labourlist--2020-11-04--Prospect: We must fight to ensure every worker has the right to disconnect

The global pandemic has changed the national conversation in many ways .
But for trade unions , perhaps no debate has been transformed as much as that around working from home , and its associated rewards and risks .
Even before the pandemic , one of the issues we were noticing was the ‘ always-on ’ culture and the increasingly blurred line between work and home life .
Technology is changing the way we are managed and work .
For many people , greater use of technology has brought freedom .
But it also has another side – an increasingly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers are available to answer emails or take calls beyond normal office hours .
The growth of technology has accelerated during the pandemic – from most of us using Zoom or other platforms to stay in touch with each other , through to employers showing an increasing interest in a creepier end of surveillance technology .
Now that we are set to enter a new lockdown , many of us will be going back to the question of whether we are working from home or living in the office .
Technology is creeping @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but we don ’ t always get a say over when and how it is used , even when it is in our own homes .
This blurred line between work and home raises many issues , including ‘ hidden overtime ’ , the mental health impact for workers who feel they can not switch off and the way it can undermine equal opportunities .
Today , as part of our ‘ union week ’ , Prospect is launching a new guide to help workers challenge and organise around this always-on culture .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Europe , who have been successfully making the case for a ‘ right to disconnect ’ .
This refers in short to the right of employees to disconnect from their work and to not receive or answer any work-related emails , calls or messages outside of normal working hours .
Workers in countries such as France , Germany , Spain and Argentina have already won legislation that safeguards negotiation or offers boundaries over this encroachment of work into home life .
We are now urging employers , business groups and the government to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the UK .
This matters both now , as we continue to struggle with the pandemic and for the future , as we know digitalisation will further change jobs .
If we want to make slogans such as ‘ build back better ’ real , we need to consider the quality of work not just the quantity of jobs .
How bad is the problem ?
Evidence was already building before the pandemic .
According to the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development , 15 % of employees constantly monitor work emails outside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them at least five times a day .
But it is also important to recognise that the impact of this culture is felt unequally .
Government research has shown that expectations of constant availability , especially when taken “ as a proxy for commitment and merit ” , can severely disadvantage workers with caring responsibilities , the majority of which continue to be women .
Our research has shown that workers are not confident about how technology will impact their lives or on how it will be used to monitor , track and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ why we have been working with our EU colleagues in Uni Global Union and with the Institute for the Future of Work on equality , data and technology .
But the absence of a UK right to disconnect in law does not mean that nothing can be done , which is why we are launching our new guide to help reps and activists to negotiate their own agreements with employers .
These agreements can take many forms , ranging from strict rules about when managers can contact their team members to regular reminders @ @ @ @ @ @ @ working hours .
It is clear that a one-size-fits-all approach will not be able to capture the complexity of this debate .
But what is essential is that employers engage with their workers about these issues and ensure that appropriate systems are put in place to enforce the idea of work-life balance in the face of technological change .

The global pandemic has changed the national conversation in many ways. But for trade unions, perhaps no debate has been transformed as much as that around working from home, and its associated rewards and risks. Even before the pandemic, one of the issues we were noticing was the ‘always-on’ culture and the increasingly blurred line between work and home life. Technology is changing the way we are managed and work. For many people, greater use of technology has brought freedom. But it also has another side – an increasingly connected world has created the expectation that workers are available to answer emails or take calls beyond normal office hours.
The growth of technology has accelerated during the pandemic – from most of us using Zoom or other platforms to stay in touch with each other, through to employers showing an increasing interest in a creepier end of surveillance technology. Now that we are set to enter a new lockdown, many of us will be going back to the question of whether we are working from home or living in the office. Technology is creeping into every part of our working lives but we don’t always get a say over when and how it is used, even when it is in our own homes. This blurred line between work and home raises many issues, including ‘hidden overtime’, the mental health impact for workers who feel they cannot switch off and the way it can undermine equal opportunities.
Today, as part of our ‘union week’, Prospect is launching a new guide to help workers challenge and organise around this always-on culture. We have learned from trade unions across Europe, who have been successfully making the case for a ‘right to disconnect’. This refers in short to the right of employees to disconnect from their work and to not receive or answer any work-related emails, calls or messages outside of normal working hours.
Workers in countries such as France, Germany, Spain and Argentina have already won legislation that safeguards negotiation or offers boundaries over this encroachment of work into home life. We are now urging employers, business groups and the government to consider how we make this work in the UK. This matters both now, as we continue to struggle with the pandemic and for the future, as we know digitalisation will further change jobs. If we want to make slogans such as ‘build back better’ real, we need to consider the quality of work not just the quantity of jobs.
How bad is the problem? Evidence was already building before the pandemic. According to the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, 15% of employees constantly monitor work emails outside work hours and another 25% check them at least five times a day. But it is also important to recognise that the impact of this culture is felt unequally. Government research has shown that expectations of constant availability, especially when taken “as a proxy for commitment and merit”, can severely disadvantage workers with caring responsibilities, the majority of which continue to be women.
Our research has shown that workers are not confident about how technology will impact their lives or on how it will be used to monitor, track and extend the working day. That is why we have been working with our EU colleagues in Uni Global Union and with the Institute for the Future of Work on equality, data and technology.
But the absence of a UK right to disconnect in law does not mean that nothing can be done, which is why we are launching our new guide to help reps and activists to negotiate their own agreements with employers. These agreements can take many forms, ranging from strict rules about when managers can contact their team members to regular reminders in work calendars about reasonable expectations about working hours. It is clear that a one-size-fits-all approach will not be able to capture the complexity of this debate. But what is essential is that employers engage with their workers about these issues and ensure that appropriate systems are put in place to enforce the idea of work-life balance in the face of technological change.


labourlist--2020-11-04--The EHRC was supposed to offer closure. It doesn’t appear to be arriving soon

Rules matter .
Last week , the Equality and Human Rights Commission ( EHRC ) found that the Labour Party had committed unlawful acts against its Jewish members .
Harassment and discrimination were evidenced in clear detail , from a sample of cases the regulator explored .
Chief among the calls by the Jewish community , the Jewish Labour Movement ( JLM ) and now the equalities regulator has been strong , moral and courageous leadership on antisemitism from the top of the party .
The kind that has been lacking for years .
For some , the discussion of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that has diminished from the key question still yet unanswered : “ Why does antisemitism on the left exist and how has it entered the Labour Party ?
” It is this question that Jewish members were hoping we would now be discussing .
Instead , thanks to the intervention of one man who could have avoided his inevitable suspension for denialism and questioning the report ’ s legally enforceable findings , we are discussing him and not the impact on us .
This is deeply frustrating for Jewish members .
For five @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by key voices inside the Labour Party that our growing warnings were politically motivated factional smears and that the extent of antisemitism on the left and inside the party was made up .
Even more frustrating is that the same chorus of people are now agitating for motions to be passed in constituency meetings and by regional executives that follow this simple and similar formulation : “ The real victim of Labour Party antisemitism is Jeremy Corbyn.
” He is not .
Rules do matter too .
If you are suspended from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for supporting another political party or candidate , it is always done under the rule 2.I.8 .
No member , it declares , should engage in actions which in the opinion of Labour ’ s national executive committee ( NEC ) are “ prejudicial , or grossly detrimental to the Labour Party ” .
Before 2017 , when the rule was finally updated after JLM ’ s urging to include discrimination against protected characteristics , the rule ’ s use was broad in interpretation and seldom used so as to be fairly sustainable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which was an infrequent occurrence , you were largely out .
The rapid expansion in membership , coupled with a rapid growth in members saying and doing antisemitic things rendered the party ’ s capacity to deal with problems , its structures for progressing cases and its rules obsolete .
As the EHRC report shows , this obsolete structure allowed for political manipulation and interference from the leader ’ s office , with all those involved seemingly unwilling to solve the problem – and not because they couldn ’ t .
In both @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the EHRC ’ s reminder that good governance is legally binding , they confirmed an important principle .
The Labour Party is liable for the actions of all those to whom it gives agency .
Whether you are a branch secretary , Constituency Labour Party chair , Labour MP or a member of the NEC , your actions within the party have consequences .
If you choose to use the powers invested in you by the Labour Party rule book , and either do or allow discriminatory things to be done , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the impact it has on its members , but those who had power to stop discrimination and chose the opposite will have committed acts that are both prejudicial and grossly detrimental to the Labour Party .
The full consequences of the EHRC ’ s report into the Labour Party have yet to be fully understood .
They may well have lasting impact for not only Labour , but for all political parties and campaigning organisations .
Apparently those who most need to read the report have not bothered to do so .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ than careful consideration , contrition or introspection , there are far too many people who want to wage war .
Jewish Labour members are once again the subject matter , instrumentalised by those uninterested in our voices but intent on telling others how we feel about this whole sordid affair regardless .
The EHRC was supposed to offer us some closure .
It doesn ’ t appear to be arriving anytime soon .

Rules matter. Last week, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) found that the Labour Party had committed unlawful acts against its Jewish members. Harassment and discrimination were evidenced in clear detail, from a sample of cases the regulator explored. Chief among the calls by the Jewish community, the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM) and now the equalities regulator has been strong, moral and courageous leadership on antisemitism from the top of the party. The kind that has been lacking for years.
For some, the discussion of rules and procedure has been an abstraction that has diminished from the key question still yet unanswered: “Why does antisemitism on the left exist and how has it entered the Labour Party?” It is this question that Jewish members were hoping we would now be discussing. Instead, thanks to the intervention of one man who could have avoided his inevitable suspension for denialism and questioning the report’s legally enforceable findings, we are discussing him and not the impact on us.
This is deeply frustrating for Jewish members. For five years, we have largely been told by key voices inside the Labour Party that our growing warnings were politically motivated factional smears and that the extent of antisemitism on the left and inside the party was made up. Even more frustrating is that the same chorus of people are now agitating for motions to be passed in constituency meetings and by regional executives that follow this simple and similar formulation: “The real victim of Labour Party antisemitism is Jeremy Corbyn.” He is not.
Rules do matter too. If you are suspended from the party, unless you have been auto-excluded for supporting another political party or candidate, it is always done under the rule 2.I.8. No member, it declares, should engage in actions which in the opinion of Labour’s national executive committee (NEC) are “prejudicial, or grossly detrimental to the Labour Party”. Before 2017, when the rule was finally updated after JLM’s urging to include discrimination against protected characteristics, the rule’s use was broad in interpretation and seldom used so as to be fairly sustainable. If you had done wrong, which was an infrequent occurrence, you were largely out.
The rapid expansion in membership, coupled with a rapid growth in members saying and doing antisemitic things rendered the party’s capacity to deal with problems, its structures for progressing cases and its rules obsolete. As the EHRC report shows, this obsolete structure allowed for political manipulation and interference from the leader’s office, with all those involved seemingly unwilling to solve the problem – and not because they couldn’t.
In both JLM’s cry for good governance and the EHRC’s reminder that good governance is legally binding, they confirmed an important principle. The Labour Party is liable for the actions of all those to whom it gives agency. Whether you are a branch secretary, Constituency Labour Party chair, Labour MP or a member of the NEC, your actions within the party have consequences.
If you choose to use the powers invested in you by the Labour Party rule book, and either do or allow discriminatory things to be done, then not only is the party liable for the impact it has on its members, but those who had power to stop discrimination and chose the opposite will have committed acts that are both prejudicial and grossly detrimental to the Labour Party.
The full consequences of the EHRC’s report into the Labour Party have yet to be fully understood. They may well have lasting impact for not only Labour, but for all political parties and campaigning organisations. Apparently those who most need to read the report have not bothered to do so.
As seemingly always happened however, rather than careful consideration, contrition or introspection, there are far too many people who want to wage war. Jewish Labour members are once again the subject matter, instrumentalised by those uninterested in our voices but intent on telling others how we feel about this whole sordid affair regardless. The EHRC was supposed to offer us some closure. It doesn’t appear to be arriving anytime soon.


labourlist--2020-11-04--Lisa Nandy: Tory refusal to condemn Trump is “dangerous moment” for UK

Lisa Nandy has slammed the government after Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab refused to condemn Donald Trump ’ s premature declaration of victory and calls for votes to stop being counted in the US election .
Speaking on Politics Live this afternoon , the Shadow Foreign Secretary argued that by neglecting “ to stand up for that principle of democracy ” her Conservative counterpart had made this a “ very dangerous moment for the UK ” .
Nandy told viewers today : “ It ’ s not for a candidate to declare when an election is over .
The election is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very much agree with Jeremy Hunt that this is a very dangerous moment for democracy .
“ Because the President didn ’ t just say that he thought that there might have been fraud committed , he actually called from the White House for the vote to stop being counted .
Many of those votes that are coming in will take several days .
“ Existing servicemen and women overseas – their ballots will take some time to arrive .
Those votes must be counted and the American people must hear loud and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up for their right to free and fair elections… “ To see Dominic Raab , the Foreign Secretary , refuse to stand up for that principle of democracy was a very dangerous moment for the UK.
” The Shadow Foreign Secretary was reacting after her counterpart Dominic Raab repeatedly refused to comment on Trump ’ s unfounded claims that he had won the election and said it was “ for the American people to decide ” on the issue .
Raab told the BBC this morning that the government were “ not going @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
He even accused journalists of “ engaging with the campaign rather than reporting on it ” when asking about the President ’ s comments .
The US election is currently ongoing with several key swing states , such as Pennsylvania and Michigan , yet to declare a winner .
Trump currently has 213 electoral college votes to Joe Biden ’ s 238 – 270 are needed to win .
But the President has already claimed victory in the election even though millions of people ’ s votes have yet to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ swing states are anything but clear .
Speaking in the early hours this morning , Trump claimed : “ We will win this and as far as I ’ m concerned , we already have won it.
” He also said they would be going to the Supreme Court to ensure voting would stop .
His comments sparked fears that the President would attempt to discount mail-in and early ballots in key swing states that are still being processed as illegitimate – ballots that are expected to be more in favour of Democrat @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supporters shortly after Trump ’ s comments , Biden ’ s campaign manager Jen O ’ Malley Dillon said that it was a “ naked effort to take away the democratic rights of American citizens ” .
Nandy ’ s latest intervention follows criticism of the President ’ s statement this morning .
In an interview with Good Morning Britain , she said that “ everything is riding on the outcome of this election ” as Trump has put democracy at stake .

Lisa Nandy has slammed the government after Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab refused to condemn Donald Trump’s premature declaration of victory and calls for votes to stop being counted in the US election.
Speaking on Politics Live this afternoon, the Shadow Foreign Secretary argued that by neglecting “to stand up for that principle of democracy” her Conservative counterpart had made this a “very dangerous moment for the UK”.
Nandy told viewers today: “It’s not for a candidate to declare when an election is over. The election is over when the votes are counted… I very much agree with Jeremy Hunt that this is a very dangerous moment for democracy.
“Because the President didn’t just say that he thought that there might have been fraud committed, he actually called from the White House for the vote to stop being counted. Many of those votes that are coming in will take several days.
“Existing servicemen and women overseas – their ballots will take some time to arrive. Those votes must be counted and the American people must hear loud and clear from our government that we stand up for their right to free and fair elections…
“To see Dominic Raab, the Foreign Secretary, refuse to stand up for that principle of democracy was a very dangerous moment for the UK.”
“To see Dominic Raab, the foreign secretary, refuse to stand up for that principle of democracy was a very dangerous moment for the UK” Shadow foreign secretary Lisa Nandy says he should back all postal votes being counted in US election#politicslive https://t.co/sxbqClCdE5 pic.twitter.com/umhX2z0vDO — BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) November 4, 2020
The Shadow Foreign Secretary was reacting after her counterpart Dominic Raab repeatedly refused to comment on Trump’s unfounded claims that he had won the election and said it was “for the American people to decide” on the issue.
Raab told the BBC this morning that the government were “not going to get involved on the election night”. He even accused journalists of “engaging with the campaign rather than reporting on it” when asking about the President’s comments.
The US election is currently ongoing with several key swing states, such as Pennsylvania and Michigan, yet to declare a winner. Trump currently has 213 electoral college votes to Joe Biden’s 238 – 270 are needed to win.
But the President has already claimed victory in the election even though millions of people’s votes have yet to be counted and the results in these remaining swing states are anything but clear.
Speaking in the early hours this morning, Trump claimed: “We will win this and as far as I’m concerned, we already have won it.” He also said they would be going to the Supreme Court to ensure voting would stop.
His comments sparked fears that the President would attempt to discount mail-in and early ballots in key swing states that are still being processed as illegitimate – ballots that are expected to be more in favour of Democrat Joe Biden.
In an email to supporters shortly after Trump’s comments, Biden’s campaign manager Jen O’Malley Dillon said that it was a “naked effort to take away the democratic rights of American citizens”.
Nandy’s latest intervention follows criticism of the President’s statement this morning. In an interview with Good Morning Britain, she said that “everything is riding on the outcome of this election” as Trump has put democracy at stake.


labourlist--2020-11-05--Why we are demanding our university decolonise the curriculum

In light of Black History Month last month and the recent events surrounding the Black Lives Matter movement , the individual – and more importantly collective – responsibility to challenge all forms of systematic prejudice should be recognised , specifically within higher education facilities .
As young BAME students at the University of Sheffield , we have written a letter , ( which is yet to be responded to ) regarding the issues that need to be urgently addressed by the department of social sciences at the University of Sheffield , but also across the UK .
These issues are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are systematically harming the learning and scholarship of BAME students within the department , putting them at a disadvantage to their white peers .
As laid out in a race inequality report published by the university , as of 2018 Sheffield has an 8.5 % attainment gap with BAME students less likely to achieve a 1st or 2:1 in their final degree outcome than white students .
In conjunction with this shocking reality , BAME applicants are less likely to be offered places at Russell Group universities despite having A-Levels equivalent to their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these issues go further than the walls of our university , as a prestigious higher education facility with a world leading social sciences department , we feel there is a duty as a department to reconsider the failure of the institution to adequately address diverse thought in teaching and the additional responsibility to have diverse teachers and lectures within the institution .
The Impact of Omission survey in June 2020 is an excellent demonstration of these issues , and how they affect students .
There is an urgency to commit to race equality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ understand the impact of microaggressions and white privilege .
There is also a need to address the lack of diversity in the teaching department at the University of Sheffield , where only 9.7 % of staff from the UK are from a BAME background .
There evidently needs to be a more conscious effort to hire lecturers of BAME backgrounds across the social science department .
Although efforts outlined by Sheffield ’ s Race and Equality Action plan , many of which were implemented in 2019 and are considered ongoing , there is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been fulfilled .
A crucial example of this being the supposed commitment to an “ inclusive curriculum ” that reflects the students ; there is no mention of plans to decolonise the curriculum .
The content of what students are taught can be seen to be taught from a western , imperialist view .
The department should make a greater attempt to give a more holistic understanding of knowledge .
Some of the shared experiences highlighted by students across the department of social sciences were consequential , regarding a module entitled ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ betraying a sense of insensitivity when conveying this module .
The module demonstrated , on many occasions , a level of ignorance and a general disregard for the opinions and experiences of BAME students whose voices are already in a minority and further remained so during the course .
And it also highlighted the necessity for a deeper understanding of these themes and how they manifest in higher education .
In light of recent global events , it is now more important than ever to convey this message and create a safe environment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to learn and share their experiences .
Recent debates regarding Black history and the teaching of it in schools have highlighted the lack of commitment from MPs and the government to commit to decolonising the curriculum .
Comments made by Tory minister Kemi Badenoch on the illegality of teaching white privilege or critical race theory demonstrate the ongoing struggle faced by BAME students , who ’ s experiences are constantly marginalised within higher education .
There are many given opportunities to include the works of Black academics throughout the year , not just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opportunity has been present on many occasions .
Without an inclusive education and understanding of society , higher education will continue to limit the experiences of BAME students .

In light of Black History Month last month and the recent events surrounding the Black Lives Matter movement, the individual – and more importantly collective – responsibility to challenge all forms of systematic prejudice should be recognised, specifically within higher education facilities. As young BAME students at the University of Sheffield, we have written a letter, (which is yet to be responded to) regarding the issues that need to be urgently addressed by the department of social sciences at the University of Sheffield, but also across the UK. These issues are not unique to our university.
They are systematically harming the learning and scholarship of BAME students within the department, putting them at a disadvantage to their white peers. As laid out in a race inequality report published by the university, as of 2018 Sheffield has an 8.5% attainment gap with BAME students less likely to achieve a 1st or 2:1 in their final degree outcome than white students. In conjunction with this shocking reality, BAME applicants are less likely to be offered places at Russell Group universities despite having A-Levels equivalent to their white counterparts.
Despite the fact that these issues go further than the walls of our university, as a prestigious higher education facility with a world leading social sciences department, we feel there is a duty as a department to reconsider the failure of the institution to adequately address diverse thought in teaching and the additional responsibility to have diverse teachers and lectures within the institution. The Impact of Omission survey in June 2020 is an excellent demonstration of these issues, and how they affect students. There is an urgency to commit to race equality action plans more broadly and to better understand the impact of microaggressions and white privilege.
There is also a need to address the lack of diversity in the teaching department at the University of Sheffield, where only 9.7% of staff from the UK are from a BAME background. There evidently needs to be a more conscious effort to hire lecturers of BAME backgrounds across the social science department. Although efforts outlined by Sheffield’s Race and Equality Action plan, many of which were implemented in 2019 and are considered ongoing, there is little evidence to suggest that these objectives have been fulfilled. A crucial example of this being the supposed commitment to an “inclusive curriculum” that reflects the students; there is no mention of plans to decolonise the curriculum. The content of what students are taught can be seen to be taught from a western, imperialist view. The department should make a greater attempt to give a more holistic understanding of knowledge.
Some of the shared experiences highlighted by students across the department of social sciences were consequential, regarding a module entitled ‘Whiteness, Power and Privilege’ – betraying a sense of insensitivity when conveying this module. The module demonstrated, on many occasions, a level of ignorance and a general disregard for the opinions and experiences of BAME students whose voices are already in a minority and further remained so during the course. And it also highlighted the necessity for a deeper understanding of these themes and how they manifest in higher education. In light of recent global events, it is now more important than ever to convey this message and create a safe environment for students of an ethnic minority background to learn and share their experiences.
Recent debates regarding Black history and the teaching of it in schools have highlighted the lack of commitment from MPs and the government to commit to decolonising the curriculum. Comments made by Tory minister Kemi Badenoch on the illegality of teaching white privilege or critical race theory demonstrate the ongoing struggle faced by BAME students, who’s experiences are constantly marginalised within higher education. There are many given opportunities to include the works of Black academics throughout the year, not just during Black history month. And this opportunity has been present on many occasions. Without an inclusive education and understanding of society, higher education will continue to limit the experiences of BAME students.


labourlist--2020-11-05--Local parties warned against passing motions on disciplinary cases

Constituency Labour Parties ( CLPs ) have been warned by the party ’ s general secretary David Evans not to “ have discussions about , or pass motions in relation to any aspect of individual disciplinary cases ” , LabourList can reveal .
The guidance today follows the suspension of Jeremy Corbyn for his response to the EHRC report last week , in which he argued “ the scale of the problem was dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents ” .
The report published last week found Labour responsible for three breaches of the Equality Act relating to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to provide adequate training to those handling them ; and harassment .
The Labour leadership was accused of a “ factional crackdown ” earlier this week following allegations that the London regional executive committee was prevented from voting on a motion expressing solidarity with Corbyn .
In an email to local party chairs and secretaries seen by LabourList , the general secretary has today stated he is “ aware of the considerable strength of feeling and the range of views that members will have about the suspension ” .
But he wrote : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accordance with the instructions of my predecessor – which I fully agree with – it is not competent business for CLPs , branches and any other party units to have discussions about , or pass motions in relation to any aspect of individual disciplinary cases .
“ This is necessary in order to protect the integrity of our processes , and to ensure that cases can be investigated and determined confidentially.
” Then general secretary Jennie Formby had previously advised local party secretaries not to accept motions on individual disciplinary cases in 2019 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lot of interest in the party and the media about our internal systems ” .
Evans also reiterated a warning issued last week on the publication of the 128-page document , in which he urged CLPs not to “ question the competence ” of the EHRC report in local meetings or on social media platforms .
That advice , which urged local party executives to ensure that such motions are “ ruled out of order ” , reflects an instruction given in August that they should not accept motions on a number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ guidance today told recipients that Labour “ will not hesitate to take appropriate action – including against individual members – where our rules and guidance are not adhered to , or standards of behaviour fall below that which we expect ” .
It follows concerns , such as those raised by national secretary of the Jewish Labour Movement Peter Mason , that the row over the suspension of the former Labour leader is distracting from the EHRC findings and the impact on Jewish members .
Labour has been served with an unlawful act @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the EHRC .
The party was given six weeks – until December 10th – to produce an action plan to the EHRC in response to the findings and recommendations .
All candidates in the Labour leadership election earlier this year pledged to implement an independent process , and this is a compulsory move following the publication of the final EHRC report on Labour antisemitism .

Constituency Labour Parties (CLPs) have been warned by the party’s general secretary David Evans not to “have discussions about, or pass motions in relation to any aspect of individual disciplinary cases”, LabourList can reveal.
The guidance today follows the suspension of Jeremy Corbyn for his response to the EHRC report last week, in which he argued “the scale of the problem was dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents”.
The report published last week found Labour responsible for three breaches of the Equality Act relating to political interference in antisemitism complaints; failure to provide adequate training to those handling them; and harassment.
The Labour leadership was accused of a “factional crackdown” earlier this week following allegations that the London regional executive committee was prevented from voting on a motion expressing solidarity with Corbyn.
In an email to local party chairs and secretaries seen by LabourList, the general secretary has today stated he is “aware of the considerable strength of feeling and the range of views that members will have about the suspension”.
But he wrote: “I must remind you that in accordance with the instructions of my predecessor – which I fully agree with – it is not competent business for CLPs, branches and any other party units to have discussions about, or pass motions in relation to any aspect of individual disciplinary cases.
“This is necessary in order to protect the integrity of our processes, and to ensure that cases can be investigated and determined confidentially.”
Then general secretary Jennie Formby had previously advised local party secretaries not to accept motions on individual disciplinary cases in 2019, warning that “there is a lot of interest in the party and the media about our internal systems”.
Evans also reiterated a warning issued last week on the publication of the 128-page document, in which he urged CLPs not to “question the competence” of the EHRC report in local meetings or on social media platforms.
That advice, which urged local party executives to ensure that such motions are “ruled out of order”, reflects an instruction given in August that they should not accept motions on a number of specified topics related to antisemitism.
The guidance today told recipients that Labour “will not hesitate to take appropriate action – including against individual members – where our rules and guidance are not adhered to, or standards of behaviour fall below that which we expect”.
It follows concerns, such as those raised by national secretary of the Jewish Labour Movement Peter Mason, that the row over the suspension of the former Labour leader is distracting from the EHRC findings and the impact on Jewish members.
Labour has been served with an unlawful act notice on the basis of the investigation by the EHRC. The party was given six weeks – until December 10th – to produce an action plan to the EHRC in response to the findings and recommendations.
All candidates in the Labour leadership election earlier this year pledged to implement an independent process, and this is a compulsory move following the publication of the final EHRC report on Labour antisemitism.


labourlist--2020-11-05--Refusal to save Union Learning Fund “blatantly partisan”, say trade unions

Trade unions have criticised the government ’ s refusal to back down on slashing support to the Union Learning Fund ( ULF ) and argued there were “ blatantly partisan reasons ” that the union-brokered training scheme was being wound down .
The FBU has argued that the Tories are too partisan on the issue and “ see any programme linked to unions as another enemy in their ideological battle ” after ministers stood by plans to axe the ULF in a parliamentary debate on Wednesday .
The TUC suggested that the government ’ s ongoing refusal to continue support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the Treasury each year than it takes out , was “ bizarre ” and like “ taking your star player off the field on a big match day ” .
The parliamentary debate on Wednesday followed controversial comments on the ULF by Gavin Williamson .
The Education Secretary declared that he would not apologise for cutting funding to a scheme that “ channelled money into the TUC ” .
The ULF was set up in 1998 to offer increased access to learning and training in workplaces in an agreement brokered by trade @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 200,000 learners – both union members and non-members .
Commenting on the decision to cut the ULF and Williamson ’ s statement , FBU general secretary Matt Wrack said : “ The revealing comments from Tory ministers lay bare their blatantly partisan reasons for scrapping the Union Learning Fund .
“ The Union Learning Fund is a common-sense policy that provides huge returns to the Exchequer and the wider economy .
It gives workers the means to upskill , retrain and gain qualifications and it ’ s targeted to them through workers ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ But this Tory government don ’ t want to listen to reason , facts , expert advice or economic sense .
They just see any programme linked to unions as another enemy in their ideological battle.
” The general secretary of the firefighters ’ union concluded : “ It ’ s a shameless slash and burn approach to policy that will only harm working people at a time when many are at their most vulnerable.
” In a Westminster Hall debate discussing higher education funding on Wednesday , Labour shadow apprenticeships @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was “ vindictive ” and showed the “ state ’ s antipathy towards the trade union sector.
” His government counterpart defended the decision to cut the ULF by saying ministers were just trying to “ streamline the delivery partners ” it used and said it would be “ simpler for people to get easy and broader access ” under a new scheme .
The government announced plans to cut the £12m annual fund last month , just days after Prime Minister Boris Johnson delivered a speech stressing the importance of training to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ An independent evaluation of the scheme in 2018 found it had given 68 % of learners a qualification after having never had one previously , and that it had offered 80 % of users skills that could transfer to a new job .
The report found that 53 % of employers saw an increase in employees with qualifications , 77 % said union learning had a positive impact on their workplaces and 68 % said unions could reach otherwise reluctant employees .
The analysis also showed that for every £1 spent on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , employers gained £4.70 through higher productivity and the government gained £3.57 through welfare savings and revenue increases .
Commenting on the ongoing campaign to save the fund , TUC head of learning and skills Kevin Rowan said : “ We ’ re having discussions with ministers on their proposal to end the Union Learning Fund .
“ Ending it would set back the government ’ s own skills goals with the loss of up to 200,000 learning opportunities each year .
It has exceeded its targets , it boosts the economy and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – so ending it would set back our economic recovery too at the worst time to do so .
“ Employers like Tesco , Heathrow , Hinkley Point C and Tata Steel are lobbying the government to save it too .
They tell us that it has played a tremendously valuable role in improving the skills and motivation of their workforce… “ Ending it now when new skills are such a vital part of the recovery is just bizarre – like taking your star player off the field on a big match day.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ mirrored the TUC ’ s comments saying that the cuts to the scheme were a “ real tragedy ” , especially given that “ training will be key to getting the country back onto its feet after the pandemic ” .
The government ’ s plan to cut the ULF comes despite the Prime Minister stressing the importance of retraining and reskilling amid Covid-19 .
He has launched a new adult education scheme , the ‘ lifetime skills guarantee ’ .
The new adult and lifelong learning scheme will offer funding for college @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A-level or equivalent qualification .
Only those aged under 23 currently qualify for a fully-funded qualification of this type .
Shadow Education Secretary Kate Green commented at the time that the government ’ s proposals were just a “ mix of reheated old policies ” and highlighted that funding for the new training would not be made available until next April .

Trade unions have criticised the government’s refusal to back down on slashing support to the Union Learning Fund (ULF) and argued there were “blatantly partisan reasons” that the union-brokered training scheme was being wound down.
The FBU has argued that the Tories are too partisan on the issue and “see any programme linked to unions as another enemy in their ideological battle” after ministers stood by plans to axe the ULF in a parliamentary debate on Wednesday.
The TUC suggested that the government’s ongoing refusal to continue support for the scheme, which contributes more to the Treasury each year than it takes out, was “bizarre” and like “taking your star player off the field on a big match day”.
The parliamentary debate on Wednesday followed controversial comments on the ULF by Gavin Williamson. The Education Secretary declared that he would not apologise for cutting funding to a scheme that “channelled money into the TUC”.
The ULF was set up in 1998 to offer increased access to learning and training in workplaces in an agreement brokered by trade unions. Last year, it supported 200,000 learners – both union members and non-members.
Commenting on the decision to cut the ULF and Williamson’s statement, FBU general secretary Matt Wrack said: “The revealing comments from Tory ministers lay bare their blatantly partisan reasons for scrapping the Union Learning Fund.
“The Union Learning Fund is a common-sense policy that provides huge returns to the Exchequer and the wider economy. It gives workers the means to upskill, retrain and gain qualifications and it’s targeted to them through workers’ organisations, not some abstract government agency.
“But this Tory government don’t want to listen to reason, facts, expert advice or economic sense. They just see any programme linked to unions as another enemy in their ideological battle.”
The general secretary of the firefighters’ union concluded: “It’s a shameless slash and burn approach to policy that will only harm working people at a time when many are at their most vulnerable.”
In a Westminster Hall debate discussing higher education funding on Wednesday, Labour shadow apprenticeships minister Toby Perkins argued that the decision was “vindictive” and showed the “state’s antipathy towards the trade union sector.”
His government counterpart defended the decision to cut the ULF by saying ministers were just trying to “streamline the delivery partners” it used and said it would be “simpler for people to get easy and broader access” under a new scheme.
The government announced plans to cut the £12m annual fund last month, just days after Prime Minister Boris Johnson delivered a speech stressing the importance of training to help combat the damage of Covid.
An independent evaluation of the scheme in 2018 found it had given 68% of learners a qualification after having never had one previously, and that it had offered 80% of users skills that could transfer to a new job.
The report found that 53% of employers saw an increase in employees with qualifications, 77% said union learning had a positive impact on their workplaces and 68% said unions could reach otherwise reluctant employees.
The analysis also showed that for every £1 spent on the ULF workers gained £7.60 through better pay, employers gained £4.70 through higher productivity and the government gained £3.57 through welfare savings and revenue increases.
Commenting on the ongoing campaign to save the fund, TUC head of learning and skills Kevin Rowan said: “We’re having discussions with ministers on their proposal to end the Union Learning Fund.
“Ending it would set back the government’s own skills goals with the loss of up to 200,000 learning opportunities each year. It has exceeded its targets, it boosts the economy and brings a net return to the Treasury – so ending it would set back our economic recovery too at the worst time to do so.
“Employers like Tesco, Heathrow, Hinkley Point C and Tata Steel are lobbying the government to save it too. They tell us that it has played a tremendously valuable role in improving the skills and motivation of their workforce…
“Ending it now when new skills are such a vital part of the recovery is just bizarre – like taking your star player off the field on a big match day.”
UNISON head of learning Teresa Donegan mirrored the TUC’s comments saying that the cuts to the scheme were a “real tragedy”, especially given that “training will be key to getting the country back onto its feet after the pandemic”.
The government’s plan to cut the ULF comes despite the Prime Minister stressing the importance of retraining and reskilling amid Covid-19. He has launched a new adult education scheme, the ‘lifetime skills guarantee’.
The new adult and lifelong learning scheme will offer funding for college courses to adults in England without an A-level or equivalent qualification. Only those aged under 23 currently qualify for a fully-funded qualification of this type.
Shadow Education Secretary Kate Green commented at the time that the government’s proposals were just a “mix of reheated old policies” and highlighted that funding for the new training would not be made available until next April.


labourlist--2020-11-05--How trade unions reacted to the Chancellor’s furlough extension

Rishi Sunak committed to extending the furlough scheme earlier today , with people set to receive 80 % of their wage covered by the government , for workers in businesses forced to close due to Covid restrictions until March next year .
Reacting to the statement delivered by the Chancellor on the economic support package this afternoon , Labour ’ s Anneliese Dodds told MPs that “ the Chancellor can change his mind at the last minute , but businesses can ’ t ” .
The Shadow Chancellor criticised him for the “ last-minute ” U-turn and highlighted that this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ winter economy plan ’ in six weeks unveiled earlier in the year .
Here ’ s how trade unions reacted to the extension… TUC general secretary Frances O ’ Grady said that agreeing to extend the scheme at its 80 % rate until spring was a “ positive step ” but argued that “ there are still gaps in the government ’ s support package ” .
Commenting on the effect on low-pay wage workers , she added : “ It ’ s not right to ask millions of low-paid workers on furlough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wage .
The Chancellor must fix the scheme so their pay is topped up to 100 % .
” The leader of the trade union federation also said that the Chancellor needed to offer more help to those self-employed workers who don ’ t qualify for government support and are “ falling between the cracks ” as a result .
Unite general secretary Len McCluskey declared that the furlough extension was “ welcome but entirely predictable ” and criticised the government for failing to offer more than “ short-term sticking plasters ” to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that “ thousands of UK jobs have been lost in the past 24 hours alone ” as a result of the delay in announcing the furlough extension – the government only confirmed the move just before the scheme was due to end .
The general secretary criticised a lack of planning from the Tories and said that “ the absence of longer-term , strategic support ” is “ making desperate matters worse and is a gift to our competitors who will recover faster and stronger ” .
McCluskey added : “ We need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health , jobs and incomes , to get us through these frightening times and out the other side , and we need it yesterday.
” The GMB warned that the government ’ s delay in choosing to extend the furlough scheme had created a “ bonfire of jobs and investment ” and stopped workers or employers from “ planning for the future ” .
Commenting on the announcement today , acting general secretary John Phillips said that while the move would “ provide much-needed certainty for many workers ” , there were still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Phillips highlighted as one example the “ injustice ” of UK sick pay rates , which are some of the lowest in Europe .
He warned that without action “ those who are doing the right thing ” and self-isolating would be “ punished with poverty sick pay ” .
The retail union said that it was “ crucial ” that workers did not “ pay the price ” for fighting Covid and expressed concerns about the situation for minimum wage workers under furlough , many of whom will have to survive on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lillis called on the government to top up minimum wage workers furlough pay to meet the living wage and called for an increase to UK sick pay rates , saying it was a “ crucial part of limiting the spread of the virus ” .
He also mirrored concerns expressed by Labour on the last-minute timing of the furlough announcement and declared that “ too often the government has chased the pandemic , rather than get ahead of it ” .
Community union general secretary Roy Rickhuss declared that the union was “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it fulfilled many of the demands made in a letter sent by the organisation to the Chancellor on Wednesday .
The trade union , which has been vocal in its support for self-employed workers during Covid , called on the government to explain the details of the newly extended Self-Employed Income Support Scheme ( SEISS ) .
Rickhuss warned that without more information many self-employed would be “ plunged into uncertainty ” .
He also criticised the “ unforgivable gaps ” in the scheme that have left millions of self-employed people without support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more “ reskilling and retraining opportunities ” for UK workers and support for “ viable businesses ” to ensure a “ prosperous future as we emerge from the crisis ” .
Head of economics at the Joseph Rowntree Foundation Dave Innes said Sunak was “ right to acknowledge ” that the crisis would last for months and supported the decision to give business and workers certainty with a furlough extension .
He criticised the Chancellor for failing to “ extend that certainty and reassurance ” to 16 million people in families on Universal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will face a £20 drop in weekly income once an emergency benefit uplift ends next April .
Innes also expressed concerns that no announcement was made on extending the evictions ban , which he called a “ vital protection for renters ” and warned that without it the UK could see a “ wave of evictions and increased homelessness ” .
Carsten Jung , a senior economist at the Institute for Public Policy Research , mirrored these concerns and warned that many families “ may even find themselves on the street ” in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extension .
The think tank also called on the government to implement a “ targeted stimulus ” , which would get “ cash into family ’ s pockets during this challenging time ” as the number of those made unemployed continues to rise .
The IPPR economist also reiterated a call made by the group last month to reform the job retention bonus , which is one of the scheduled replacements to the furlough , to be more “ targeted ” on those in need and less “ wasteful ” .

Rishi Sunak committed to extending the furlough scheme earlier today, with people set to receive 80% of their wage covered by the government, for workers in businesses forced to close due to Covid restrictions until March next year.
Reacting to the statement delivered by the Chancellor on the economic support package this afternoon, Labour’s Anneliese Dodds told MPs that “the Chancellor can change his mind at the last minute, but businesses can’t”.
The Shadow Chancellor criticised him for the “last-minute” U-turn and highlighted that this was the fourth change to his ‘winter economy plan’ in six weeks unveiled earlier in the year. Here’s how trade unions reacted to the extension…
TUC
TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady said that agreeing to extend the scheme at its 80% rate until spring was a “positive step” but argued that “there are still gaps in the government’s support package”.
Commenting on the effect on low-pay wage workers, she added: “It’s not right to ask millions of low-paid workers on furlough to survive on less than the minimum wage. The Chancellor must fix the scheme so their pay is topped up to 100%.”
The leader of the trade union federation also said that the Chancellor needed to offer more help to those self-employed workers who don’t qualify for government support and are “falling between the cracks” as a result.
Unite
Unite general secretary Len McCluskey declared that the furlough extension was “welcome but entirely predictable” and criticised the government for failing to offer more than “short-term sticking plasters” to workers until now.
He also warned that “thousands of UK jobs have been lost in the past 24 hours alone” as a result of the delay in announcing the furlough extension – the government only confirmed the move just before the scheme was due to end.
The general secretary criticised a lack of planning from the Tories and said that “the absence of longer-term, strategic support” is “making desperate matters worse and is a gift to our competitors who will recover faster and stronger”.
McCluskey added: “We need a government with a plan to protect health, jobs and incomes, to get us through these frightening times and out the other side, and we need it yesterday.”
GMB
The GMB warned that the government’s delay in choosing to extend the furlough scheme had created a “bonfire of jobs and investment” and stopped workers or employers from “planning for the future”.
Commenting on the announcement today, acting general secretary John Phillips said that while the move would “provide much-needed certainty for many workers”, there were still many issues that still needed addressing.
Phillips highlighted as one example the “injustice” of UK sick pay rates, which are some of the lowest in Europe. He warned that without action “those who are doing the right thing” and self-isolating would be “punished with poverty sick pay”.
Usdaw
The retail union said that it was “crucial” that workers did not “pay the price” for fighting Covid and expressed concerns about the situation for minimum wage workers under furlough, many of whom will have to survive on very low pay.
General secretary Paddy Lillis called on the government to top up minimum wage workers furlough pay to meet the living wage and called for an increase to UK sick pay rates, saying it was a “crucial part of limiting the spread of the virus”.
He also mirrored concerns expressed by Labour on the last-minute timing of the furlough announcement and declared that “too often the government has chased the pandemic, rather than get ahead of it”.
Community
Community union general secretary Roy Rickhuss declared that the union was “pleased” with the new extension as it fulfilled many of the demands made in a letter sent by the organisation to the Chancellor on Wednesday.
The trade union, which has been vocal in its support for self-employed workers during Covid, called on the government to explain the details of the newly extended Self-Employed Income Support Scheme (SEISS).
Rickhuss warned that without more information many self-employed would be “plunged into uncertainty”. He also criticised the “unforgivable gaps” in the scheme that have left millions of self-employed people without support.
The Labour-affiliated trade union called for more “reskilling and retraining opportunities” for UK workers and support for “viable businesses” to ensure a “prosperous future as we emerge from the crisis”.
Prospect
Prospect general secretary Mike Clancy criticised the “confusion and uncertainty” that had been caused by the Chancellor’s “constant redrafting of the rules on economic support” after the last-minute furlough announcement.
He welcomed the new extension to the scheme but warned that “thousands of jobs” had been lost due to the government’s delay, which will “plunge people into economic hardship that was totally avoidable”.
Clancy also declared that the “exclusion of three million self-employed and freelance workers” from SEISS was now “even more unjustifiable than it was back in March” and called for Sunak to ensure everyone will have access to support.
And other organisations…
Head of economics at the Joseph Rowntree Foundation Dave Innes said Sunak was “right to acknowledge” that the crisis would last for months and supported the decision to give business and workers certainty with a furlough extension.
He criticised the Chancellor for failing to “extend that certainty and reassurance” to 16 million people in families on Universal Credit or Working Tax Credit, who will face a £20 drop in weekly income once an emergency benefit uplift ends next April.
Innes also expressed concerns that no announcement was made on extending the evictions ban, which he called a “vital protection for renters” and warned that without it the UK could see a “wave of evictions and increased homelessness”.
Carsten Jung, a senior economist at the Institute for Public Policy Research, mirrored these concerns and warned that many families “may even find themselves on the street” in the coming winter without an eviction ban extension.
The think tank also called on the government to implement a “targeted stimulus”, which would get “cash into family’s pockets during this challenging time” as the number of those made unemployed continues to rise.
The IPPR economist also reiterated a call made by the group last month to reform the job retention bonus, which is one of the scheduled replacements to the furlough, to be more “targeted” on those in need and less “wasteful”.


labourlist--2020-11-05--Build back better? Labour in Wales is building back greener

This week is Wales Climate Week – 2nd to 6th November – and as part of the initiative , the Welsh government will be holding a week-long series of free , digital and interactive events for people of all ages who are passionate about the environment and tackling climate change .
It is part of an ongoing commitment by our Labour administration here in Wales to ensure the environment remains a key priority – both during the pandemic and in our post-Covid recovery .
There has not been a lot to cheer during the health crisis but one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of our green spaces , reductions in air pollution and an increase in people walking and cycling – more people have been cycling recently than during our golden Olympic summer of 2012 .
As the Senedd member for Newport East , an area which sits on the Severn Estuary , and a former environment minister , green issues matter to me .
I ’ m also a grandfather and I want to ensure my grandchildren grow up in and enjoy the benefits of a cleaner and greener planet .
Our Welsh Labour government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; in 2016 , Wales appointed the world ’ s first future generations commissioner .
The role is designed to provide support and advise the government and the public sector about social , economic , cultural and environmental wellbeing for the current and future generations .
Last year , our Senedd became the first parliament in the world to declare a climate change emergency .
Since then , ministers have taken practical steps : consulting on a ban on a range of single-use plastics and , earlier this year , plans were announced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Wales .
As the minister who proudly opened the Wales coast path eight years ago , a national forest is another way in which we can reconnect with our natural environment .
The Clean Air Plan for Wales has recently been published and the Burns Commission , which was set up to explore ways to reduce congestion on the M4 in south east Wales , has published its initial recommendations to expand and modernise our public transport infrastructure in the region .
Both of these reports have had a strong emphasis on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jessica Morden MP , I ’ ve been working with campaigners to persuade ministers to support what would be the UK ’ s first ‘ walkway station ‘ in more than a century in Magor on the outskirts of Newport .
We have heard a lot during the pandemic about ‘ building back better ’ but if we ’ re serious about our future , we ought to be building back greener .
Our post-Covid recovery must be built on the principles of social justice and environmental justice – because only then will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the climate change emergency .

This week is Wales Climate Week – 2nd to 6th November – and as part of the initiative, the Welsh government will be holding a week-long series of free, digital and interactive events for people of all ages who are passionate about the environment and tackling climate change. It is part of an ongoing commitment by our Labour administration here in Wales to ensure the environment remains a key priority – both during the pandemic and in our post-Covid recovery.
There has not been a lot to cheer during the health crisis but one of the few positives has been a greater appreciation of our green spaces, reductions in air pollution and an increase in people walking and cycling – more people have been cycling recently than during our golden Olympic summer of 2012. As the Senedd member for Newport East, an area which sits on the Severn Estuary, and a former environment minister, green issues matter to me. I’m also a grandfather and I want to ensure my grandchildren grow up in and enjoy the benefits of a cleaner and greener planet.
Our Welsh Labour government is ahead of the curve on this; in 2016, Wales appointed the world’s first future generations commissioner. The role is designed to provide support and advise the government and the public sector about social, economic, cultural and environmental wellbeing for the current and future generations. Last year, our Senedd became the first parliament in the world to declare a climate change emergency. Since then, ministers have taken practical steps: consulting on a ban on a range of single-use plastics and, earlier this year, plans were announced for a national forest stretching the length of Wales. As the minister who proudly opened the Wales coast path eight years ago, a national forest is another way in which we can reconnect with our natural environment.
The Clean Air Plan for Wales has recently been published and the Burns Commission, which was set up to explore ways to reduce congestion on the M4 in south east Wales, has published its initial recommendations to expand and modernise our public transport infrastructure in the region. Both of these reports have had a strong emphasis on rail and its why, together with Jessica Morden MP, I’ve been working with campaigners to persuade ministers to support what would be the UK’s first ‘walkway station‘ in more than a century in Magor on the outskirts of Newport.
We have heard a lot during the pandemic about ‘building back better’ but if we’re serious about our future, we ought to be building back greener. Our post-Covid recovery must be built on the principles of social justice and environmental justice – because only then will we really be able to start addressing the climate change emergency.


labourlist--2020-11-05--When it comes to rebuilding trust, Labour means business

Coronavirus has brought into focus exactly how unscrupulous some of our businesses can be .
Britannia Hotels threw out resident staff with no notice .
Mike Ashley demanded employees open his Sports Direct stores , arguing they were an essential service .
EasyJet paid a £60m dividend to its founder while simultaneously asking the government for a bailout .
Wetherspoons moved weekly-paid staff onto monthly salaries in order to wait for their furlough grant .
Each of these examples demonstrates unforgivable and inexcusable business practice .
But at the same time , we have also been humbled by businesses acting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Already struggling food chain Leon has provided key workers with a 50 % discount .
Upon reopening , Timpson offered free dry cleaning for unemployed people attending interviews .
Redrow Homes gave show homes to NHS workers who could not get back to their families .
Their honourable conduct , acting with integrity and responsibility to their communities , is the hallmark of the best of British businesses .
Labour ’ s relationship with business has struggled for the last decade .
We have not been seen to be on the side of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to manage the economy in a way that made it easier for them to do business .
This culminated in a command and control manifesto , with a flagship pledge to seize company shares .
Rebuilding trust in our party and our policies will take time .
It requires a change of mindset that appreciates that there is no contradiction between Labour being the party of workers and , at the same time , the party of business .
Labour , under our new leadership , is in prime place to rebuild and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Energy and Industrial Strategy is much diminished under this government .
The industrial strategy has been consigned to the past .
Britain has neither the manufacturing nor the skills strategies it needs to seize the opportunities of tomorrow .
The commitment to tackling regional inequality appears to ring hollow .
While Keir Starmer started his week talking to businesses at the Confederation of British Industry ( CBI ) conference , Boris Johnson bottled it , confirming that “ f*** business ” is his operating mantra .
A call between businesses and the Prime @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ended with Johnson making jokes about roulette .
And less than two months before the end of the Brexit transition period , there is no clarity about what our future relationship will look like with our single biggest trading market .
From our largest manufacturing companies to small and medium enterprises ( SMEs ) who rely on cross-channel trade , we have been forced to watch the theatre of our on-off-on-off trade negotiations .
A tactic that prioritises appeasing restless Tory MPs and the right-wing media , ahead of issues relating to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not just need to provide a critique of Tory failures – the public are seeing that for themselves .
We must explain the principles and policies that will firmly re-establish Labour as being on the side of business .
In his speech to the CBI , Keir Starmer started to set out his vision for a new contract with business .
One that included the message that a “ Labour government will back British businesses to grow , to succeed and to expand ” and recognising “ businesses for what they are – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ good jobs and strong communities ” .
That new contract with business has to be about working in the long-term interests of our communities and country .
It means setting out clear expectations on behaviour .
That businesses must play their part in tackling the climate crisis with ambitious targets and clear accountability .
That in their workplaces , businesses must recognise trade unions and support lifelong learning and skills development .
That employers must have robust plans to measure and tackle gender and race pay differentials .
That they contribute their fair @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than avoiding it through complex structures .
That businesses establish local supply chains supporting SMEs where possible , and pay suppliers promptly .
And that they pay their staff a genuine living wage and ban zero-hours contracts .
Looking at this list , there is nothing a responsible chief executive and board could not sign up to .
In fact , many businesses already do some of the above , albeit on a piecemeal basis .
But it is not enough for only major employers to behave this way ; these standards have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Labour will need to consider the incentives that will be needed to ensure all elements are adopted .
A simple step would be to hardwire such minimum standards into all public sector procurement .
If businesses want to bid for public contracts , they will need to demonstrate a commitment to the highest standards , to ethical conduct and to putting their communities first .
Our new contract with business will embed fairness , justice and prosperity in our businesses , workplaces and communities .
Changing the business culture in the UK @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one that upholds the highest standards .
And shifting the narrative so that businesses make a profit , but not at the expense of their staff , suppliers and community .
We have a Tory government defined by incompetence .
As businesses collapse and unemployment rockets , the outlook for our economy is bleak .
Labour is starting to set out a vision for the future .
A vision that will rebuild the trust of the business community and will set out to the country that we mean business – responsible business .

Coronavirus has brought into focus exactly how unscrupulous some of our businesses can be. Britannia Hotels threw out resident staff with no notice. Mike Ashley demanded employees open his Sports Direct stores, arguing they were an essential service. EasyJet paid a £60m dividend to its founder while simultaneously asking the government for a bailout. Wetherspoons moved weekly-paid staff onto monthly salaries in order to wait for their furlough grant. Each of these examples demonstrates unforgivable and inexcusable business practice.
But at the same time, we have also been humbled by businesses acting with integrity, compassion and loyalty. Already struggling food chain Leon has provided key workers with a 50% discount. Upon reopening, Timpson offered free dry cleaning for unemployed people attending interviews. Redrow Homes gave show homes to NHS workers who could not get back to their families. Their honourable conduct, acting with integrity and responsibility to their communities, is the hallmark of the best of British businesses.
Labour’s relationship with business has struggled for the last decade. We have not been seen to be on the side of business, nor have we been trusted to manage the economy in a way that made it easier for them to do business. This culminated in a command and control manifesto, with a flagship pledge to seize company shares. Rebuilding trust in our party and our policies will take time. It requires a change of mindset that appreciates that there is no contradiction between Labour being the party of workers and, at the same time, the party of business. Labour, under our new leadership, is in prime place to rebuild and reconnect.
The Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy is much diminished under this government. The industrial strategy has been consigned to the past. Britain has neither the manufacturing nor the skills strategies it needs to seize the opportunities of tomorrow. The commitment to tackling regional inequality appears to ring hollow. While Keir Starmer started his week talking to businesses at the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) conference, Boris Johnson bottled it, confirming that “f*** business” is his operating mantra. A call between businesses and the Prime Minister last week lasted 21 minutes and ended with Johnson making jokes about roulette.
And less than two months before the end of the Brexit transition period, there is no clarity about what our future relationship will look like with our single biggest trading market. From our largest manufacturing companies to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) who rely on cross-channel trade, we have been forced to watch the theatre of our on-off-on-off trade negotiations. A tactic that prioritises appeasing restless Tory MPs and the right-wing media, ahead of issues relating to the continuity of supply.
But Labour will not just need to provide a critique of Tory failures – the public are seeing that for themselves. We must explain the principles and policies that will firmly re-establish Labour as being on the side of business. In his speech to the CBI, Keir Starmer started to set out his vision for a new contract with business. One that included the message that a “Labour government will back British businesses to grow, to succeed and to expand” and recognising “businesses for what they are – an indispensable part of creating prosperity, good jobs and strong communities”. That new contract with business has to be about working in the long-term interests of our communities and country.
It means setting out clear expectations on behaviour. That businesses must play their part in tackling the climate crisis with ambitious targets and clear accountability. That in their workplaces, businesses must recognise trade unions and support lifelong learning and skills development. That employers must have robust plans to measure and tackle gender and race pay differentials. That they contribute their fair and proper share of tax, rather than avoiding it through complex structures. That businesses establish local supply chains supporting SMEs where possible, and pay suppliers promptly. And that they pay their staff a genuine living wage and ban zero-hours contracts.
Looking at this list, there is nothing a responsible chief executive and board could not sign up to. In fact, many businesses already do some of the above, albeit on a piecemeal basis. But it is not enough for only major employers to behave this way; these standards have to be embedded across the private sector. Labour will need to consider the incentives that will be needed to ensure all elements are adopted.
A simple step would be to hardwire such minimum standards into all public sector procurement. If businesses want to bid for public contracts, they will need to demonstrate a commitment to the highest standards, to ethical conduct and to putting their communities first. Our new contract with business will embed fairness, justice and prosperity in our businesses, workplaces and communities. Changing the business culture in the UK from a race to the bottom to one that upholds the highest standards. And shifting the narrative so that businesses make a profit, but not at the expense of their staff, suppliers and community.
We have a Tory government defined by incompetence. As businesses collapse and unemployment rockets, the outlook for our economy is bleak. Labour is starting to set out a vision for the future. A vision that will rebuild the trust of the business community and will set out to the country that we mean business – responsible business.


labourlist--2020-11-05--“Full of lies”: TSSA slams Tory mayoral candidate TfL bailout ‘facts’ site

The TSSA has criticised the Conservatives after Tory London mayoral candidate Shaun Bailey launched a “ facts ” website about the Covid bailout for Transport for London with the union describing it as “ full of lies ” .
The transport workers union , the largest organisation representing TfL staff , declared that the Conservative campaign website was an “ absolute disgrace ” and called for it to be taken down immediately .
The website , titled ‘ Transport for London Bailout Facts ’ , is unbranded with the only reference to its origins at its bottom where it says @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Shaun Bailey ” and lists the London address of the Tory campaign headquarters .
TSSA general secretary Manuel Cortes said : “ This politically-driven website is full of lies , is an absolute disgrace and should be taken down immediately .
Londoners know that coronavirus has hit the whole country hard .
“ While the Conservatives were happy to bail out the private train companies and keep funding them so they can pay shareholder dividends , their approach to Transport for London has been nakedly political .
This is no time for such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” The website criticises London mayor Sadiq Khan for seeking a TfL bailout and alleges financial waste by the transport authority , including £12bn of debts accrued before Covid and an £828m pension scheme .
It claims that the £1.6bn loss of fares for the transport service caused by the pandemic pales in comparison to the supposed £9.56bn of TfL money that has been allegedly wasted by management since 2016 .
A number of problems have been raised with the figures presented by the website .
It categorises the entirety of the organisation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its £9.56bn figure , for example .
It also cites £1.59bn worth of interest payments on the service ’ s high debt , ignoring that TfL ’ s financial deficit has been reduced by 71 % since Khan took control from the now Prime Minister Boris Johnson .
The tube network in London has seen a 60 % drop in the number of passengers using the service since the pandemic began , according to recent figures .
Fares are the largest source of funding for the transport authority .
Khan and TfL have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a bailout from the government to help the service keep going despite the huge shortfall in fares .
The negotiations have been heated and a source of controversy over recent weeks .
The mayor has secured a package worth £1.8bn this week .
There were a variety of concessions attached , including a rise in fares of 1 % above inflation in 2021 , shelving a second Crossrail link and investigating the rollout of driverless trains .
The bailout follows the release of a leaked TfL report by train drivers ’ union ASLEF @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the tube would cost £7bn and would be “ poor value for money ” for the city .
Khan has accused both Bailey and the Prime Minister of lying after they both claimed that TfL only needed a bailout as Khan had “ bankrupted ” the service through mismanagement during his time as mayor .
Bailey was due to run against Khan in the London mayoral elections this year , but the vote was postponed until May 2021 as a result of coronavirus .
He currently trails the Labour incumbent in the polls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ faced criticism for falsely presenting their Twitter as a fact-checking service during the 2019 general election when the party renamed its account “ factcheckUK ” .

The TSSA has criticised the Conservatives after Tory London mayoral candidate Shaun Bailey launched a “facts” website about the Transport for London coronavirus bailout that the union has described as “full of lies”.
The trade union for transport workers, which is the largest organisation representing TfL staff, declared that the Conservative campaign website was an “absolute disgrace” and called for it to be taken down immediately.
The website, titled ‘Transport for London Bailout Facts’, is unbranded with the only reference to its origins at the bottom where it says it was published “on behalf of Shaun Bailey” and lists the London address of the Tory campaign headquarters.
TSSA general secretary Manuel Cortes said: “This politically-driven website is full of lies, is an absolute disgrace and should be taken down immediately. Londoners know that coronavirus has hit the whole country hard.
“While the Conservatives were happy to bail out the private train companies and keep funding them so they can pay shareholder dividends, their approach to Transport for London has been nakedly political. This is no time for such games and the Tories should be ashamed.”
The website criticises London mayor Sadiq Khan for seeking a TfL bailout and alleges financial waste by the transport authority, including £12bn of debts accrued before Covid and an £828m pension scheme.
It claims that the £1.6bn loss of fares for the transport service caused by the pandemic pales in comparison to the supposed £9.56bn of TfL money that has been allegedly wasted by management since 2016.
A number of problems have been raised with the figures presented by the website. It categorises the entirety of the organisation’s pension scheme as waste in its £9.56bn figure, for example.
It also cites £1.59bn worth of interest payments on the service’s high debt, ignoring that TfL’s financial deficit has been reduced by 71% since Khan took control from the now Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
The tube network in London has seen a 60% drop in the number of passengers using the service since the pandemic began, according to recent figures. Fares are the largest source of funding for the transport authority.
Khan and TfL have, as a result, been seeking a bailout from the government to help the service keep going despite the huge shortfall in fares. The negotiations have been heated and a source of controversy over recent weeks.
The mayor has secured a package worth £1.8bn this week. There were a variety of concessions attached, including a rise in fares of 1% above inflation in 2021, shelving a second Crossrail link and investigating the rollout of driverless trains.
The bailout follows the release of a leaked TfL report by train drivers’ union ASLEF, which found that driverless trains on the tube would cost £7bn and would be “poor value for money” for the city.
Khan has accused both Bailey and the Prime Minister of lying after they both claimed that TfL only needed a bailout as Khan had “bankrupted” the service through mismanagement during his time as mayor.
Bailey was due to run against Khan in the London mayoral elections this year, but the vote was postponed until May 2021 as a result of coronavirus. He currently trails the Labour incumbent in the polls by 22%.
The Tories previously faced criticism for falsely presenting their Twitter as a fact-checking service during the 2019 general election when the party renamed its account “factcheckUK”.


labourlist--2020-11-06--Labour warns government of “dangerous” Covid prison restrictions

David Lammy has warned of a “ damaging ” and “ dangerous ” situation in English prisons after the government has continued with Covid restrictions that leave many prisoners stuck in their cells for 23 hours a day .
Reacting to the announcement of a number of new measures today aimed at reducing the spread of Covid in prisons , the Shadow Justice Secretary said that the rules were “ inevitable ” after Downing Street failed to curb the UK ’ s rising infections .
The restrictions include a ban on social visits for adult prisoners in England as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in March , which saw many inmates confined to their cells for almost the whole day .
Commenting on the restrictions for prisons , the Labour justice spokesperson said : “ The government ’ s failure to act fast enough or decisively enough to control this pandemic has made further restrictions in prisons inevitable .
“ Locking prisoners in their cells for 23 hours per day for many months , without access to rehabilitation or family visits , is not only damaging for mental health , it is dangerous.
” “ The less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around inside , the more likely they will re-offend when they are let out .
The government must learn from its mistakes by using the extra time the second lockdown buys to finally get control of the pandemic.
” Justice minister Lucy Frazer defended the new restrictions this morning by suggesting that they are necessary to “ protect the lives and wellbeing ” of prison staff and inmates and that the government had “ learned lessons ” from the first lockdown .
Frazer also suggested that the “ action and tough decisions ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year during the first wave of the pandemic were effective , and said they had “ limited the spread of the virus in our prisons and saved lives ” .
The severe regime of restrictions from March reduced the time prisoners could spend outside their cells to about 30 minutes a day , suspended prison transfers and required new arrivals to quarantine for 14 days .
The chief inspector of prisons in England and Wales warned last month , before the announcement of the new lockdown , that locking up prisoners in what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ irreparable damage ” to their mental health .
Publishing his final annual report before stepping down from the role , Peter Clarke highlighted the dangers of the current restrictions and expressed concerns that “ very little ” was now being done to stop prisoners from reoffending in future .
English prisons have been the sites of several outbreaks of the virus .
HMP Lowdham Grange in Nottinghamshire saw a large spike in cases last month after a total of 172 prisoners and 43 staff tested positive .
The most recent data on the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the period up to August 31st , found 560 reported cases across all prisons in England and Wales , lower than the early estimations that case numbers could exceed 77,000 .
Analysis from September found that Covid rates in prisons when adjusted for age are higher than in the wider community .
At that time , there were 7.6 cases per 1,000 population in prison , compared to 4.9 per 1,000 in the overall population .
Lammy ’ s criticism of government inaction mirrors comments made by Labour leader Keir Starmer , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ lockdown weeks ago but saw the call rejected by Boris Johnson in favour of his tiered Covid restrictions .
Since then , the government has been forced to implement its own nationwide lockdown for England , which will last a month compared to Labour ’ s proposed two or three weeks and comes weeks after SAGE first warned of rising infection rates .
Starmer accused the Prime Minister in Monday ’ s House of Commons Covid update of having “ overpromised and under-delivered ” at “ every stage ” of the crisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government ’ s inaction ” .

David Lammy has warned of a “damaging” and “dangerous” situation in English prisons after the government has continued with Covid restrictions that leave many prisoners stuck in their cells for 23 hours a day.
Reacting to the announcement of a number of new measures today aimed at reducing the spread of Covid in prisons, the Shadow Justice Secretary said that the rules were “inevitable” after Downing Street failed to curb the UK’s rising infections.
The restrictions include a ban on social visits for adult prisoners in England as well as a continuation of previous measures introduced in March, which saw many inmates confined to their cells for almost the whole day.
Commenting on the restrictions for prisons, the Labour justice spokesperson said: “The government’s failure to act fast enough or decisively enough to control this pandemic has made further restrictions in prisons inevitable.
“Locking prisoners in their cells for 23 hours per day for many months, without access to rehabilitation or family visits, is not only damaging for mental health, it is dangerous.
“The less opportunity prisoners get to turn their lives around inside, the more likely they will re-offend when they are let out. The government must learn from its mistakes by using the extra time the second lockdown buys to finally get control of the pandemic.”
Justice minister Lucy Frazer defended the new restrictions this morning by suggesting that they are necessary to “protect the lives and wellbeing” of prison staff and inmates and that the government had “learned lessons” from the first lockdown.
Frazer also suggested that the “action and tough decisions” taken by the government earlier in the year during the first wave of the pandemic were effective, and said they had “limited the spread of the virus in our prisons and saved lives”.
The severe regime of restrictions from March reduced the time that prisoners could spend outside their cells to around 30 minutes a day, suspended prison transfers and required new arrivals to quarantine for 14 days.
The chief inspector of prisons in England and Wales warned last month, before the announcement of the new lockdown, that locking up prisoners in what amounts to solitary confinement was causing “irreparable damage” to their mental health.
Publishing his final annual report before stepping down from the role, Peter Clarke highlighted the dangers of the current restrictions and expressed concerns that “very little” was now being done to stop prisoners from reoffending in future.
English prisons have been the sites of several outbreaks of the virus. HMP Lowdham Grange in Nottinghamshire saw a large spike in cases last month after a total of 172 prisoners and 43 staff tested positive.
The most recent data on the spread of coronavirus in prisons, covering the period up to August 31st, found 560 reported cases across all prisons in England and Wales, lower than the early estimations that case numbers could exceed 77,000.
Analysis from September found that Covid rates in prisons when adjusted for age are higher than in the wider community. At that time, there were 7.6 cases per 1,000 population in prison, compared to 4.9 per 1,000 in the overall population.
Lammy’s criticism of government inaction mirrors comments made by Labour leader Keir Starmer, who called for a short ‘circuit breaker’ lockdown weeks ago but saw the call rejected by Boris Johnson in favour of his tiered Covid restrictions.
Since then, the government has been forced to implement its own nationwide lockdown for England, which will last a month compared to Labour’s proposed two or three weeks and comes weeks after SAGE first warned of rising infection rates.
Starmer accused the Prime Minister in Monday’s House of Commons Covid update of having “overpromised and under-delivered” at “every stage” of the crisis and highlighted “the human cost of the government’s inaction”.