposite. A sector which accounts for 10% of our economic output has been almost totally left out of the government’s trade negotiations with the EU. What started as plans for an ambitious financial services chapter in a free trade agreement, with talk of mutual recognition and super equivalence, has been watered down and watered down. Now the Conservative Government is trying desperately to dress up a sow’s ear as a silk purse – their unilateral decision to grant access to UK markets, with the hope – hope, not guarantee- that we might get offered the same in return.
It is not a foregone conclusion that we will emerge with a deal, as last weekend’s revelations indicated. If we do obtain a deal, media reports suggest it will be as thin as gruel – it won’t contain anything for our largest exporting industry. And along the way, having threatened to break international law as a negotiating tactic, the government has trashed our reputation with other potential trading partners. Little wonder we’ve seen over 7,000 financial services jobs lost already and £1.2tn in assets poised to follow.
Sadly, what’s true of Brexit has been true of coronavirus too. Last minute changes to economic support schemes have left businesses in all sectors not knowing what on earth is about to happen next. The Chancellor set out four versions of his winter economy plan in six weeks, all of them before winter had even begun. We have come out of national lockdown today and yet the business support packages for Tier 2 and Tier 3 areas of the country are still inadequate and unfair, and we still lack clarity about what comes next.
We’ve still had nothing from the government on what will happen to those companies who’ve taken out loans and find themselves burdened with unsustainable debt, despite the finance sector’s best efforts to draw attention to the issue. There’s still no word on the mysterious Project Birch plans to support our most strategic industries. Above all, there is still no proper plan to see the country through to March. That’s completely irresponsible, in a situation where the UK is experiencing the worst economic downturn in the G7 – and where the OECD yesterday forecast that our recovery will take longer than the rest of the G7, too.
It doesn’t have to be like this. Politicians and financial firms should be working hand in hand to lay the groundwork for our recovery. I want us to have a genuine partnership so that together we can deliver security and opportunity for every part of the country. I’ve said today what a responsible financial services industry might look like.
My promise in return is that from Labour, under new leadership, you would get responsible government. A government that plans for the long-term, not chopping and changing every five minutes. A government that knows the value of one of our most important sectors and seeks to maximise it. A government that, once it has set the regulatory framework and the operating environment, will do all it can to ensure stability. That way, businesses and finance can plan for the future and deliver the fair and sustainable growth, and much-needed jobs, that every part of our country deserves.


labourlist--2020-12-02--Tier we go again: Johnson suffers revolt but rules pass as vaccine approved

We start the day with excellent news : Pfizer/BioNTech coronavirus vaccine has been approved for widespread use in the UK , and Matt Hancock says it will be rolled out from next week .
There are difficulties as it needs to be kept at -70°C , but clear progress is being made .
In the meantime , of course , coronavirus restrictions still need to be passed , implemented and followed – and the positive vaccine news hasn ’ t completely swept away the headlines about Boris Johnson suffering his biggest Tory rebellion since the general election in the House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Minister offered reassurances and a few small concessions , plus a last-minute Zoom call and even reportedly some pleading by the voting lobbies .
But with 54 Conservatives opposing the new rules , they were only approved thanks to opposition MPs abstaining .
Not all Labour MPs complied with their party whip , however : 15 , plus Jeremy Corbyn , voted against a return to the three-tier Covid-19 rules system .
As I explain here , the Labour rebels all had different reasons for breaking the whip – some were incensed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of coherence in the regulations ; others had more fundamental objections , being either in favour of ‘ zero Covid ’ or a ‘ risk management ’ strategy instead of the current approach .
Labour is seeking a “ genuine partnership ” with the financial services sector , Anneliese Dodds will declare this morning .
( Political party , 120 , “ under new management ” , looking for a “ well-functioning , responsible banking sector ” ? )
This lonely hearts ad speech to Bloomberg will see the Shadow Chancellor approach the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ blazing a trail ” in the drive towards a green economic recovery – but Dodds will also urge the financial services to go “ further , faster ” .
Alongside an explanation of Labour ’ s positions on climate-related disclosures and climate-friendly pension schemes , she will reiterate the need for “ responsible government ” .
Keir Starmer has his eye on a humble address fit for the Covid era , if his Times piece today is anything to go by .
Describing the Prime Minister ’ s behaviour as “ irresponsible ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – the Labour leader is calling on the government to “ release all the modelling it has done of sectoral impacts and potential job losses ” .
If not , Labour will force a vote on the issue .
But away from parliamentary manoeuvres , Starmer is facing pressure from within his party , as one of the donors that he approached with a personalised letter according to The Times two weeks ago has been found to have tweeted “ abhorrent ” comments .
The Muslim Council of Britain , the Labour Muslim @ @ @ @ @ @ @ return the donations .
The leadership might also think about taking another look at its vetting processes .
Sign up to LabourList ’ s morning email for everything Labour , every weekday morning .

We start the day with excellent news: Pfizer/BioNTech coronavirus vaccine has been approved for widespread use in the UK, and Matt Hancock says it will be rolled out from next week. There are difficulties as it needs to be kept at -70°C, but clear progress is being made. In the meantime, of course, coronavirus restrictions still need to be passed, implemented and followed – and the positive vaccine news hasn’t completely swept away the headlines about Boris Johnson suffering his biggest Tory rebellion since the general election in the House of Commons last night.
The Prime Minister offered reassurances and a few small concessions, plus a last-minute Zoom call and even reportedly some pleading by the voting lobbies. But with 54 Conservatives opposing the new rules, they were only approved thanks to opposition MPs abstaining. Not all Labour MPs complied with their party whip, however: 15, plus Jeremy Corbyn, voted against a return to the three-tier Covid-19 rules system. As I explain here, the Labour rebels all had different reasons for breaking the whip – some were incensed by the lack of economic support and lack of coherence in the regulations; others had more fundamental objections, being either in favour of ‘zero Covid’ or a ‘risk management’ strategy instead of the current approach.
Labour is seeking a “genuine partnership” with the financial services sector, Anneliese Dodds will declare this morning. (Political party, 120, “under new management”, looking for a “well-functioning, responsible banking sector”?) This lonely hearts ad speech to Bloomberg will see the Shadow Chancellor approach the sector with warmth and praise for “blazing a trail” in the drive towards a green economic recovery – but Dodds will also urge the financial services to go “further, faster”. Alongside an explanation of Labour’s positions on climate-related disclosures and climate-friendly pension schemes, she will reiterate the need for “responsible government”.
Keir Starmer has his eye on a humble address fit for the Covid era, if his Times piece today is anything to go by. Describing the Prime Minister’s behaviour as “irresponsible” – there’s that theme again – the Labour leader is calling on the government to “release all the modelling it has done of sectoral impacts and potential job losses”. If not, Labour will force a vote on the issue. But away from parliamentary manoeuvres, Starmer is facing pressure from within his party, as one of the donors that he approached with a personalised letter according to The Times two weeks ago has been found to have tweeted “abhorrent” comments. The Muslim Council of Britain, the Labour Muslim Network and others are urging Labour to return the donations. The leadership might also think about taking another look at its vetting processes. Sign up to LabourList’s morning email for everything Labour, every weekday morning.


labourlist--2020-12-02--Ex-MP Katy Clark selected as Labour MSP candidate for Cunninghame North

Katy Clark , a Labour peer and former MP for North Ayrshire and Arran , has been selected as Labour ’ s MSP candidate for Cunninghame North against Johanna Baxter in a victory for the party ’ s left .
Clark won the selection race with 38 votes against 31 for Baxter , a member of Labour ’ s national executive committee ( NEC ) and Scottish executive committee ( SEC ) and chair of the Cunninghame North local party .
Baxter had fought the seat for Labour last time in the Scottish parliamentary election in 2016 .
LabourList sources @ @ @ @ @ @ @ selection contest was split along factional lines .
Commenting on her win , Clark told LabourList : “ I am delighted to have been selected as Labour ’ s candidate for Cunninghame North .
Now more than ever Labour needs a positive vision for Scotland .
“ And Cunninghame North needs a MSP who will fight for jobs , investment and the eradication of poverty .
I am really looking forward to the campaign.
” Local party Stephen McNeill secretary added : “ It is a pleasure to have Katy Clark as our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaigning with her next year with good socialist policies.
” Clark served as MP for North Ayrshire and Arran from 2005 to 2015 , when the UK parliamentary seat was lost to the SNP .
She is on the Labour left and was political secretary to Jeremy Corbyn when he was leader .
After conducting Labour ’ s democracy review , and standing as a candidate on the London list in the 2019 European parliamentary elections , Clark was made Baroness Clark of Kilwinning in the Lords this year .
Cunninghame North is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kenneth Gibson – but he is facing a probe into alleged bullying and harassment , and the SNP suspended its selection race for the MSP seat in October .
Two SNP officials recently resigned over claims that Gibson had engaged in “ aggressive and abrasive ” behaviour “ especially of women ” .
The MSP has called it a “ vicious and mendacious smear campaign ” .
The MSP won a majority of 8,724 at the last election , with the Conservative candidate Jamie Greene placing second .
Greene , now a regional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the constituency next year .

Katy Clark, a Labour peer and former MP for North Ayrshire and Arran, has been selected as Labour’s MSP candidate for Cunninghame North against Johanna Baxter in a victory for the party’s left.
Clark won the selection race with 38 votes against 31 for Baxter, a member of Labour’s national executive committee (NEC) and Scottish executive committee (SEC) and chair of the Cunninghame North local party.
Baxter had fought the seat for Labour last time in the Scottish parliamentary election in 2016. LabourList sources say the result of the fresh candidate selection contest was split along factional lines.
Commenting on her win, Clark told LabourList: “I am delighted to have been selected as Labour’s candidate for Cunninghame North. Now more than ever Labour needs a positive vision for Scotland.
“And Cunninghame North needs a MSP who will fight for jobs, investment and the eradication of poverty. I am really looking forward to the campaign.”
Local party Stephen McNeill secretary added: “It is a pleasure to have Katy Clark as our candidate and I am looking forward to campaigning with her next year with good socialist policies.”
Clark served as MP for North Ayrshire and Arran from 2005 to 2015, when the UK parliamentary seat was lost to the SNP. She is on the Labour left and was political secretary to Jeremy Corbyn when he was leader.
After conducting Labour’s democracy review, and standing as a candidate on the London list in the 2019 European parliamentary elections, Clark was made Baroness Clark of Kilwinning in the Lords this year.
Cunninghame North is a safe SNP seat currently held by Kenneth Gibson – but he is facing a probe into alleged bullying and harassment, and the SNP suspended its selection race for the MSP seat in October.
Two SNP officials recently resigned over claims that Gibson had engaged in “aggressive and abrasive” behaviour “especially of women”. The MSP has called it a “vicious and mendacious smear campaign”.
The MSP won a majority of 8,724 at the last election, with the Conservative candidate Jamie Greene placing second. Greene, now a regional list MSP, has been reselected for the constituency next year.


labourlist--2020-12-02--Labour slams government for “dragging its feet” in fight against tax avoidance

Labour has accused the government of “ dragging its feet ” over introducing previously promised measures to clamp down on tax avoidance and stressed that everyone should “ play by the rules and pay their fair share of tax ” .
In a letter sent by shadow minister James Murray today , following parliamentary questions on the issue earlier this week , Labour has highlighted that the government promised in the budget in March to bring forward new legislation .
Despite this , and plans to announce measures in the subsequently scrapped Autumn budget , minister Jesse Norman refused to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Commons and only said the government would make announcements “ shortly ” .
Labour ’ s James Murray said : “ The government promised to crack down on promoters of tax avoidance this year – but now all their pledges have been dropped from 2020 , with no guarantee of when we ’ ll see them return.
” The government initially drafted legislation to tackle the promoters of tax avoidance in July for the finance bill 2020-21 , but this was subsequently delayed until next year with the content subject to confirmation in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ financial secretary to the Treasury , who recently replaced Dan Carden in the post , added : “ It ’ s irresponsible for the government to keep dragging its feet on such a key issue .
“ Everyone should play by the rules and pay their fair share of tax .
The fact this Chancellor is pushing ahead with a key worker pay freeze while going soft on tax avoidance makes you wonder about his priorities.
” In the letter sent to the minister today , Labour has asked for confirmation as to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ July for this year ’ s finance bill would be included in next year ’ s instead .
The shadow financial secretary to the Treasury also asked the government minister to outline what and when draft legislation of further measures will be published and in which bill they will be included .
Murray asked the minister on Tuesday : “ Following the loan charge review , the government promised in March that this year would bring both legislation and the announcement of additional policy measures against those who promote tax avoidance schemes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the minister confirm when the promised changes will become law ?
” In response , financial secretary to the Treasury Jesse Norman simply told colleagues : “ We will be making an announcement about the response to the Sir Amyas Morse ’ s [ loan charge ] review shortly.
” The government commissioned Morse to lead an independent review into the loan charge .
The loan charge is an anti-avoidance measure introduced in 2016 to address the tax loss to the exchequer from a variety of ‘ disguised remuneration ’ schemes .
Below @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sent to Tory minister Jesse Norman .
I am writing , further to my question to you in the House of Commons on 1 December , about my concerns that the government is delaying much-needed action to tackle the promoters of tax avoidance .
At the budget on 11 March , the government announced initial steps it would be taking to tackle the promoters of tax avoidance , and the necessary legislation was published in draft on 21 July .
This was intended to be part of the Finance bill 2020-21 , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delayed .
It now seems uncertain whether the legislation will be included in the Finance bill 2021 , with the government making clear the contents of that bill will be subject to confirmation at budget 2021 .
Furthermore , a government strategy on tackling promoters of tax avoidance published on 19 March promised that further measures , beyond those published in July , would be announced at Autumn budget this year .
However , with the Autumn budget now cancelled , you confirmed in a written ministerial statement on 12 November that these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year .
Instead , your statement suggests their detail will be set out and consulted on sometime next year , and you give no indication of when the subsequent legislation might be enacted .
I would therefore be grateful if you could confirm : • Whether the draft anti-avoidance legislation published on 21 July 2020 will form part of the Finance bill 2021 ?
• When the further measures to tackle promoters of tax avoidance first promised in ‘ Tackling promoters of mass-marketed tax avoidance schemes ’ ( published 19 March 2020 ) @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Written Ministerial Statement of 12 November 2020 , will be published in full and consulted on ?
• When you expected the draft legislation on these further measures will be published , and through which bill you expect the necessary legislation to become law ?
When I raised these points with you in the House of Commons on 1 December , you did not respond in full , but rather promised the government would be making a further announcement ‘ shortly ’ .
I would however , welcome your response to the specific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or alternatively your commitment to a date by which a further announcement will be made and a guarantee that this will include specific answers to the points above .
The delays in implementing legislation around the promoters of tax avoidance worryingly echo the government ’ s delay in reforming the law over corporate liability for economic crime .
In that case , the government first said it would look into corporate liability in 2014 , then taking until 2017 to issue a call for evidence , and a further three years to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ call for evidence on corporate liability , published earlier this month , the government asked the Law Commission to produce an options report .
This means there will be no realistic prospect of law reform before 2023 at the very earliest : nearly a decade since the matter was first raised .
People in this country expect everyone to play fair and pay the tax they should .
They want the government to act , without delay , against those who promote tax avoidance schemes , and who routinely mislead otherwise law-abiding taxpayers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s delay means people may be left at risk of serious personal financial difficulty , and means the public finances may continue to miss out on billions of pounds a year .
I would therefore be grateful for your response to my above questions about the implementation of measures on this important matter .

Labour has accused the government of “dragging its feet” over introducing previously promised measures to clamp down on tax avoidance and stressed that everyone should “play by the rules and pay their fair share of tax”.
In a letter sent by shadow minister James Murray today, following parliamentary questions on the issue earlier this week, Labour has highlighted that the government promised in the budget in March to bring forward new legislation.
Despite this, and plans to announce measures in the subsequently scrapped Autumn budget, minister Jesse Norman refused to answer questions on the issue in the Commons and only said the government would make announcements “shortly”.
Labour’s James Murray said: “The government promised to crack down on promoters of tax avoidance this year – but now all their pledges have been dropped from 2020, with no guarantee of when we’ll see them return.”
The government initially drafted legislation to tackle the promoters of tax avoidance in July for the finance bill 2020-21, but this was subsequently delayed until next year with the content subject to confirmation in the next budget.
The new shadow financial secretary to the Treasury, who recently replaced Dan Carden in the post, added: “It’s irresponsible for the government to keep dragging its feet on such a key issue.
“Everyone should play by the rules and pay their fair share of tax. The fact this Chancellor is pushing ahead with a key worker pay freeze while going soft on tax avoidance makes you wonder about his priorities.”
In the letter sent to the minister today, Labour has asked for confirmation as to whether the draft anti-avoidance legislation published in July for this year’s finance bill would be included in next year’s instead.
The shadow financial secretary to the Treasury also asked the government minister to outline what and when draft legislation of further measures will be published and in which bill they will be included.
Murray asked the minister on Tuesday: “Following the loan charge review, the government promised in March that this year would bring both legislation and the announcement of additional policy measures against those who promote tax avoidance schemes.
“As neither has happened, will the minister confirm when the promised changes will become law?”
In response, financial secretary to the Treasury Jesse Norman simply told colleagues: “We will be making an announcement about the response to the Sir Amyas Morse’s [loan charge] review shortly.”
The government commissioned Morse to lead an independent review into the loan charge. The loan charge is an anti-avoidance measure introduced in 2016 to address the tax loss to the exchequer from a variety of ‘disguised remuneration’ schemes.
Below is the full text of the letter sent to Tory minister Jesse Norman.
Dear Jesse,
I am writing, further to my question to you in the House of Commons on 1 December, about my concerns that the government is delaying much-needed action to tackle the promoters of tax avoidance.
At the budget on 11 March, the government announced initial steps it would be taking to tackle the promoters of tax avoidance, and the necessary legislation was published in draft on 21 July. This was intended to be part of the Finance bill 2020-21, though of course that bill has now been delayed. It now seems uncertain whether the legislation will be included in the Finance bill 2021, with the government making clear the contents of that bill will be subject to confirmation at budget 2021.
Furthermore, a government strategy on tackling promoters of tax avoidance published on 19 March promised that further measures, beyond those published in July, would be announced at Autumn budget this year.
However, with the Autumn budget now cancelled, you confirmed in a written ministerial statement on 12 November that these proposals will now not be published this year. Instead, your statement suggests their detail will be set out and consulted on sometime next year, and you give no indication of when the subsequent legislation might be enacted.
I would therefore be grateful if you could confirm:
Whether the draft anti-avoidance legislation published on 21 July 2020 will form part of the Finance bill 2021? When the further measures to tackle promoters of tax avoidance first promised in ‘Tackling promoters of mass-marketed tax avoidance schemes’ (published 19 March 2020), and referred to again in your Written Ministerial Statement of 12 November 2020, will be published in full and consulted on? When you expected the draft legislation on these further measures will be published, and through which bill you expect the necessary legislation to become law?
When I raised these points with you in the House of Commons on 1 December, you did not respond in full, but rather promised the government would be making a further announcement ‘shortly’. I would however, welcome your response to the specific points above ahead of that further announcement, or alternatively your commitment to a date by which a further announcement will be made and a guarantee that this will include specific answers to the points above.
The delays in implementing legislation around the promoters of tax avoidance worryingly echo the government’s delay in reforming the law over corporate liability for economic crime. In that case, the government first said it would look into corporate liability in 2014, then taking until 2017 to issue a call for evidence, and a further three years to respond.
In its response to the call for evidence on corporate liability, published earlier this month, the government asked the Law Commission to produce an options report. This means there will be no realistic prospect of law reform before 2023 at the very earliest: nearly a decade since the matter was first raised.
People in this country expect everyone to play fair and pay the tax they should. They want the government to act, without delay, against those who promote tax avoidance schemes, and who routinely mislead otherwise law-abiding taxpayers.
I am concerned the government’s delay means people may be left at risk of serious personal financial difficulty, and means the public finances may continue to miss out on billions of pounds a year. I would therefore be grateful for your response to my above questions about the implementation of measures on this important matter.
Yours sincerely,
James


labourlist--2020-12-02--Keir Starmer calls for plan to roll out Covid vaccine “swiftly, safely and fairly”

Keir Starmer has called for the government to bring forward a “ practical plan ” for rolling out the coronavirus vaccine “ swiftly , safely and fairly ” following the news that the UK has approved the Pfizer/BioNTech jab for use next week .
In a Sky News interview this evening , the Labour leader hailed reports that the UK government has secured the vaccine as “ welcome news ” but warned of the logistical challenges facing the country with the task of administering it .
Starmer said : “ This is really welcome news and we owe a debt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been involved in it .
Obviously , what we now need from the government is a practical plan for rolling this out swiftly , safely and fairly .
“ I think there ’ s a real problem with care homes and how we get the vaccine into care homes .
Logistical problems because the vaccine has to be kept at such a low degree , so cold .
“ But we ’ ve got to overcome that , we ’ ve got to pull together , because people in care homes have suffered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reported this morning that the jab , which offers up to 95 % protection against the virus , is safe to be rolled out and the UK has secured 800,000 doses ( enough for 400,000 people ) to arrive in the coming days .
The government has identified cohorts of people with varying degrees of priority for the vaccine .
Elderly people in care homes and care home staff have been placed top of the priority list , followed by those over 80 and health and care staff .
The comments from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Prime Minister ’ s Questions earlier this afternoon , in which he quizzed Boris Johnson on the details of the roll out of the vaccine including problems raised in its application in care homes .
Starmer highlighted concers that were expressed this morning by the Welsh Labour government , which said that due to the extremely low temperature needed to store the vaccine it could not currently be distributed in care homes .
He also pressed the Prime Minister to bring forward legislation to combat anti-vax disinformation about the vaccine .
Labour called @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anti-vax conspiracy theories , particularly on social media platforms .

Keir Starmer has called for the government to bring forward a “practical plan” for rolling out the coronavirus vaccine “swiftly, safely and fairly” following the news that the UK has approved the Pfizer/BioNTech jab for use next week.
In a Sky News interview this evening, the Labour leader hailed reports that the UK government has secured the vaccine as “welcome news” but warned of the logistical challenges facing the country with the task of administering it.
Starmer said: “This is really welcome news and we owe a debt of gratitude to everybody who’s been involved in it. Obviously, what we now need from the government is a practical plan for rolling this out swiftly, safely and fairly.
“I think there’s a real problem with care homes and how we get the vaccine into care homes. Logistical problems because the vaccine has to be kept at such a low degree, so cold.
“But we’ve got to overcome that, we’ve got to pull together, because people in care homes have suffered enough already.”
British medicines regulator MHRA reported this morning that the jab, which offers up to 95% protection against the virus, is safe to be rolled out and the UK has secured 800,000 doses (enough for 400,000 people) to arrive in the coming days.
The government has identified cohorts of people with varying degrees of priority for the vaccine. Elderly people in care homes and care home staff have been placed top of the priority list, followed by those over 80 and health and care staff.
The comments from the Labour leader follow the latest session of Prime Minister’s Questions earlier this afternoon, in which he quizzed Boris Johnson on the details of the roll out of the vaccine including problems raised in its application in care homes.
Starmer highlighted concers that were expressed this morning by the Welsh Labour government, which said that due to the extremely low temperature needed to store the vaccine it could not currently be distributed in care homes.
He also pressed the Prime Minister to bring forward legislation to combat anti-vax disinformation about the vaccine. Labour called last month for censorship laws to fight anti-vax conspiracy theories, particularly on social media platforms.


labourlist--2020-12-02--WATCH: “Oh, seriously?” Yvette Cooper grills minister on asylum plans

Labour ’ s Yvette Cooper has grilled immigration minister today on various reported government proposals related to asylum seekers , including plans to put in place giant wave machines to deter Channel crossings .
The home affairs select committee chair asked Chris Philp : “ Can you just confirm that you are no longer looking at sending asylum seekers to the Ascension Island ?
” She was referring to reports from September that the government had considered building an asylum processing centre on a remote territory in the Atlantic Ocean , more than 4,000 miles from the UK .
Philp @ @ @ @ @ @ @ considered a wide range… of options .
I don ’ t want to give any definitive commentary on what we have and haven ’ t thought about , or rule in or out what steps may be taken in the future .
“ Oh , seriously ?
” Cooper , the Labour MP for Normanton , Pontefract and Castleford , asked in response .
“ You ’ re seriously not going to rule out sending asylum seekers to the Ascension Island to be processed ?
” The Tory MP said : “ Well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do that , but I ’ m not going to… ” Cooper raised another reported proposal , asking : “ What about , can you rule out putting people on disused oil platforms ?
” “ We don ’ t have any current plans to put people on oil platforms , no .
But I ’ m not going to go through a whole list of hypotheticals , ” Philp replied .
Asked about suggestions of “ boats with pumps generating waves that would force boats back into French waters ” and “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the immigration minister would only say that these are not “ current plans ” .
The minister for immigration compliance and the courts was being questioned as part of the home affairs committee inquiry into Channel crossings , migration and asylum-seeking routes through the European Union .

Labour’s Yvette Cooper has grilled immigration minister today on various reported government proposals related to asylum seekers, including plans to put in place giant wave machines to deter Channel crossings.
The home affairs select committee chair asked Chris Philp: “Can you just confirm that you are no longer looking at sending asylum seekers to the Ascension Island?”
She was referring to reports from September that the government had considered building an asylum processing centre on a remote territory in the Atlantic Ocean, more than 4,000 miles from the UK.
Philp replied: “The Home Office has considered a wide range… of options. I don’t want to give any definitive commentary on what we have and haven’t thought about, or rule in or out what steps may be taken in the future.
“Oh, seriously?” Cooper, the Labour MP for Normanton, Pontefract and Castleford, asked in response. “You’re seriously not going to rule out sending asylum seekers to the Ascension Island to be processed?”
The Tory MP said: “Well, we have no current plans to do that, but I’m not going to…” Cooper raised another reported proposal, asking: “What about, can you rule out putting people on disused oil platforms?”
“We don’t have any current plans to put people on oil platforms, no. But I’m not going to go through a whole list of hypotheticals,” Philp replied.
Asked about suggestions of “boats with pumps generating waves that would force boats back into French waters” and “giant wave machines in the Channel”, the immigration minister would only say that these are not “current plans”.
The minister for immigration compliance and the courts was being questioned as part of the home affairs committee inquiry into Channel crossings, migration and asylum-seeking routes through the European Union.


labourlist--2020-12-02--Exclusive: Eight affiliated trade unions urge Labour to resolve Corbyn whip row

The leaders of eight trade unions affiliated to the Labour Party have signed a joint statement expressing “ concerns ” over the unresolved situation regarding Jeremy Corbyn ’ s whip , LabourList can reveal .
The fresh statement explains that unions met with Keir Starmer last week to call for the whip to be restored to the former party leader and put forward concerns that Labour has recently been “ distracted by internal wrangling ” .
It suggests that the ongoing row over the whip is “ causing deep division in our party ” that “ will not be understood @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and concludes : “ We urge all parties to resolve this matter quickly.
” The general secretaries of left-wing affiliated unions Unite , CWU , FBU , ASLEF , TSSA , NUM and BFAWU all signed a statement in October expressing “ serious concerns ” over the original suspension of Corbyn from the party .
But the general secretary of Community , Roy Rickhuss , has also signed up on this occasion to the statement issued jointly by unions about Corbyn .
The union nominated Starmer for the leadership earlier this year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Labour Movement conference that he was “ disappointed ” with Corbyn ’ s response to the Equality and Human Rights Commission report , saying it was “ as bad as you could get ” .
His predecessor was suspended in October after claiming that “ the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents ” in response to the probe that found Labour responsible for unlawful acts .
Below is the full text of the statement and signatories .
At a meeting with Keir Starmer ( Monday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the situation regarding Jeremy Corbyn and called for the Labour whip to be restored to him .
In the face of millions losing their jobs and a disgraceful imposition by the government of a public sector pay freeze , we have been distracted by internal wrangling , which is causing deep division in our party and will not be understood or forgiven by the British public .
We urge all parties to resolve this matter quickly .

The leaders of eight trade unions affiliated to the Labour Party have signed a joint statement expressing “concerns” over the unresolved situation regarding Jeremy Corbyn’s whip, LabourList can reveal.
The fresh statement explains that unions met with Keir Starmer last week to call for the whip to be restored to the former party leader and put forward concerns that Labour has recently been “distracted by internal wrangling”.
It suggests that the ongoing row over the whip is “causing deep division in our party” that “will not be understood or forgiven by the British public”, and concludes: “We urge all parties to resolve this matter quickly.”
The general secretaries of left-wing affiliated unions Unite, CWU, FBU, ASLEF, TSSA, NUM and BFAWU all signed a statement in October expressing “serious concerns” over the original suspension of Corbyn from the party.
But the general secretary of Community, Roy Rickhuss, has also signed up on this occasion to the statement issued jointly by unions about Corbyn. The union nominated Starmer for the leadership earlier this year.
Starmer last weekend told the Jewish Labour Movement conference that he was “disappointed” with Corbyn’s response to the Equality and Human Rights Commission report, saying it was “as bad as you could get”.
His predecessor was suspended in October after claiming that “the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents” in response to the probe that found Labour responsible for unlawful acts.
Below is the full text of the statement and signatories.
At a meeting with Keir Starmer (Monday 23rd November) unions expressed concerns at the situation regarding Jeremy Corbyn and called for the Labour whip to be restored to him.
In the face of millions losing their jobs and a disgraceful imposition by the government of a public sector pay freeze, we have been distracted by internal wrangling, which is causing deep division in our party and will not be understood or forgiven by the British public.
We urge all parties to resolve this matter quickly.
Dave Ward – CWU
Matt Wrack – FBU
Mick Whelan – ASLEF
Manuel Cortes – TSSA
Ian Hodson – BFAWU
Sarah Woolley – BFAWU
Chris Kitchen – NUM
Roy Rickhuss – Community
Len McCluskey – Unite


labourlist--2020-12-02--Labour cannot rubber-stamp a Tory Brexit deal. This is an enormous trap

It could be this week .
It could be next week .
In theory , it might never come .
It may well not even need a straight up or down vote in the Commons , but it is unlikely that the Tories would miss an opportunity to make one happen .
One thing for certain , however , is that the much over-promised deal with the EU is set to be the next episode in the national drama that has dominated UK politics over the last five years .
One thing we need to prepare ourselves for as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is the way that the Tories will try to frame the debate when their deal eventually arrives .
It is in their interests to establish a simple but startling contrast between their deal and the consequences of no deal .
However thin their deal is , with concession after concession to the EU , the Tories will want to be singing its praises and the only way they will be able to give any impression of shine will be by comparing it to the disaster that a no-deal exit would be .
After @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is an understandable desire within the labour movement to now put it aside and accept whatever the government comes back with .
The argument is lost , time has run out .
There is no appetite for the disruption , uncertainty and chaos that would result from a no-deal exit on top of the challenges already faced in dealing with the impact of the pandemic .
But the gnawing reality is that this is an enormous trap .
The looming prospect of a no-deal exit is a phantom the Tories have regularly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything as an alternative – no matter how harmful it may be .
Yet the contrast between their deal and no deal is the contrast between their policy and something that we have tried every which way to avoid .
It would damage Britain more than any other country and more than any other outcome .
It is something that no responsible government should do .
Instead , no matter which side of the argument we may have stood on over the last five years in terms of the referendum and subsequently , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to hold the government to account for the promises they have made .
In order to do that , we must focus on the gap between what the government is doing and what we would do – not between what the government is doing and some phantom , catastrophic , unthinkable outcome .
If we are making the contrast between no deal and the Tory deal , we are simply rubber-stamping their plan all along .
It is a trap that Labour must be very careful not to fall into .
We should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for in this deal and making the case for the shortcomings of this deal against Labour ’ s demands , not against Tory threats of no deal .
Before he was leader , and before we left the EU , Keir Starmer set six tests for the Tories on any exit agreement .
They failed those tests .
Keir was right to use them to both hold the Tories to account against what they said they could achieve and what we would have sought to achieve , not simply against the worst possible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Tories to account for their promises , not their threats , and to shine a spotlight on their failings was absolutely correct .
Today , the tests are different .
We have already left the EU .
It is clear that we are not going to get the exact same benefits , despite the many promises .
After all , the government has already legislated to stop that .
But we can still measure the government against the sort of deal Labour thinks we could have achieved since the 2019 election – the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ livelihoods first , and the politics second .
Because by 2024 , we need to be clear about the difference a Labour government could have and would make .
Our economic case is almost certainly going to be shaped by how our trading relationship with the EU could and should be different .
Our critique of the government ’ s national security record may well need to focus on what they did not deliver in this deal , and how we put it right .
For the next few years , again and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and ready to draw the contrast between what we think is right and what they have done – not give in to the inevitability of the disaster that awaits us .
Here is what I will be looking for when measuring the Tory deal against what could have been achieved : • Barrier-free trade in goods , without quotas for imports , tariffs , fees , or charges ; • A lasting level playing field agreement , which protects workers ’ rights here in Britain and secures our environmental standards ; • Mutual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ UK services industries , from banking and law through to engineering consultancy ; • Data protection agreements that ensure our tech industry can thrive and our police have access to the security information that keeps us all safe ; • Travel arrangements that protect UK holidaymakers : preserving mobile phone roaming agreements , a simple replacement for European health insurance cards , simple pet passports and the freedom to travel for leisure without barriers ; • EU recognition of UK drivers ’ licences and vice versa – especially for lorry drivers and all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a living ; • A comprehensive agreement on health and social security for pensioners overseas and for all those needing healthcare abroad ; • Continuing involvement in the arrangements that make the European arrest warrant possible ; and • Enforcement and governance arrangements for the deal that are clear , robust , workable and provide British companies and workers with the certainty they need .
These might not be your tests , but we should all be thinking about what our tests are now .
We can not allow the Tories to shape @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they bring back .
They have strung this out to the very last possible moment to leave no time for debate .
They have an 80-seat majority and do not need Labour to get this through .
This is on them .
If and when the deal comes , remember what we were promised and think about what we could have had .
Remember what we did have .
Think about what we will need to be calling for at the next election .
If it is not what is on the table @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it now ?
Whatever you do , don ’ t just accept that it is better than nothing .
Because that was Boris Johnson ’ s plan all along .

It could be this week. It could be next week. In theory, it might never come. It may well not even need a straight up or down vote in the Commons, but it is unlikely that the Tories would miss an opportunity to make one happen. One thing for certain, however, is that the much over-promised deal with the EU is set to be the next episode in the national drama that has dominated UK politics over the last five years.
One thing we need to prepare ourselves for as a party, and as a movement, is the way that the Tories will try to frame the debate when their deal eventually arrives. It is in their interests to establish a simple but startling contrast between their deal and the consequences of no deal. However thin their deal is, with concession after concession to the EU, the Tories will want to be singing its praises and the only way they will be able to give any impression of shine will be by comparing it to the disaster that a no-deal exit would be.
After so many years of divisive debate, there is an understandable desire within the labour movement to now put it aside and accept whatever the government comes back with. The argument is lost, time has run out. There is no appetite for the disruption, uncertainty and chaos that would result from a no-deal exit on top of the challenges already faced in dealing with the impact of the pandemic.
But the gnawing reality is that this is an enormous trap. The looming prospect of a no-deal exit is a phantom the Tories have regularly conjured up to convince people to support anything as an alternative – no matter how harmful it may be. Yet the contrast between their deal and no deal is the contrast between their policy and something that we have tried every which way to avoid. It would damage Britain more than any other country and more than any other outcome. It is something that no responsible government should do.
Instead, no matter which side of the argument we may have stood on over the last five years in terms of the referendum and subsequently, it is our duty as the opposition to hold the government to account for the promises they have made. In order to do that, we must focus on the gap between what the government is doing and what we would do – not between what the government is doing and some phantom, catastrophic, unthinkable outcome. If we are making the contrast between no deal and the Tory deal, we are simply rubber-stamping their plan all along.
It is a trap that Labour must be very careful not to fall into. We should think about what Labour would be looking for in this deal and making the case for the shortcomings of this deal against Labour’s demands, not against Tory threats of no deal. Before he was leader, and before we left the EU, Keir Starmer set six tests for the Tories on any exit agreement. They failed those tests. Keir was right to use them to both hold the Tories to account against what they said they could achieve and what we would have sought to achieve, not simply against the worst possible outcome. His strategy to force the Tories to account for their promises, not their threats, and to shine a spotlight on their failings was absolutely correct.
Today, the tests are different. We have already left the EU. It is clear that we are not going to get the exact same benefits, despite the many promises. After all, the government has already legislated to stop that. But we can still measure the government against the sort of deal Labour thinks we could have achieved since the 2019 election – the sort of deal that would have put livelihoods first, and the politics second. Because by 2024, we need to be clear about the difference a Labour government could have and would make.
Our economic case is almost certainly going to be shaped by how our trading relationship with the EU could and should be different. Our critique of the government’s national security record may well need to focus on what they did not deliver in this deal, and how we put it right. For the next few years, again and again, we need to be able and ready to draw the contrast between what we think is right and what they have done – not give in to the inevitability of the disaster that awaits us. Here is what I will be looking for when measuring the Tory deal against what could have been achieved:
Barrier-free trade in goods, without quotas for imports, tariffs, fees, or charges; A lasting level playing field agreement, which protects workers’ rights here in Britain and secures our environmental standards; Mutual recognition of qualifications, vital for the UK services industries, from banking and law through to engineering consultancy; Intellectual property arrangements that protect UK innovation and creativity; Data protection agreements that ensure our tech industry can thrive and our police have access to the security information that keeps us all safe; Travel arrangements that protect UK holidaymakers: preserving mobile phone roaming agreements, a simple replacement for European health insurance cards, simple pet passports and the freedom to travel for leisure without barriers; EU recognition of UK drivers’ licences and vice versa – especially for lorry drivers and all those who drive to the EU for a living; A comprehensive agreement on health and social security for pensioners overseas and for all those needing healthcare abroad; Continuing involvement in the arrangements that make the European arrest warrant possible; and Enforcement and governance arrangements for the deal that are clear, robust, workable and provide British companies and workers with the certainty they need.
These might not be your tests, but we should all be thinking about what our tests are now. We cannot allow the Tories to shape how we think about the deal that they bring back. They have strung this out to the very last possible moment to leave no time for debate. They have an 80-seat majority and do not need Labour to get this through. This is on them.
If and when the deal comes, remember what we were promised and think about what we could have had. Remember what we did have. Think about what we will need to be calling for at the next election. If it is not what is on the table, why would we be voting for it now? Whatever you do, don’t just accept that it is better than nothing. Because that was Boris Johnson’s plan all along.


labourlist--2020-12-02--Ashworth offers show of cross-party unity to promote Covid vaccination

Labour ’ s Jonathan Ashworth has offered to do media appearances alongside Health Secretary Matt Hancock for displays of cross-party unity to promote the benefits of Covid vaccination and limit hesitancy among members of the public .
“ This is indeed fantastic news , ” the Shadow Health Secretary told the House of Commons today , commenting on the UK becoming the first country to approve the Pfizer/BioNTech coronavirus vaccine for roll-out .
Ashworth reiterated “ vaccination saves lives ” , before adding : “ If it helps , I will stand alongside the Secretary of State – socially distanced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or any TV studio to show that we are united cross-party in promoting vaccination.
” Hancock replied : “ If we can together encourage anybody to take a vaccine who may be hesitant by appearing together and being vaccinated together , of course I ’ d be happy to do that .
I recommend that we have a professional vaccinating us.
” Responding to the Covid-19 update this afternoon , the Shadow Health Secretary recommended that the government launch a large-scale public information campaign on vaccination and suggested sending a pamphlet to every @ @ @ @ @ @ @ UK is expected to achieve herd immunity , for more details on the idea of a “ freedom pass ” and whether there would be a “ route map ” for which restrictions can ease as Covid-19 vaccination rates increase .
On the relaxing of rules , Hancock replied : “ We don ’ t know the answer to that question.
” He explained that while the vaccine protects individuals , its impact on reducing the spread is unknown as yet due to the problem of asymptomatic transmission .
On the questions of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being vaccinated and whether the government is prepared to expand the eligibility criteria for the £500 self-isolation grant , Hancock did not offer answers .
The Health Secretary confirmed that “ there will of course be a public information campaign ” .
Addressing the matter of health inequalities , he said “ we absolutely need to reach all communities ” with the vaccine but gave no specifics .
Asked how many will be vaccinated by January , Hancock could not say .
He told MPs : “ While today brings more certainty , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , because we have 800,000 that have now passed the batch-testing .
“ The total number that will be manufactured over this timeframe is not yet known .
It ’ s all dependent on a manufacturing process which is complicated itself .
This is not a chemical , it is a biological product.
” He said the answer was “ as yet unknowable ” .
Labour backbencher Angela Eagle asked whether Hancock shared the Prime Minister ’ s stated hope that the vaccine could be rolled out by Easter and whether the vaccine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hancock said : “ The speed at which we can continue this roll-out will be determined by the speed at which Pfizer can manufacture and whether the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine is approved by the MHRA , of which we have 100 million on order.
” He added : “ One of the reasons that we have 357 million doses from seven different vaccines is to be able to vaccinate further doses in due course , whether that ’ s through re-procurement of one of the existing vaccines or by switching to a different vaccine @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Covid-19 vaccination , Downing Street has suggested today that Boris Johnson would also be willing to be vaccinated in public , though only if it did not prevent someone in greater need from receiving one .
The UK has pre-ordered 40 million doses in total of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine that has now been approved .
This is enough to vaccinate 20 million people , as two doses 21 days apart are required per individual .
Around 10 million of the doses are expected to become available this year .
It is hoped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the UK – Moderna and Oxford – will also be approved in the coming weeks .

Labour’s Jonathan Ashworth has offered to do media appearances alongside Health Secretary Matt Hancock for displays of cross-party unity to promote the benefits of Covid vaccination and limit hesitancy among members of the public.
“This is indeed fantastic news,” the Shadow Health Secretary told the House of Commons today, commenting on the UK becoming the first country to approve the Pfizer/BioNTech coronavirus vaccine for roll-out.
Ashworth reiterated “vaccination saves lives”, before adding: “If it helps, I will stand alongside the Secretary of State – socially distanced, of course – on any platform or any TV studio to show that we are united cross-party in promoting vaccination.”
Hancock replied: “If we can together encourage anybody to take a vaccine who may be hesitant by appearing together and being vaccinated together, of course I’d be happy to do that. I recommend that we have a professional vaccinating us.”
Responding to the Covid-19 update this afternoon, the Shadow Health Secretary recommended that the government launch a large-scale public information campaign on vaccination and suggested sending a pamphlet to every household.
Ashworth also asked when the UK is expected to achieve herd immunity, for more details on the idea of a “freedom pass” and whether there would be a “route map” for which restrictions can ease as Covid-19 vaccination rates increase.
On the relaxing of rules, Hancock replied: “We don’t know the answer to that question.” He explained that while the vaccine protects individuals, its impact on reducing the spread is unknown as yet due to the problem of asymptomatic transmission.
On the questions of whether people will need to self-isolate after being vaccinated and whether the government is prepared to expand the eligibility criteria for the £500 self-isolation grant, Hancock did not offer answers.
The Health Secretary confirmed that “there will of course be a public information campaign”. Addressing the matter of health inequalities, he said “we absolutely need to reach all communities” with the vaccine but gave no specifics.
Asked how many will be vaccinated by January, Hancock could not say. He told MPs: “While today brings more certainty, it doesn’t end all uncertainties, because we have 800,000 that have now passed the batch-testing.
“The total number that will be manufactured over this timeframe is not yet known. It’s all dependent on a manufacturing process which is complicated itself. This is not a chemical, it is a biological product.” He said the answer was “as yet unknowable”.
Labour backbencher Angela Eagle asked whether Hancock shared the Prime Minister’s stated hope that the vaccine could be rolled out by Easter and whether the vaccine would become available again next year.
Hancock said: “The speed at which we can continue this roll-out will be determined by the speed at which Pfizer can manufacture and whether the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine is approved by the MHRA, of which we have 100 million on order.”
He added: “One of the reasons that we have 357 million doses from seven different vaccines is to be able to vaccinate further doses in due course, whether that’s through re-procurement of one of the existing vaccines or by switching to a different vaccine if clinically appropriate.”
On the promotion of Covid-19 vaccination, Downing Street has suggested today that Boris Johnson would also be willing to be vaccinated in public, though only if it did not prevent someone in greater need from receiving one.
The UK has pre-ordered 40 million doses in total of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine that has now been approved. This is enough to vaccinate 20 million people, as two doses 21 days apart are required per individual.
Around 10 million of the doses are expected to become available this year. It is hoped that other vaccines that have been pre-ordered by the UK – Moderna and Oxford – will also be approved in the coming weeks.


labourlist--2020-12-02--Arcadia workers must “not pay the price of Philip Green’s greed”, says Miliband

Ed Miliband has declared that workers at Arcadia should “ not pay the price of Philip Green ’ s greed ” while highlighting that the chairman ’ s family recently took the largest dividend payment in British history .
The Shadow Business Secretary raised the plight of workers at Arcadia and Debenhams , two large high street employers which recently collapsed , during an urgent question in parliament today and urged the government to take action .
Miliband told the minister this afternoon : “ Let me join the minister in expressing deep sympathy for those who are at risk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of government and indeed this House is whether that sympathy translates into action… “ Philip Green owes the workers at Arcadia a moral duty .
His family took a dividend worth £1.2bn from the company , the largest in UK history , more than three times the size of the pension deficit .
“ The workers at Arcadia should not pay the price of Philip Green ’ s greed .
So will the minister now publicly call for Philip Green to make good any shortfall in the pension scheme ?
And will he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ steps to make sure this happens ?
” Miliband also argued that the government must “ learn lessons ” from the demise of the two chains and subsequent fallout and bring forward legislation to ensure pension fund holders are made priority creditors when businesses go bust .
He argued : “ In the insolvency bill this summer , Labour put forward amendments to make pension fund holders priority creditors when businesses went bust .
The minister said it was not necessary .
“ Does he now agree now that it was a mistake @ @ @ @ @ @ @ protected the pensions at Arcadia and that this should be put right through legislation in the future ?
” Miliband called for “ specific and targeted help ” to ensure that those facing redundancy can get back into work and for additional support to high street businesses in the pandemic , including the extension of the rent evictions moratorium .
Reports emerged earlier this week that Debenhams is set to close its stores after the retail business failed to secure a rescue plan .
Around 12,000 workers will lose their jobs when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The news followed just hours after the Arcadia group , of which Philip Green is chairman , went into administration .
The organisation owns Topshop , Topman , Wallis , Evans , Burton , Miss Selfridge , Dorothy Perkins and Outfit .
Arcadia has 444 stores in the UK and 22 overseas with and overall total of 13,000 employees .
While online companies such as Asos are thought to be interested in acquiring some of the brands , they are unlikely to take on the physical stores .
Shopworkers ’ union Usdaw @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with retail employers and trade unions to develop a recovery plan for the industry and highlighted that the sector was already struggling before the pandemic began .
Commenting on the scale of the challenge in the crisis , Paddy Lillis said : “ Over 200,000 retail job losses and 20,000 store closures this year are absolutely devastating and lay bare the scale of the challenge the industry faces.
” The general secretary added : “ What retail needs is a joined up strategy of unions , employers and government working together to develop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ substantial issues that need to be addressed likes rents , rates and taxation , to create a level playing field between high streets and online retail .
Those issues will not be resolved with the support the governemnt has already announced .
“ Retail is crucial to our town and city centres , it employs around three million people across the UK .
The government must take this seriously and we need a recovery plan to get the industry back on its feet.
” Labour leader Keir Starmer highlighted the impact of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Questions this afternoon , calling on Boris Johnson to provide greater support to the retail industry in the health crisis .
Below is the text of the contribution made by Ed Miliband today .
Let me join the minister in expressing deep sympathy for those who are at risk of losing their jobs .
The test of government and indeed this House is whether that sympathy translates into action .
So I have four specific questions for him .
First , Philip Green owes the workers at Arcadia a moral duty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ £1.2bn from the company , the largest in UK history , more than three times the size of the pension deficit .
The workers at Arcadia should not pay the price of Philip Green ’ s greed .
So will the minister now publicly call for Philip Green to make good any shortfall in the pension scheme ?
And will he ensure the pensions regulator takes all possible steps to make sure this happens ?
Second , we need to learn lessons .
In the insolvency bill this summer , Labour put forward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ creditors when businesses went bust .
The minister said it was not necessary .
Does he now agree now that it was a mistake , that this change would have better protected the pensions at Arcadia and that this should be put right through legislation in the future ?
Third , on the workers at Debenhams and indeed Arcadia facing redundancy , given the scale of redundancies and the grim economic backdrop will he look at providing specific and targeted help for them to get back to work ?
Fourth , we have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an estimated 20,000 shops closing and 200,000 workers losing their jobs since the economic crisis began .
While we welcome the support that has been provided , will he recognise the government must do more ?
Extending the rent evictions moratorium beyond December when it is due to expire .
Increasing the support for hospitality businesses which was a call across this House yesterday .
And addressing the massive disadvantage high streets face around business rates compared to online retailers ?
Today is a day of great news on the vaccine .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the businesses and jobs we need on the other side of this crisis .
They are still not acting on a scale that meets the economic emergency our country faces .
They need to do so .

Ed Miliband has declared that workers at Arcadia should “not pay the price of Philip Green’s greed” while highlighting that the chairman’s family recently took the largest dividend payment in British history.
The Shadow Business Secretary raised the plight of workers at Arcadia and Debenhams, two large high street employers which recently collapsed, during an urgent question in parliament today and urged the government to take action.
Miliband told the minister this afternoon: “Let me join the minister in expressing deep sympathy for those who are at risk of losing their jobs. The test of government and indeed this House is whether that sympathy translates into action…
“Philip Green owes the workers at Arcadia a moral duty. His family took a dividend worth £1.2bn from the company, the largest in UK history, more than three times the size of the pension deficit.
“The workers at Arcadia should not pay the price of Philip Green’s greed. So will the minister now publicly call for Philip Green to make good any shortfall in the pension scheme? And will he ensure the pensions regulator takes all possible steps to make sure this happens?”
Miliband also argued that the government must “learn lessons” from the demise of the two chains and subsequent fallout and bring forward legislation to ensure pension fund holders are made priority creditors when businesses go bust.
He argued: “In the insolvency bill this summer, Labour put forward amendments to make pension fund holders priority creditors when businesses went bust. The minister said it was not necessary.
“Does he now agree now that it was a mistake, that this change would have better protected the pensions at Arcadia and that this should be put right through legislation in the future?”
Miliband called for “specific and targeted help” to ensure that those facing redundancy can get back into work and for additional support to high street businesses in the pandemic, including the extension of the rent evictions moratorium.
Reports emerged earlier this week that Debenhams is set to close its stores after the retail business failed to secure a rescue plan. Around 12,000 workers will lose their jobs when the chain’s 124 shops stop trading.
The news followed just hours after the Arcadia group, of which Philip Green is chairman, went into administration. The organisation owns Topshop, Topman, Wallis, Evans, Burton, Miss Selfridge, Dorothy Perkins and Outfit.
Arcadia has 444 stores in the UK and 22 overseas with and overall total of 13,000 employees. While online companies such as Asos are thought to be interested in acquiring some of the brands, they are unlikely to take on the physical stores.
Shopworkers’ union Usdaw has called on the Conservatives to work with retail employers and trade unions to develop a recovery plan for the industry and highlighted that the sector was already struggling before the pandemic began.
Commenting on the scale of the challenge in the crisis, Paddy Lillis said: “Over 200,000 retail job losses and 20,000 store closures this year are absolutely devastating and lay bare the scale of the challenge the industry faces.”
The general secretary added: “What retail needs is a joined up strategy of unions, employers and government working together to develop a recovery plan.
“There are substantial issues that need to be addressed likes rents, rates and taxation, to create a level playing field between high streets and online retail. Those issues will not be resolved with the support the governemnt has already announced.
“Retail is crucial to our town and city centres, it employs around three million people across the UK. The government must take this seriously and we need a recovery plan to get the industry back on its feet.”
Labour leader Keir Starmer highlighted the impact of the two companies going bust during Prime Minister’s Questions this afternoon, calling on Boris Johnson to provide greater support to the retail industry in the health crisis.
"The workers of Arcadia should not pay the price of Philip Green's greed" Shadow business secretary Ed Miliband says the government should call for the Arcadia boss to "make good any shortfall in the pension scheme" https://t.co/UMxq2ClESx pic.twitter.com/x5m3dHzP4h — BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) December 2, 2020
Below is the text of the contribution made by Ed Miliband today.
Let me join the minister in expressing deep sympathy for those who are at risk of losing their jobs. The test of government and indeed this House is whether that sympathy translates into action. So I have four specific questions for him.
First, Philip Green owes the workers at Arcadia a moral duty. His family took a dividend worth £1.2bn from the company, the largest in UK history, more than three times the size of the pension deficit. The workers at Arcadia should not pay the price of Philip Green’s greed. So will the minister now publicly call for Philip Green to make good any shortfall in the pension scheme? And will he ensure the pensions regulator takes all possible steps to make sure this happens?
Second, we need to learn lessons. In the insolvency bill this summer, Labour put forward amendments to make pension fund holders priority creditors when businesses went bust. The minister said it was not necessary. Does he now agree now that it was a mistake, that this change would have better protected the pensions at Arcadia and that this should be put right through legislation in the future?
Third, on the workers at Debenhams and indeed Arcadia facing redundancy, given the scale of redundancies and the grim economic backdrop will he look at providing specific and targeted help for them to get back to work?
Fourth, we have an emergency on our high streets with an estimated 20,000 shops closing and 200,000 workers losing their jobs since the economic crisis began. While we welcome the support that has been provided, will he recognise the government must do more? Extending the rent evictions moratorium beyond December when it is due to expire. Increasing the support for hospitality businesses which was a call across this House yesterday. And addressing the massive disadvantage high streets face around business rates compared to online retailers?
Today is a day of great news on the vaccine. The government has a massive responsibility to preserve the businesses and jobs we need on the other side of this crisis. They are still not acting on a scale that meets the economic emergency our country faces. They need to do so.


labourlist--2020-12-03--Dodds: Use £1.3bn from supermarkets to support businesses and individuals

Anneliese Dodds has called on the government to “ do the right thing ” with the £1.3bn business rates relief returned to the government by supermarkets to support businesses and individuals to get through the winter .
Responding to news that Sainsbury ’ s will join Morrisons and Tesco in paying back £1.29bn they were exempted from paying earlier this year , the Shadow Chancellor called on the Tories to boost support available for businesses in Tiers 2 and 3 .
She said : “ It ’ s welcome that our largest supermarkets have done the decent thing and returned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government ’ s one-size-fits-all approach to rates relief .
“ This should never have been necessary .
If the UK government had done as Labour asked , and as we did in Wales , it could have targeted support to those who needed it right from the start and saved many more jobs.
” The government initially announced on March 18th that all retail , hospitality and leisure businesses would not be required to pay business rates in England for the year 2020-21 as a result of the implementation of Covid restrictions .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and did not extend the 100 % relief to properties with a rateable value of £500,000 or more .
This decision affected fewer than 200 properties across Wales but saved approximately £117m .
Dodds added : “ The UK government must now urgently do the right thing and use this money to fix the holes in its economic support schemes and end the unfairness in the current system.
” The move from Sainsbury ’ s today comes after the business , which reported that it has incurred “ significant costs ” in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and profits had been “ stronger than originally expected ” .
The supermarket company faced significant criticism when it paid out £230m to investors earlier this year after it decided to axe 3,500 UK jobs and announced that it would close 420 Argos shops , which it owns .
Labour has repeatedly called on the Prime Minister and Chancellor to abandon what party figures have described as a “ one-size-fits-all ” approach and pursue a more targeted attitude to business support in the pandemic .
Labour warned on Monday that the latest business @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government in the pandemic will “ level down ” the poorest areas and “ betrays some of the most deprived communities under the toughest restrictions ” .
The party highlighted that through the ‘ additional restrictions grant ’ , which makes a one-off £20-per-head payment to councils , some of the poorest areas will receive the same or less funding than the richest despite being set to go into higher tiers .
Labour has also pointed out that the £1,000 payment announced by the Prime Minister last week for ‘ wet-led ’ pubs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make up the shortfall between the local restrictions support grant and the original small business grant .

Anneliese Dodds has called on the government to “do the right thing” with the £1.3bn business rates relief returned to the government by supermarkets to support businesses and individuals to get through the winter.
Responding to news that Sainsbury’s will join Morrisons and Tesco in paying back £1.29bn they were exempted from paying earlier this year, the Shadow Chancellor called on the Tories to boost support available for businesses in Tiers 2 and 3.
She said: “It’s welcome that our largest supermarkets have done the decent thing and returned the money they gained from the UK government’s one-size-fits-all approach to rates relief.
“This should never have been necessary. If the UK government had done as Labour asked, and as we did in Wales, it could have targeted support to those who needed it right from the start and saved many more jobs.”
The government initially announced on March 18th that all retail, hospitality and leisure businesses would not be required to pay business rates in England for the year 2020-21 as a result of the implementation of Covid restrictions.
The Welsh Labour government adjusted this relief and did not extend the 100% relief to properties with a rateable value of £500,000 or more. This decision affected fewer than 200 properties across Wales but saved approximately £117m.
Dodds added: “The UK government must now urgently do the right thing and use this money to fix the holes in its economic support schemes and end the unfairness in the current system.”
The move from Sainsbury’s today comes after the business, which reported that it has incurred “significant costs” in the Covid crisis, nevertheless said its sales and profits had been “stronger than originally expected”.
The supermarket company faced significant criticism when it paid out £230m to investors earlier this year after it decided to axe 3,500 UK jobs and announced that it would close 420 Argos shops, which it owns.
Labour has repeatedly called on the Prime Minister and Chancellor to abandon what party figures have described as a “one-size-fits-all” approach and pursue a more targeted attitude to business support in the pandemic.
Labour warned on Monday that the latest business grants schemes to be introduced by the government in the pandemic will “level down” the poorest areas and “betrays some of the most deprived communities under the toughest restrictions”.
The party highlighted that through the ‘additional restrictions grant’, which makes a one-off £20-per-head payment to councils, some of the poorest areas will receive the same or less funding than the richest despite being set to go into higher tiers.
Labour has also pointed out that the £1,000 payment announced by the Prime Minister last week for ‘wet-led’ pubs in Tiers 2 and 3 does not make up the shortfall between the local restrictions support grant and the original small business grant.