labourlist--2020-05-21--Shortlist of six drawn up for Labour general secretary job

Labour ’ s general secretary appointment panel has drawn up a shortlist of six candidates after interviewing longlisted applicants today .
The following have been shortlisted : • David Evans – former regional secretary ( 1995-1999 ) and assistant general secretary of the party ( 1999-2001 ) ; founder and current director of The Campaign Company • Byron Taylor – former national officer of the trade union liaison organisation ; former Labour group council leader in Basildon ; longlisted for the general secretary post in 2018 • Andrew Fisher – former Labour executive director of policy and research under Jeremy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MEP for the West Midlands ( 1999-2009 ; 2014-2020 ) • Karin Christiansen – former general secretary of the Co-operative Party ( 2012-2015 ) ; currently managing director of data polling and campaigns firm Datapraxis • Amanda Martin – president of the National Education Union ; former parliamentary candidate ; chair of Portsmouth Labour Party David Evans is widely seen as the frontrunner favoured by the leader ’ s office , particularly Keir Starmer ’ s chief of staff Morgan McSweeney , and he has relevant experience as a former assistant general secretary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the FBU , warned colleagues against picking Evans , describing him as a “ factional figure ” and “ likely to be extremely divisive ” on the basis of comments made during the Blair era .
Labour council leader Stephen Cowan has defended Evans , calling the applicant a “ professional political campaigner – one of a small number of experts in the UK , and arguably the best in the country ” .
Andrew Fisher is the preferred candidate of the Labour left , while the ‘ soft left ’ including a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Karin Christiansen as the applicant on which they are most keen .
The party ’ s right had feared that the shortlist would not include those applicants most strongly favoured by their faction , as the panel comprised mostly members from the Labour left .
In 2018 , the NEC was offered a choice of just two – Jennie Formby , the leadership-favoured applicant , or Christine Blower , who had only joined the Labour Party two years prior .
But this shortlist leaves the process open , and Labour ’ s full @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a politically varied choice of candidates when it holds a vote on Tuesday .

Labour’s general secretary appointment panel has drawn up a shortlist of six candidates after interviewing longlisted applicants today.
The following have been shortlisted:
David Evans – former regional secretary (1995-1999) and assistant general secretary of the party (1999-2001); founder and current director of The Campaign Company
– former regional secretary (1995-1999) and assistant general secretary of the party (1999-2001); founder and current director of The Campaign Company Byron Taylor – former national officer of the trade union liaison organisation; former Labour group council leader in Basildon; longlisted for the general secretary post in 2018
– former national officer of the trade union liaison organisation; former Labour group council leader in Basildon; longlisted for the general secretary post in 2018 Andrew Fisher – former Labour executive director of policy and research under Jeremy Corbyn
– former Labour executive director of policy and research under Jeremy Corbyn Neena Gill – former Labour MEP for the West Midlands (1999-2009; 2014-2020)
– former Labour MEP for the West Midlands (1999-2009; 2014-2020) Karin Christiansen – former general secretary of the Co-operative Party (2012-2015); currently managing director of data polling and campaigns firm Datapraxis
– former general secretary of the Co-operative Party (2012-2015); currently managing director of data polling and campaigns firm Datapraxis Amanda Martin – president of the National Education Union; former parliamentary candidate; chair of Portsmouth Labour Party
David Evans is widely seen as the frontrunner favoured by the leader’s office, particularly Keir Starmer’s chief of staff Morgan McSweeney, and he has relevant experience as a former assistant general secretary.
Matt Wrack, general secretary of the FBU, warned colleagues against picking Evans, describing him as a “factional figure” and “likely to be extremely divisive” on the basis of comments made during the Blair era.
Labour council leader Stephen Cowan has defended Evans, calling the applicant a “professional political campaigner – one of a small number of experts in the UK, and arguably the best in the country”.
Andrew Fisher is the preferred candidate of the Labour left, while the ‘soft left’ including a number of Labour MPs have picked out Karin Christiansen as the applicant on which they are most keen.
The party’s right had feared that the shortlist would not include those applicants most strongly favoured by their faction, as the panel comprised mostly members from the Labour left.
In 2018, the NEC was offered a choice of just two – Jennie Formby, the leadership-favoured applicant, or Christine Blower, who had only joined the Labour Party two years prior.
But this shortlist leaves the process open, and Labour’s full national executive committee will be presented with a politically varied choice of candidates when it holds a vote on Tuesday.


labourlist--2020-05-21--Labour winning power, with the help of David Evans

Watching the Conservative government floundering in the face of a crisis it is ideologically unable to tackle provides a reminder , if one were ever needed , that winning elections is the single most important thing the Labour Party can do .
Whether locally , or nationally , Britain needs Labour in power to protect the poorest , tackle inequality , defend our public sector and transform society for the better .
I have watched that transformation at local level , having led the opposition for eight long years in what was known as “ Cameron ’ s favourite council @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be win in what was viewed as a safe Tory flagship , where the Conservative Party ’ s small state , austerity programme seemed too well-established to ever shift .
Even Labour Party HQ wrote off any chance of us ever winning , describing that hope as a “ bridge too far ” .
But with the help of David Evans , Labour in Hammersmith and Fulham had our first landslide victory in 2014 .
Britain needs a Labour landslide at the next general election .
Appointing David Evans as the next general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a huge step towards that outcome .
The simple reason : David is a professional political campaigner – one of a small number of experts in the UK , and arguably the best in the country .
His respectful understanding of people ’ s concerns , what drives them and how that influences how they vote is scientific and thorough .
That cerebral approach is combined with decades of long experience fighting Tories giving him an instinctive feel for what works .
Look around the world , and political campaigning has got tougher @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bad generals fight the last war .
The best campaigners reinvent the rules – something David Evans has a long track record of doing .
The David Evans I know is non-factional , honest and consensus-building .
He was arrested during the miners ’ strike and began as an activist in the Thatcher years .
But that was all a long time ago .
The person I ’ ve known since 2013 has helped us in Hammersmith and Fulham Labour bring about a radical programme of change : from bringing services back in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ care ; introducing universal free breakfast for school children ; paying the London living wage ; to saving Charing Cross Hospital and stopping the biggest hospital closure programme in London ’ s history .
In 2018 , voters gave my colleagues and me our second landslide – slashing the number of Tories even more and delivering the biggest swing to Labour in any competitive area in Britain .
David has been by our side and a passionate fighter for social justice in every battle .
I can only believe that some of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quietly spoken , thoughtful and decent person I ’ ve come to rely on .
The last general election was devastating for our party .
We have a steep mountain to climb to get back into office .
I simply couldn ’ t bear to lose another election .
That would be our fifth in a row and give the Conservatives a free hand to reshape our country .
We need to find the best people and get them to help us win .
David Evans is the very best .
I hope @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that the national executive committee hires him .

Watching the Conservative government floundering in the face of a crisis it is ideologically unable to tackle provides a reminder, if one were ever needed, that winning elections is the single most important thing the Labour Party can do.
Whether locally, or nationally, Britain needs Labour in power to protect the poorest, tackle inequality, defend our public sector and transform society for the better. I have watched that transformation at local level, having led the opposition for eight long years in what was known as “Cameron’s favourite council”.
We were never meant to be win in what was viewed as a safe Tory flagship, where the Conservative Party’s small state, austerity programme seemed too well-established to ever shift. Even Labour Party HQ wrote off any chance of us ever winning, describing that hope as a “bridge too far”. But with the help of David Evans, Labour in Hammersmith and Fulham had our first landslide victory in 2014.
Britain needs a Labour landslide at the next general election. Appointing David Evans as the next general secretary of the Labour Party would be a huge step towards that outcome. The simple reason: David is a professional political campaigner – one of a small number of experts in the UK, and arguably the best in the country.
His respectful understanding of people’s concerns, what drives them and how that influences how they vote is scientific and thorough. That cerebral approach is combined with decades of long experience fighting Tories giving him an instinctive feel for what works.
Look around the world, and political campaigning has got tougher and more sophisticated with each election. Bad generals fight the last war. The best campaigners reinvent the rules – something David Evans has a long track record of doing.
The David Evans I know is non-factional, honest and consensus-building. He was arrested during the miners’ strike and began as an activist in the Thatcher years. But that was all a long time ago.
The person I’ve known since 2013 has helped us in Hammersmith and Fulham Labour bring about a radical programme of change: from bringing services back in house; abolishing charges for adult home care; introducing universal free breakfast for school children; paying the London living wage; to saving Charing Cross Hospital and stopping the biggest hospital closure programme in London’s history.
In 2018, voters gave my colleagues and me our second landslide – slashing the number of Tories even more and delivering the biggest swing to Labour in any competitive area in Britain. David has been by our side and a passionate fighter for social justice in every battle. I can only believe that some of the people criticising him have never met the quietly spoken, thoughtful and decent person I’ve come to rely on.
The last general election was devastating for our party. We have a steep mountain to climb to get back into office. I simply couldn’t bear to lose another election. That would be our fifth in a row and give the Conservatives a free hand to reshape our country. We need to find the best people and get them to help us win. David Evans is the very best. I hope that he is shortlisted for the job and that the national executive committee hires him.


labourlist--2020-05-21--Labour celebrates U-turn on NHS immigration surcharge exemption

Keir Starmer has declared that the government U-turn on the immigration health surcharge is a “ victory for common decency ” , after it was announced that the fee would be scrapped for NHS and care workers .
The opposition leader tweeted that he welcomed the move by Boris Johnson to back the Labour proposal , just 24 hours after the Tory leader had defended maintaining the charge for all migrants during Prime Minister ’ s Questions .
Starmer had raised the issue on Wednesday afternoon , asking whether the charge was fair on health and care workers .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suggested a change would cost £900m .
But the government performed a U-turn this afternoon , following pressure from backbench Conservative MPs who publicly and privately said they would support the move to exempt migrant NHS and care workers .
A spokesperson for 10 Downing Street said : “ As the Prime Minister said in the House of Commons , he has been thinking about this a great deal .
He has been a personal beneficiary of carers from abroad and understands the difficulties faced by our amazing NHS staff .
“ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ benefit the NHS , help to care for the sick and save lives .
NHS and care workers from abroad who are granted visas are doing this already by the fantastic contribution which they make.
” In response to the news , UK Labour tweeted : “ We did it .
Scrapping the NHS charge for health and care workers from abroad is the right thing to do .
“ We ’ re glad the government listened to the thousands of people who stood by carers with us .
These workers have our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” UNISON general secretary Dave Prentis said the move was “ long overdue ” , adding : “ It ’ s a moral injustice to ask migrant staff to make double the contribution of others and pay extra for the very services they help provide.
” “ This must also apply to the workers ’ families .
And the government should go further by removing the charge for all migrant workers.
” Johnson ’ s figure of £900m had been contested by Labour ’ s Seema Malhotra , who obtained figures from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact the total sum earned from the charge since 2015 .
The exemption is estimated to cost between £1.2m and £35m .
This latest U-turn on policy follows another by the Home Office last night , which saw the government agree to extend the coronavirus NHS bereavement scheme to include NHS support staff and care workers .

Keir Starmer has declared that the government U-turn on the immigration health surcharge is a “victory for common decency”, after it was announced that the fee would be scrapped for NHS and care workers.
The opposition leader tweeted that he welcomed the move by Boris Johnson to back the Labour proposal, just 24 hours after the Tory leader had defended maintaining the charge for all migrants during Prime Minister’s Questions.
Starmer had raised the issue on Wednesday afternoon, asking whether the charge was fair on health and care workers. The Prime Minister defended the policy and incorrectly suggested a change would cost £900m.
But the government performed a U-turn this afternoon, following pressure from backbench Conservative MPs who publicly and privately said they would support the move to exempt migrant NHS and care workers.
A spokesperson for 10 Downing Street said: “As the Prime Minister said in the House of Commons, he has been thinking about this a great deal. He has been a personal beneficiary of carers from abroad and understands the difficulties faced by our amazing NHS staff.
“The purpose of the NHS surcharge is to benefit the NHS, help to care for the sick and save lives. NHS and care workers from abroad who are granted visas are doing this already by the fantastic contribution which they make.”
In response to the news, UK Labour tweeted: “We did it. Scrapping the NHS charge for health and care workers from abroad is the right thing to do.
“We’re glad the government listened to the thousands of people who stood by carers with us. These workers have our backs, we will always have theirs.”
UNISON general secretary Dave Prentis said the move was “long overdue”, adding: “It’s a moral injustice to ask migrant staff to make double the contribution of others and pay extra for the very services they help provide.”
“This must also apply to the workers’ families. And the government should go further by removing the charge for all migrant workers.”
Johnson’s figure of £900m had been contested by Labour’s Seema Malhotra, who obtained figures from the Commons library showing that this was in fact the total sum earned from the charge since 2015. The exemption is estimated to cost between £1.2m and £35m.
This latest U-turn on policy follows another by the Home Office last night, which saw the government agree to extend the coronavirus NHS bereavement scheme to include NHS support staff and care workers.


labourlist--2020-05-21--Exclusive: Labour calls on UK to help secure global ceasefire amid pandemic

Labour has called on the UK government to use its diplomatic influence to secure support for a global ceasefire that would help countries focus on their coronavirus pandemic response , LabourList can reveal .
Writing to International Development Secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan today , Labour ’ s Preet Kaur Gill raised concern over the recent failure of the United Nations Security Council to back the call for a ceasefire .
UN Secretary António Guterres appealed for a global ceasefire two months ago , saying the “ fury of the virus illustrates the folly of war ” .
But members of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agree on the Covid-19 resolution .
Gill has told the UK government that this failure “ will cause further damage to the populations of countries and regions with current or intermittent conflict occurring ” , where health systems are more likely to be weak .
“ It is not possible to scale up the health services that are needed to tackle the immediate impacts of coronavirus if people are fighting , ” the Shadow Secretary of State for International Development wrote .
“ We have already seen that the failure to cooperate at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resources .
Failing to reach an agreement on a ceasefire soon will threaten peace and security.
” The Labour Party has repeatedly urged the government to lead the way in developing an international response to the pandemic and to support countries in Africa with “ overburdened and under-resourced health systems ” .
Former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown has advised world leaders to form a temporary global government that would tackle both the medical and economic crises around the world caused by Covid-19 .
Gill has highlighted that the UN Refugee Agency estimate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ currently displaced – many due to conflict and often living in camps without space for social distancing or adequate sanitation and with a lack of supplies .
Gill concluded in her letter to Trevelyan : “ A global ceasefire is a vital step to focus attention and resources on supporting those most at risk from Covid-19 and its effects .
The sooner we do it , the more lifesaving assistance can be provided to those who need it .
“ The UK must show global leadership and use its diplomatic influence with international @ @ @ @ @ @ @ global ceasefire in the UN Security Council as a matter of urgency so that efforts can be focused on delivering an effective , global Covid-19 response.
” The World Health Organisation agreed a resolution on Tuesday to investigate the global response to the pandemic , with none of the 194 members states raising objections to the proposal put forward by the European Union .

Labour has called on the UK government to use its diplomatic influence to secure support for a global ceasefire that would help countries focus on their coronavirus pandemic response, LabourList can reveal.
Writing to International Development Secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan today, Labour’s Preet Kaur Gill raised concern over the recent failure of the United Nations Security Council to back the call for a ceasefire.
UN Secretary António Guterres appealed for a global ceasefire two months ago, saying the “fury of the virus illustrates the folly of war”. But members of the Security Council have not been able to agree on the Covid-19 resolution.
Gill has told the UK government that this failure “will cause further damage to the populations of countries and regions with current or intermittent conflict occurring”, where health systems are more likely to be weak.
“It is not possible to scale up the health services that are needed to tackle the immediate impacts of coronavirus if people are fighting,” the Shadow Secretary of State for International Development wrote.
“We have already seen that the failure to cooperate at an international level risks a scramble over resources. Failing to reach an agreement on a ceasefire soon will threaten peace and security.”
The Labour Party has repeatedly urged the government to lead the way in developing an international response to the pandemic and to support countries in Africa with “overburdened and under-resourced health systems”.
Former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown has advised world leaders to form a temporary global government that would tackle both the medical and economic crises around the world caused by Covid-19.
Gill has highlighted that the UN Refugee Agency estimate of at least 70 million people being currently displaced – many due to conflict and often living in camps without space for social distancing or adequate sanitation and with a lack of supplies.
Gill concluded in her letter to Trevelyan: “A global ceasefire is a vital step to focus attention and resources on supporting those most at risk from Covid-19 and its effects. The sooner we do it, the more lifesaving assistance can be provided to those who need it.
“The UK must show global leadership and use its diplomatic influence with international partners to help secure support for a global ceasefire in the UN Security Council as a matter of urgency so that efforts can be focused on delivering an effective, global Covid-19 response.”
The World Health Organisation agreed a resolution on Tuesday to investigate the global response to the pandemic, with none of the 194 members states raising objections to the proposal put forward by the European Union.


labourlist--2020-05-21--Labour calls for equalities impact assessment of Covid recovery strategy

Labour ’ s Marsha de Cordova has called on the government to “ urgently undertake and publish a meaningful equality impact assessment ” of its coronavirus recovery strategy .
The Shadow Women and Equalities Secretary said that the government should make sure that those “ most at-risk ” are protected , including women , LGBT+ , BAME and disabled people .
The party highlighted research from the Centre for Labour and Social Studies showing that only one in ten on low incomes are able to work from home and that BAME people are four times more likely to work in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Commenting on the recovery strategy , de Cordova said : “ We have already seen how Covid-19 has exposed and exacerbated economic , health and social inequalities in our society .
“ It is vital that the groups most at-risk to in this crisis , including the BAME community , women and disabled people , are protected in the government ’ s plans to ease lockdown.
” The party said that following government announcements , many “ face pressure to return to work and risk their safety ” , and that this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ BAME people .
The MP for Battersea added : “ That is why Labour is calling on the government to urgently undertake and publish an equalities impact assessment of its coronavirus recovery strategy.
” Under the 2010 Equality Act , the government has a duty – like all public authorities – to “ advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a… protected characteristic ” and eliminate unlawful discrimination .
The document outlining the UK ’ s recovery from Covid-19 does not acknowledge additional risk faced by BAME communities – despite data from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are 4.2 times more likely to die from the virus .
With health factors and deprivation taken into account , the figures suggest that black people are 1.9 times more likely to die than their white counterparts .
Those of Indian , Pakistani and Bangladeshi ethnicity are also at increased risk .

Labour’s Marsha de Cordova has called on the government to “urgently undertake and publish a meaningful equality impact assessment” of its coronavirus recovery strategy.
The Shadow Women and Equalities Secretary said that the government should make sure that those “most at-risk” are protected, including women, LGBT+, BAME and disabled people.
The party highlighted research from the Centre for Labour and Social Studies showing that only one in ten on low incomes are able to work from home and that BAME people are four times more likely to work in an industry shut down by the virus.
Commenting on the recovery strategy, de Cordova said: “We have already seen how Covid-19 has exposed and exacerbated economic, health and social inequalities in our society.
“It is vital that the groups most at-risk to in this crisis, including the BAME community, women and disabled people, are protected in the government’s plans to ease lockdown.”
The party said that following government announcements, many “face pressure to return to work and risk their safety”, and that this is likely to disproportionately impact women and BAME people.
The MP for Battersea added: “That is why Labour is calling on the government to urgently undertake and publish an equalities impact assessment of its coronavirus recovery strategy.”
Under the 2010 Equality Act, the government has a duty – like all public authorities – to “advance equality of opportunity between persons who share a… protected characteristic” and eliminate unlawful discrimination.
The document outlining the UK’s recovery from Covid-19 does not acknowledge additional risk faced by BAME communities – despite data from the ONS which found that black men are 4.2 times more likely to die from the virus.
With health factors and deprivation taken into account, the figures suggest that black people are 1.9 times more likely to die than their white counterparts. Those of Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi ethnicity are also at increased risk.


labourlist--2020-05-21--The Tory immigration bill is no way to offer thanks to our NHS workers

The Prime Minister returned to work only a few weeks ago .
His top team – chief advisor Dominic Cummings , Health Secretary Matt Hancock , chief medical advisor Chris Whitty and top civil servant Sir Mark Sedwill – had all tested positive for Covid-19 .
While they recovered at home , Boris Johnson required hospitalisation and was treated in intensive care .
After leaving hospital , Johnson praised NHS staff for the “ brilliant care ” he received , saying : “ I can ’ t thank them enough .
I owe them my life ” .
He went @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to him personally , including a EU national .
As millions across the country take time out each Thursday evening to clap and show their thanks to key workers , not least NHS staff and care workers , it would seem Johnson has extra reason to show appreciation .
But Johnson ’ s first actions following his return to 10 Downing Street are a slap in the face to many of our frontline key workers , who are risking their lives to save others and protect the health of everyone in our country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a new immigration bill that would end the current rights of EU nationals to continue working in the UK .
And it seeks to end their current rights , creating a hole before the new immigration system takes its place .
There are 180,000 EU nationals working as NHS staff and care workers .
Our health and social care system relies on their bravery , courage and dedication now more than ever .
Shadow Home Secretary Nick Thomas-Symonds was right to say that it is not in the national interest to seek parliamentary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they are on the frontline fighting a global pandemic .
The Prime Minister is hardly showing thanks to those NHS workers to whom he says he owes his life .
A calculation has presumably been made that the public would rather prevent the NHS working at full capacity , by ending EU rights as quickly as possible , than prevent a rising Covid-19 death toll .
Under this Tory government , Brexit is more important than protecting public health .
Labour was right to set a three-line whip against the immigration bill on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lynch said : “ To those workers in our NHS who have had their visas extended for a year , the government did not do you a favour .
You did us a favour.
” It is deeply disappointing the current Tory government can show such a callous disregard to many tens of thousands of the heroes who have helped keep us safe and make our country work .
Keir Starmer ’ s call for NHS and care workers to become exempt from the immigration health surcharge is especially welcome – and already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ago , I wrote for LabourList that this surcharge was “ an election stunt ” .
It is built around a fictional guesstimate of average use of all public services , including citizens , and not the additional impact of any migration .
Funds raised from the IHS neither go to a local health authority nor even to the NHS .
It is non-hypothecated and goes straight into a Treasury blackhole .
With some application fees already up to 900 % above their cost , this is yet another cash-raising ruse that does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health service .
It ’ s time the plug was pulled .
Things look set to go from bad to worse .
While the government claims its plans for a new points-based immigration system rewards skills over salaries , the white paper only recommends points based on how much someone earns .
This is set above what many highly-skilled workers earn in the NHS or in health-related research , and so it is likely to have a negative impact on a system already under significant pressure .
Thomas-Symonds said it suggests to anyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ unwelcome ” by the government – highlighting again that salaries , not skills , are what counts most in these Tory plans .
More than ever , we need a Labour government .
The current leadership under Keir Starmer should continue to hammer home the message that the government is making a political choice – prioritising Brexit now over public health , as if a global pandemic and mounting death toll aren ’ t happening .
The sooner a change in priorities , the better .
Labour must continue to show the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government .

The Prime Minister returned to work only a few weeks ago. His top team – chief advisor Dominic Cummings, Health Secretary Matt Hancock, chief medical advisor Chris Whitty and top civil servant Sir Mark Sedwill – had all tested positive for Covid-19. While they recovered at home, Boris Johnson required hospitalisation and was treated in intensive care.
After leaving hospital, Johnson praised NHS staff for the “brilliant care” he received, saying: “I can’t thank them enough. I owe them my life”. He went further, naming the nurses who saw to him personally, including a EU national. As millions across the country take time out each Thursday evening to clap and show their thanks to key workers, not least NHS staff and care workers, it would seem Johnson has extra reason to show appreciation.
But Johnson’s first actions following his return to 10 Downing Street are a slap in the face to many of our frontline key workers, who are risking their lives to save others and protect the health of everyone in our country. The government has rushed to pass a new immigration bill that would end the current rights of EU nationals to continue working in the UK. And it seeks to end their current rights, creating a hole before the new immigration system takes its place.
There are 180,000 EU nationals working as NHS staff and care workers. Our health and social care system relies on their bravery, courage and dedication now more than ever. Shadow Home Secretary Nick Thomas-Symonds was right to say that it is not in the national interest to seek parliamentary approval for kicking out key workers while they are on the frontline fighting a global pandemic.
The Prime Minister is hardly showing thanks to those NHS workers to whom he says he owes his life. A calculation has presumably been made that the public would rather prevent the NHS working at full capacity, by ending EU rights as quickly as possible, than prevent a rising Covid-19 death toll. Under this Tory government, Brexit is more important than protecting public health.
Labour was right to set a three-line whip against the immigration bill on Monday. As shadow immigration minister Holly Lynch said: “To those workers in our NHS who have had their visas extended for a year, the government did not do you a favour. You did us a favour.” It is deeply disappointing the current Tory government can show such a callous disregard to many tens of thousands of the heroes who have helped keep us safe and make our country work.
Keir Starmer’s call for NHS and care workers to become exempt from the immigration health surcharge is especially welcome – and already gaining cross-party support. Over five years ago, I wrote for LabourList that this surcharge was “an election stunt”. It is built around a fictional guesstimate of average use of all public services, including citizens, and not the additional impact of any migration. Funds raised from the IHS neither go to a local health authority nor even to the NHS. It is non-hypothecated and goes straight into a Treasury blackhole. With some application fees already up to 900% above their cost, this is yet another cash-raising ruse that does not improve the immigration system or the health service. It’s time the plug was pulled.
Things look set to go from bad to worse. While the government claims its plans for a new points-based immigration system rewards skills over salaries, the white paper only recommends points based on how much someone earns. This is set above what many highly-skilled workers earn in the NHS or in health-related research, and so it is likely to have a negative impact on a system already under significant pressure. Thomas-Symonds said it suggests to anyone earning less than £25,600 that they are “unwelcome” by the government – highlighting again that salaries, not skills, are what counts most in these Tory plans.
More than ever, we need a Labour government. The current leadership under Keir Starmer should continue to hammer home the message that the government is making a political choice – prioritising Brexit now over public health, as if a global pandemic and mounting death toll aren’t happening. The sooner a change in priorities, the better. Labour must continue to show the leadership so lacking in Johnson’s government.


labourlist--2020-05-22--Labour designers release new posters to support key workers

Graphic designers supportive of the Labour Party have celebrated the UK ’ s key workers with the launch of a second artpack on the theme .
Featuring 11 original posters , the work by creatives in the labour movement was coordinated by Labour Party Graphic Designers , an independent network of designers .
The second ‘ supporting key workers ’ artpack includes a foreword by LPGD founder Kevin Kennedy Ryan II and ‘ words from the frontline ’ by the National Education Union ’ s Amanda Martin .
The NEU president is currently in the running to become Labour ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the national executive committee ( NEC ) panel on Thursday .
The latest artpack is dedicated to Belly Mujinga , who died after being spat at and coughed over by a member of the public while working as a ticket controller at Victoria Station in London .
LPGD have included a link to the fundraiser set up by Mujinga ’ s colleagues .
It helped to fund her funeral and will see future donations support her family especially her 11-year-old daughter .
Labour Party Graphic Designers is a collective that first came @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Kevin Kennedy Ryan , was interviewed by LabourList in April 2019 .
Further information and examples from the first ‘ supporting key workers ’ artpack , released last month , can be found here on LabourList .
Below is a selection of the contributions by Labour designers .
You can view the full artpack here and download posters here .

Graphic designers supportive of the Labour Party have celebrated the UK’s key workers with the launch of a second artpack on the theme.
Featuring 11 original posters, the work by creatives in the labour movement was coordinated by Labour Party Graphic Designers, an independent network of designers.
The second ‘supporting key workers’ artpack includes a foreword by LPGD founder Kevin Kennedy Ryan II and ‘words from the frontline’ by the National Education Union’s Amanda Martin.
The NEU president is currently in the running to become Labour’s next general secretary after being shortlisted by the national executive committee (NEC) panel on Thursday.
Martin’s piece, which criticises the government proposal to reopen schools on June 1st, reads: “Our profession is missing information, missing reasons and missing resources, but those who criticise us are missing the point.
The teacher and trade unionist concludes: “We want to get back in the classroom but we need to know that the science says it’s safe.”
The latest artpack is dedicated to Belly Mujinga, who died after being spat at and coughed over by a member of the public while working as a ticket controller at Victoria Station in London.
LPGD have included a link to the fundraiser set up by Mujinga’s colleagues. It helped to fund her funeral and will see future donations support her family especially her 11-year-old daughter.
Labour Party Graphic Designers is a collective that first came together last year. The founder, Kevin Kennedy Ryan, was interviewed by LabourList in April 2019.
Further information and examples from the first ‘supporting key workers’ artpack, released last month, can be found here on LabourList.
Below is a selection of the contributions by Labour designers. You can view the full artpack here and download posters here.


labourlist--2020-05-22--Keir Starmer’s winning streak

Keir Starmer’s winning streak

Just one day after Keir Starmer announced that he would be tabling an amendment to the immigration bill to exempt NHS and care workers from the immigration health surcharge , the government U-turned .
It is another example of the new opposition leader using Prime Minister ’ s Questions to great effect .
While it may not be watched by most of the population , it is closely followed by political journalists and MPs who can then put pressure on the government to change its mind on key policies .
The skill in this move was not coming up with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already been raised at a coronavirus press conference ) , but simply in picking the right one .
Starmer has a knack for judging a mood and positioning himself to match it , as he showed in the Labour leadership election .
Does the new exemption for NHS and care workers get to the root of the problem with the health surcharge ?
Arguably not .
When confirming the U-turn , a No 10 spokesperson said : “ The purpose of the NHS surcharge is to benefit the NHS , help to care @ @ @ @ @ @ @ NHS and care workers from abroad who are granted visas are doing this already by the fantastic contribution which they make.
” The underlying assumption that migrants should pay an extra yearly fee – despite paying taxes like everyone else – has not been challenged .
That many lives will be improved by this “ victory for common decency ” , as Starmer put it , is not to be dismissed .
And this is a solid win for the opposition leader .
But Labour ’ s job is not done .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ general secretary will be one of the applicants on this shortlist of six drawn up yesterday .
Starmer allies had been worried that the majority-left panel would stitch up the process and exclude those candidates favoured by the leadership .
( In 2018 , the national executive committee was offered a choice of just two . )
But this has not happened : the shortlist reflects the whole spectrum of political opinion in the party – including lefty Andrew Fisher , the Co-op ’ s Karin Christiansen , and Blair-era aide David Evans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ strong criticism from the Labour left .
FBU leader Matt Wrack has warned colleagues against picking Evans for the top post , arguing that the former assistant general secretary is a “ factional figure ” and “ likely to be extremely divisive ” .
This is largely on the basis of a 1999 report Evans authored that was scathing of local parties , described as “ dysfunctional ” and “ more like Trotters Independent Traders than Marks & Spencer ” in terms of “ high street presence ” .
The FBU and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be a “ unifying figure ” .
But he has many enthusiastic supporters , particularly in local government – council leader Stephen Cowan has written here about how he helped them facilitate a local landslide for Labour – and crucially on the NEC .
Evans is not an inevitability : Christiansen is also favoured by NEC members , and could come through the middle as the unity candidate .
The full NEC will hear from the six applicants on Tuesday and hold its vote then .
We can confidently predict that the leader @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whomever is ultimately chosen .
Before then , you can read the first of Jonathan Ashworth ’ s new weekly LabourList series on Labour ’ s response to Covid-19 .
He kicks off with demands for a testing and tracing strategy , more support for care homes , and some strong comments on government outsourcing in the coronavirus crisis .
Sign up to LabourList ’ s morning email for everything Labour , every weekday morning .

Just one day after Keir Starmer announced that he would be tabling an amendment to the immigration bill to exempt NHS and care workers from the immigration health surcharge, the government U-turned. It is another example of the new opposition leader using Prime Minister’s Questions to great effect. While it may not be watched by most of the population, it is closely followed by political journalists and MPs who can then put pressure on the government to change its mind on key policies. The skill in this move was not coming up with a proposal (the exemption idea had already been raised at a coronavirus press conference), but simply in picking the right one. Starmer has a knack for judging a mood and positioning himself to match it, as he showed in the Labour leadership election.
Does the new exemption for NHS and care workers get to the root of the problem with the health surcharge? Arguably not. When confirming the U-turn, a No 10 spokesperson said: “The purpose of the NHS surcharge is to benefit the NHS, help to care for the sick and save lives. NHS and care workers from abroad who are granted visas are doing this already by the fantastic contribution which they make.” The underlying assumption that migrants should pay an extra yearly fee – despite paying taxes like everyone else – has not been challenged. That many lives will be improved by this “victory for common decency”, as Starmer put it, is not to be dismissed. And this is a solid win for the opposition leader. But Labour’s job is not done.
In internal news, Labour’s next general secretary will be one of the applicants on this shortlist of six drawn up yesterday. Starmer allies had been worried that the majority-left panel would stitch up the process and exclude those candidates favoured by the leadership. (In 2018, the national executive committee was offered a choice of just two.) But this has not happened: the shortlist reflects the whole spectrum of political opinion in the party – including lefty Andrew Fisher, the Co-op’s Karin Christiansen, and Blair-era aide David Evans. This is despite the latter attracting strong criticism from the Labour left.
FBU leader Matt Wrack has warned colleagues against picking Evans for the top post, arguing that the former assistant general secretary is a “factional figure” and “likely to be extremely divisive”. This is largely on the basis of a 1999 report Evans authored that was scathing of local parties, described as “dysfunctional” and “more like Trotters Independent Traders than Marks & Spencer” in terms of “high street presence”. The FBU and the Bakers’ Union say he cannot be a “unifying figure”. But he has many enthusiastic supporters, particularly in local government – council leader Stephen Cowan has written here about how he helped them facilitate a local landslide for Labour – and crucially on the NEC.
Evans is not an inevitability: Christiansen is also favoured by NEC members, and could come through the middle as the unity candidate. The full NEC will hear from the six applicants on Tuesday and hold its vote then. We can confidently predict that the leader’s office will be pleased with whomever is ultimately chosen. Before then, you can read the first of Jonathan Ashworth’s new weekly LabourList series on Labour’s response to Covid-19. He kicks off with demands for a testing and tracing strategy, more support for care homes, and some strong comments on government outsourcing in the coronavirus crisis. Sign up to LabourList’s morning email for everything Labour, every weekday morning.


labourlist--2020-05-22--Labour demands investigation of data breach by outsourcing firm Serco

Labour has demanded an investigation by the government into the data breach by outsourcing firm Serco that saw the email addresses of almost 300 coronavirus contact tracers accidentally shared .
In a letter to opposite number Michael Gove , Labour ’ s Rachel Reeves has asked that the government publishes details of the coronavirus contracts handed to Serco and of the impact of the breach .
The Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster has pressed Gove on the consequences that Serco will face for the error , the reasons for using the outsourcing firm and the basis on which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ described it as “ troubling ” that Serco has been “ trusted with some of the most sensitive work in our national effort ” against Covid-19 but “ seems to struggle with the most basic aspects of data privacy ” .
Reeves said : “ To ease the lockdown restrictions , a proper system of test , trace and isolate needs to be in place .
The government needs to make sure… that the public have faith in it .
It has never been clear what expertise or specialist knowledge Serco can bring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chosen to use Serco for its coronavirus response despite the company being investigated by the Serious Fraud Office in 2019 – a probe that led to two individuals being charged with fraud and false accounting .
The outsourcing giant had to pay £22.9m to the UK ’ s Serious Fraud Office after understating the level of profitability of its electronic monitoring contract in its reports to the Ministry of Justice .
Reeves has also noted the “ performance of Serco ’ s existing contracts with the Home Office and the Department for Work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been penalised repeatedly , it keeps being awarded new contracts for asylum accommodation .
Serco has been caught up in numerous controversies , including alleged abuse in immigration detention centres , but continues to run Yarl ’ s Wood and this month is taking over Brook House and Tinsley House .
But the government has chosen the firm to train staff to trace cases of Covid-19 .
The training , also run by contact centre company Sitel , has reportedly been beset by problems raised with The Guardian .
Commenting on Labour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ We need some clarity from the government about why and how Serco came to be awarded this contract ; and we need reassurances that the contract tracing programme is in safe hands .
“ The Prime Minister has promised it will be up and running by the 1st of June ; if we are to ease lockdown safely , then it is essential that the government gets this right.
” Below is the full text of the letter from Rachel Reeves to Michael Gove .
I am writing to you again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ May .
In that letter , I raised a number of concerns about the role of outsourcing specialists in delivering key parts of our response to the coronavirus , the lack of transparency around the value and details of the contracts involved , and in particular the ability of those companies to carry out essential work to the required standard .
One of the issues raised was around Serco , who have a prominent role in the delivery of contact tracing .
As I signalled in the letter , Serco ’ s involvement @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for concern – in particular given the previous Serious Fraud Office ’ s 2019 investigation into Serco , and also because of the performance of Serco ’ s existing contracts with the Home Office and the Department for Work and Pensions .
An effective system of contract tracing relies on a high level of trust and public confidence .
People need to be willing to share their personal information , in order for us to be able to locate who they have been in contact with and by extension who is at risk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , any fear that information will not be secure or may be used in relation to issues around immigration status or benefits claims threatens to compromise our effort to trace , and contain , the virus .
Given these pre-existing concerns , I was alarmed to see reports yesterday that Serco had inadvertently shared the names of 300 contact tracers over email .
It is particularly troubling that a company that is being trusted with some of the most sensitive work in our national effort against the virus seems to struggle with the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It seems fair to expect that any organisation handling sensitive personal data should have watertight data control and security practices and protocols across the whole organisation .
Surely government should have assessed the organisation ’ s capability to maintain the highest levels of data security before awarding such a contract .
Given that Serco are refusing to refer themselves to the ICO in relation to this breach , please could you explain : • By what process will this breach be investigated ?
• What sanctions , if any , will be applied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Serco been able to offer that the company can be trusted not only with the data of its own workers , but also of the general public ?
• What conversations have you had with the Information Commissioner regarding this this incident , concerns rising from it , and wider concerns about Serco ’ s ability to handle sensitive data on behalf of the government ?
• What , if any , impact will this incident have on the tracing strategy ?
This data breach underlines the importance of government provided transparency around @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – and with other private companies including Deloitte and KPMG .
So , I would ask that you set out , without further delay : • Details of the procurement process undertaken in order to appoint Serco ; • Details of any assessment made of the organisation ’ s capability to deliver and what alternatives were assessed ; • The scope , value , payment terms and length of the contract .
Without an effective system of contact tracing , our efforts to contain this virus , minimise loss of life , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ compromised .
Without trust in the process and in those charged with delivering contact tracing , there is no chance that it will succeed .
I look forward to your response , to the queries contained within this letter and in my original letter of 14th May regarding contracts to Serco , Deloitte , Edenred and others .
Now , more than ever , it is vital that the public can have confidence in government .

Labour has demanded an investigation by the government into the data breach by outsourcing firm Serco that saw the email addresses of almost 300 coronavirus contact tracers accidentally shared.
In a letter to opposite number Michael Gove, Labour’s Rachel Reeves has asked that the government publishes details of the coronavirus contracts handed to Serco and of the impact of the breach.
The Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster has pressed Gove on the consequences that Serco will face for the error, the reasons for using the outsourcing firm and the basis on which it can be trusted.
She has described it as “troubling” that Serco has been “trusted with some of the most sensitive work in our national effort” against Covid-19 but “seems to struggle with the most basic aspects of data privacy”.
Reeves said: “To ease the lockdown restrictions, a proper system of test, trace and isolate needs to be in place. The government needs to make sure… that the public have faith in it. It has never been clear what expertise or specialist knowledge Serco can bring to contact tracing.”
The government has chosen to use Serco for its coronavirus response despite the company being investigated by the Serious Fraud Office in 2019 – a probe that led to two individuals being charged with fraud and false accounting.
The outsourcing giant had to pay £22.9m to the UK’s Serious Fraud Office after understating the level of profitability of its electronic monitoring contract in its reports to the Ministry of Justice.
Reeves has also noted the “performance of Serco’s existing contracts with the Home Office and the Department for Work and Pensions”. Although the firm has been penalised repeatedly, it keeps being awarded new contracts for asylum accommodation.
Serco has been caught up in numerous controversies, including alleged abuse in immigration detention centres, but continues to run Yarl’s Wood and this month is taking over Brook House and Tinsley House.
But the government has chosen the firm to train staff to trace cases of Covid-19. The training, also run by contact centre company Sitel, has reportedly been beset by problems raised with The Guardian.
Commenting on Labour’s new demands, Reeves said: “We need some clarity from the government about why and how Serco came to be awarded this contract; and we need reassurances that the contract tracing programme is in safe hands.
“The Prime Minister has promised it will be up and running by the 1st of June; if we are to ease lockdown safely, then it is essential that the government gets this right.”
Below is the full text of the letter from Rachel Reeves to Michael Gove.
Dear Michael,
I am writing to you again, further to my letter of 14th May.
In that letter, I raised a number of concerns about the role of outsourcing specialists in delivering key parts of our response to the coronavirus, the lack of transparency around the value and details of the contracts involved, and in particular the ability of those companies to carry out essential work to the required standard.
One of the issues raised was around Serco, who have a prominent role in the delivery of contact tracing. As I signalled in the letter, Serco’s involvement in this task was already a cause for concern – in particular given the previous Serious Fraud Office’s 2019 investigation into Serco, and also because of the performance of Serco’s existing contracts with the Home Office and the Department for Work and Pensions.
An effective system of contract tracing relies on a high level of trust and public confidence. People need to be willing to share their personal information, in order for us to be able to locate who they have been in contact with and by extension who is at risk of spreading the virus further.
Therefore, any fear that information will not be secure or may be used in relation to issues around immigration status or benefits claims threatens to compromise our effort to trace, and contain, the virus.
Given these pre-existing concerns, I was alarmed to see reports yesterday that Serco had inadvertently shared the names of 300 contact tracers over email. It is particularly troubling that a company that is being trusted with some of the most sensitive work in our national effort against the virus seems to struggle with the most basic aspects of data privacy.
It seems fair to expect that any organisation handling sensitive personal data should have watertight data control and security practices and protocols across the whole organisation. Surely government should have assessed the organisation’s capability to maintain the highest levels of data security before awarding such a contract.
Given that Serco are refusing to refer themselves to the ICO in relation to this breach, please could you explain:
By what process will this breach be investigated?
What sanctions, if any, will be applied to Serco?
What assurances has Serco been able to offer that the company can be trusted not only with the data of its own workers, but also of the general public?
What conversations have you had with the Information Commissioner regarding this this incident, concerns rising from it, and wider concerns about Serco’s ability to handle sensitive data on behalf of the government?
What, if any, impact will this incident have on the tracing strategy?
This data breach underlines the importance of government provided transparency around the nature of its agreement with Serco – and with other private companies including Deloitte and KPMG. So, I would ask that you set out, without further delay:
Details of the procurement process undertaken in order to appoint Serco;
Details of any assessment made of the organisation’s capability to deliver and what alternatives were assessed;
The scope, value, payment terms and length of the contract.
Without an effective system of contact tracing, our efforts to contain this virus, minimise loss of life, and gradually ease the lockdown will be severely compromised. Without trust in the process and in those charged with delivering contact tracing, there is no chance that it will succeed.
I look forward to your response, to the queries contained within this letter and in my original letter of 14th May regarding contracts to Serco, Deloitte, Edenred and others. Now, more than ever, it is vital that the public can have confidence in government.
Yours sincerely,
Rachel Reeves


labourlist--2020-05-22--We need a tracing strategy, not toxic outsourcing – Ashworth’s Covid-19 update

Over 23,000 more people have died in care homes in the first four months of this year compared to last .
The ONS says almost 12,500 of these are due to Covid-19 ; more than 10,600 are as yet unexplained .
Meanwhile ministers boast that they put a ‘ protective ring ’ around care homes from February .
But the tragic truth is , like with personal protective equipment ( PPE ) , lockdown and testing , ministers were slow to respond and negligent in policy decision .
Now we ’ ve seen an unfolding crisis in care homes .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ when needed .
And while hospitals would not have purposefully discharged sick patients , there was no testing of people transferred from hospital to care homes until mid-April .
Given what is known about asymptomatic transmission , many in the care sector believe this failure to test contributed to the seeding the virus .
Rather than prioritising infection control , PPE was requisitioned from care home staff and given to the NHS because of wider shortages .
Guidance suggesting infection was unlikely was still in place even when there was community transmission .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ testing of all residents and staff in homes nearly 12 weeks later .
Failure after failure .
Labour has called for more support for social care from the start .
We warned early on in this crisis that testing was a crucial tool in our fight to contain its spread in care homes , and we called for all staff and residents to be tested .
Testing for all staff and residents is now urgent .
Our hard-working care staff are playing a vital role in keeping people safe during this pandemic .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ensure older and vulnerable people receive the support they need .
But they need more support themselves .
Vacancies in the care sector and high numbers of staff self-isolating has meant care staff have had to make difficult choices that they shouldn ’ t be forced to make – such as whether to self-isolate when they start displaying symptoms or continue going to work to provide safe levels of care .
I have always argued that the lockdown in itself is not a strategy and that the government needs to build an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus in the community .
Testing should be expanded further beyond symptomatic carriers – with health and care workers the priority .
A recent study from Imperial , for example , suggested that weekly testing of healthcare workers is “ estimated to reduce their contribution to transmission by 25-33 % , on top of reductions achieved by self-isolation following symptoms ” .
Similarly , a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine warns that symptoms-based screening alone in nursing homes failed to detect large numbers of infectious cases .
It recommends @ @ @ @ @ @ @ residing or working in skilled nursing facilities needs to be implemented now ” .
But testing isn ’ t enough .
Extensive testing , tracing and quarantining has reduced the spread of the virus in South Korea .
Yet in the UK ministers abandoned this approach on March 12th .
It means we ’ ve wasted precious time when we should have been building up tracing capacity , develop protocols and recruiting staff .
This week , I wrote to Matt Hancock asking a series of questions about why this was allowed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Health and public health staff – alongside other key local government staff such as Environmental Health Officers who know their local patch – have years of experience in contact tracing and case finding .
They must now be fully mobilised to spearhead tracing .
Instead of giving local public health services the funding and resources needed to tackle the virus locally , ministers are relying on outsourcing company Serco .
Serco has shown that it can ’ t be trusted to deliver on government contracts – it was fined £19m for failing to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Ministry of Justice ’ s electronic tagging service .
Serco has already been forced to apologise over a data breach from its recruitment of contact tracers – before the service has properly got off the ground .
Covid-19 shouldn ’ t be an excuse for yet more wasteful , toxic outsourcing .
Our public health experts should be leading our response .
Tracing should be locally-led and properly integrated with primary care .
GPs should be involved so they can monitor the health of their patients .
And if people are asked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support for those who otherwise would not be able to .
We know that those in more deprived , overcrowded areas are at risk .
Hotel space should be used free of charge to help people isolate if they don ’ t have the space to do so at home .
It also means people need decent sick pay .
Without a strategy to test , trace and isolate people , society will not be able to reopen safely .
Without support for care homes , our elderly and vulnerable relatives will continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ virus .
Both are crucial in the fight against this virus , and every day without proper action puts too many people at risk .

Over 23,000 more people have died in care homes in the first four months of this year compared to last. The ONS says almost 12,500 of these are due to Covid-19; more than 10,600 are as yet unexplained. Meanwhile ministers boast that they put a ‘protective ring’ around care homes from February. But the tragic truth is, like with personal protective equipment (PPE), lockdown and testing, ministers were slow to respond and negligent in policy decision. Now we’ve seen an unfolding crisis in care homes.
There was no lockdown of care homes when needed. And while hospitals would not have purposefully discharged sick patients, there was no testing of people transferred from hospital to care homes until mid-April. Given what is known about asymptomatic transmission, many in the care sector believe this failure to test contributed to the seeding the virus.
Rather than prioritising infection control, PPE was requisitioned from care home staff and given to the NHS because of wider shortages. Guidance suggesting infection was unlikely was still in place even when there was community transmission. Shockingly, there is still no full testing of all residents and staff in homes nearly 12 weeks later. Failure after failure.
Labour has called for more support for social care from the start. We warned early on in this crisis that testing was a crucial tool in our fight to contain its spread in care homes, and we called for all staff and residents to be tested. Testing for all staff and residents is now urgent.
Our hard-working care staff are playing a vital role in keeping people safe during this pandemic. They go above and beyond every day to ensure older and vulnerable people receive the support they need. But they need more support themselves. Vacancies in the care sector and high numbers of staff self-isolating has meant care staff have had to make difficult choices that they shouldn’t be forced to make – such as whether to self-isolate when they start displaying symptoms or continue going to work to provide safe levels of care.
I have always argued that the lockdown in itself is not a strategy and that the government needs to build an effective plan to control the spread of the virus in the community. Testing should be expanded further beyond symptomatic carriers – with health and care workers the priority. A recent study from Imperial, for example, suggested that weekly testing of healthcare workers is “estimated to reduce their contribution to transmission by 25-33%, on top of reductions achieved by self-isolation following symptoms”.
Similarly, a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine warns that symptoms-based screening alone in nursing homes failed to detect large numbers of infectious cases. It recommends that “testing to include asymptomatic persons residing or working in skilled nursing facilities needs to be implemented now”.
But testing isn’t enough. Extensive testing, tracing and quarantining has reduced the spread of the virus in South Korea. Yet in the UK ministers abandoned this approach on March 12th. It means we’ve wasted precious time when we should have been building up tracing capacity, develop protocols and recruiting staff. This week, I wrote to Matt Hancock asking a series of questions about why this was allowed to happen.
Local government Directors of Public Health and public health staff – alongside other key local government staff such as Environmental Health Officers who know their local patch – have years of experience in contact tracing and case finding. They must now be fully mobilised to spearhead tracing.
Instead of giving local public health services the funding and resources needed to tackle the virus locally, ministers are relying on outsourcing company Serco. Serco has shown that it can’t be trusted to deliver on government contracts – it was fined £19m for failing to properly disclose the profits made from running the Ministry of Justice’s electronic tagging service.
Serco has already been forced to apologise over a data breach from its recruitment of contact tracers – before the service has properly got off the ground. Covid-19 shouldn’t be an excuse for yet more wasteful, toxic outsourcing. Our public health experts should be leading our response.
Tracing should be locally-led and properly integrated with primary care. GPs should be involved so they can monitor the health of their patients. And if people are asked to isolate, we need to provide support for those who otherwise would not be able to. We know that those in more deprived, overcrowded areas are at risk. Hotel space should be used free of charge to help people isolate if they don’t have the space to do so at home. It also means people need decent sick pay.
Without a strategy to test, trace and isolate people, society will not be able to reopen safely. Without support for care homes, our elderly and vulnerable relatives will continue to be the victims of this cruel virus. Both are crucial in the fight against this virus, and every day without proper action puts too many people at risk.


labourlist--2020-05-22--Clear red water in the UK’s response to the coronavirus pandemic

This year marks the 21st anniversary of the establishment of the National Assembly for Wales , now the Senedd .
Throughout this time , Wales has had a Labour-led government .
The slogan “ clear red water ” , first used by Rhodri Morgan – First Minister of Wales between 2000 and 2009 – describes the distinctive and socialist flavour to Welsh politics .
Wales can be proud of its radical and socialist tradition , from the raising of the red flag at the Merthyr rising of 1831 to the internationalism of the Welsh miners and the birth of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MP .
Our devolved Labour-led government still holds a strong commitment to publicly owned services .
We have retained a largely publicly owned NHS in Wales , and led the way on free prescriptions .
Alongside Scotland and the UK , Wales led the way in declaring a climate emergency .
We have the best rates for domestic recycling in the UK , we were the first to begin charging for plastic bags and we ’ ve banned fracking .
We were also first with the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act 2015 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Welsh government passed a bill allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to vote in Welsh elections .
Wales is also helping to lead the way in developing an inclusive , largely foundational , economy .
We are taking a social partnership approach to promote fair work that safeguards workers ’ rights and conditions , encourages locally based procurement policies and promotes the principle of public investment and employment with a social and community purpose .
And there have been some positive and distinctive steps taken by the Welsh government during the coronavirus pandemic – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enshrined in law , and care staff being provided with an additional payment of £500 .
But this has taken place within continued Tory government constraints on our devolved powers and funding .
A decade of brutal austerity has stripped Welsh councils of £1.6bn from their budgets .
The Barnett formula is ill-equipped to meet Wales ’ funding needs .
Throughout this pandemic , an estimated £526m of Welsh government revenue spending has not been covered by central government .
Despite the progress made since devolution , we in Wales – like the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many challenges , and poverty and inequality persist .
23 % of the population live in poverty with child poverty rates even higher at 29 % .
At the same time , Wales now has five billionaires and the 29 wealthiest people in Wales have a combined worth of over £15bn .
The death rate in the most deprived areas of Wales has been more than twice as high as in the least deprived areas during the pandemic .
Now is the time for clear red thinking , leading to action on what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will look like in a post-coronavirus world .
In Westminster and the media , there is already talk of a freeze on public pay and cuts to public spending to pay for our Covid-19 debts .
We can ’ t allow that to happen .
There can be no return to the austerity and privatisation policies that so severely undermined our NHS and local authorities .
It is time we properly rewarded those who keep our society running .
It is not hedge fund managers saving lives and keeping our country going during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to tackle climate change .
This is an even greater threat to the planet than this pandemic – but it also presents us with opportunities .
Governments must now invest in a green industrial revolution , creating over a million new jobs .
It is time , too , for a debate on constitutional reform – and I welcome Keir Starmer ’ s commitment to exploring this – in order to build a new long-term political and constitutional consensus .
All parts of the UK should be properly and fairly funded without the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arise .
And what of the implications of Brexit ?
How much will this Tory UK government attempt to retain powers , and funding , that should come to devolved nations ?
All four nations of the UK can learn from one another , and it is time for some of that clear red water to seep from Wales into the rest of the UK .
We should act in unity to stand up and campaign against the damaging policies of this regressive Tory government .
We need that clear red water turned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than ever , as we fight to give future generations across the UK a fairer , greener , socialist future .

This year marks the 21st anniversary of the establishment of the National Assembly for Wales, now the Senedd. Throughout this time, Wales has had a Labour-led government. The slogan “clear red water”, first used by Rhodri Morgan – First Minister of Wales between 2000 and 2009 – describes the distinctive and socialist flavour to Welsh politics.
Wales can be proud of its radical and socialist tradition, from the raising of the red flag at the Merthyr rising of 1831 to the internationalism of the Welsh miners and the birth of the NHS taken from Tredegar by a Welsh MP. Our devolved Labour-led government still holds a strong commitment to publicly owned services. We have retained a largely publicly owned NHS in Wales, and led the way on free prescriptions.
Alongside Scotland and the UK, Wales led the way in declaring a climate emergency. We have the best rates for domestic recycling in the UK, we were the first to begin charging for plastic bags and we’ve banned fracking. We were also first with the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act 2015. In the spirit of that legislation, the Welsh government passed a bill allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to vote in Welsh elections.
Wales is also helping to lead the way in developing an inclusive, largely foundational, economy. We are taking a social partnership approach to promote fair work that safeguards workers’ rights and conditions, encourages locally based procurement policies and promotes the principle of public investment and employment with a social and community purpose.
And there have been some positive and distinctive steps taken by the Welsh government during the coronavirus pandemic – like the two-metre social distancing guidance being enshrined in law, and care staff being provided with an additional payment of £500. But this has taken place within continued Tory government constraints on our devolved powers and funding.
A decade of brutal austerity has stripped Welsh councils of £1.6bn from their budgets. The Barnett formula is ill-equipped to meet Wales’ funding needs. Throughout this pandemic, an estimated £526m of Welsh government revenue spending has not been covered by central government.
Despite the progress made since devolution, we in Wales – like the rest of the UK – still face many challenges, and poverty and inequality persist. 23% of the population live in poverty with child poverty rates even higher at 29%. At the same time, Wales now has five billionaires and the 29 wealthiest people in Wales have a combined worth of over £15bn. The death rate in the most deprived areas of Wales has been more than twice as high as in the least deprived areas during the pandemic.
Now is the time for clear red thinking, leading to action on what Wales and the rest of the UK will look like in a post-coronavirus world. In Westminster and the media, there is already talk of a freeze on public pay and cuts to public spending to pay for our Covid-19 debts. We can’t allow that to happen.
There can be no return to the austerity and privatisation policies that so severely undermined our NHS and local authorities. It is time we properly rewarded those who keep our society running. It is not hedge fund managers saving lives and keeping our country going during the pandemic.
We must go further to tackle climate change. This is an even greater threat to the planet than this pandemic – but it also presents us with opportunities. Governments must now invest in a green industrial revolution, creating over a million new jobs.
It is time, too, for a debate on constitutional reform – and I welcome Keir Starmer’s commitment to exploring this – in order to build a new long-term political and constitutional consensus. All parts of the UK should be properly and fairly funded without the need for a begging bowl whenever needs arise. And what of the implications of Brexit? How much will this Tory UK government attempt to retain powers, and funding, that should come to devolved nations?
All four nations of the UK can learn from one another, and it is time for some of that clear red water to seep from Wales into the rest of the UK. We should act in unity to stand up and campaign against the damaging policies of this regressive Tory government. We need that clear red water turned into clear red action – now more than ever, as we fight to give future generations across the UK a fairer, greener, socialist future.


labourlist--2020-05-22--Predatory venture capitalists took over our care homes. This profiteering cannot continue

The shockingly high levels of deaths in our care homes appears to be one of the biggest scandals of the coronavirus pandemic in the UK .
A comprehensive and thorough inquiry into the government ’ s handling of the pandemic will no doubt come as soon as some sense of normality can be restored .
However , any inquiry must also focus on the conditions under which many care homes companies were managed – and I use that term very loosely .
The business model many care homes operated under was that of excess profiteering , cost-cutting , loading the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ money to pay excess interest rates and heavy dividends – letting the taxpayer pick up the tab when all failed .
In 2012 , I warned about the takeover of care home firm Four Seasons by private equity .
I warned the that private equity firms were in it for a quick buck rather than to ensure the best possible standards of care for vulnerable people in society .
Very sadly , but very predictably , in 2015 it emerged that Four Seasons was experiencing financial problems and sitting on £500m worth of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tax havens ) .
Sadly the then Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt did nothing to sort out the unsustainable business models that they had .
I urged him to get a grip and highlighted their unsustainable business model , which relied on government and hard-pressed local councils bailing them out .
Unfortunately , he did nothing to prevent predatory venture capitalists with unsound business models from repeatedly taking over our care homes .
I have to admit it is somewhat grating to hear him criticise the government over the pandemic while taking absolutely zero @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which we now find ourselves .
We are seeing the devastating consequences of this dogmatic Thatcherism – prioritising obscene profits over the care of vulnerable people – which has been allowed to take place .
At the start of the crisis , the GMB union was pointing this out , saying that if care workers “ become ill they either have to try and support their families on poverty sick pay – or turn up to work ill which could be a death sentence for residents ” .
UNISON went even further , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employers are doing the right thing , but many care workers are being put in danger because what they ’ re being told is plain wrong .
They feel helpless because they ’ re often on low pay and are left to choose between risking their health or paying their bills.
” Many care staff faced a dilemma : risk their own destitution , or risk becoming infected and infecting their own families .
Aside from the inquiry into how the country performed during this crisis , major change to the care system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that prioritises the safety of those in care homes and the staff tasked with treating them .
This isn ’ t even to say the private sector should be completely taken out of the sector , but that the government should regulate carefully to ensure the public doesn ’ t have to bail out the management failures and that this predatory behaviour is not putting the safety of staff at risk .
The Tory government – and their Lib Dem coalition allies , lest it be forgotten – agreed to this set-up due @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sector was always a better and more efficient provider than the state and that short-term cheapest was always best .
They have been proven wrong .

The shockingly high levels of deaths in our care homes appears to be one of the biggest scandals of the coronavirus pandemic in the UK. A comprehensive and thorough inquiry into the government’s handling of the pandemic will no doubt come as soon as some sense of normality can be restored. However, any inquiry must also focus on the conditions under which many care homes companies were managed – and I use that term very loosely.
The business model many care homes operated under was that of excess profiteering, cost-cutting, loading the companies up with debt and using that money to pay excess interest rates and heavy dividends – letting the taxpayer pick up the tab when all failed.
In 2012, I warned about the takeover of care home firm Four Seasons by private equity. I warned the that private equity firms were in it for a quick buck rather than to ensure the best possible standards of care for vulnerable people in society.
Very sadly, but very predictably, in 2015 it emerged that Four Seasons was experiencing financial problems and sitting on £500m worth of debt (much of it in offshore tax havens). Sadly the then Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt did nothing to sort out the unsustainable business models that they had.
I urged him to get a grip and highlighted their unsustainable business model, which relied on government and hard-pressed local councils bailing them out. Unfortunately, he did nothing to prevent predatory venture capitalists with unsound business models from repeatedly taking over our care homes. I have to admit it is somewhat grating to hear him criticise the government over the pandemic while taking absolutely zero responsibility for contributing to the conditions in which we now find ourselves.
We are seeing the devastating consequences of this dogmatic Thatcherism – prioritising obscene profits over the care of vulnerable people – which has been allowed to take place. At the start of the crisis, the GMB union was pointing this out, saying that if care workers “become ill they either have to try and support their families on poverty sick pay – or turn up to work ill which could be a death sentence for residents”.
UNISON went even further, saying: “Some tell us their employers are doing the right thing, but many care workers are being put in danger because what they’re being told is plain wrong. They feel helpless because they’re often on low pay and are left to choose between risking their health or paying their bills.” Many care staff faced a dilemma: risk their own destitution, or risk becoming infected and infecting their own families.
Aside from the inquiry into how the country performed during this crisis, major change to the care system is sorely needed – and an approach that prioritises the safety of those in care homes and the staff tasked with treating them. This isn’t even to say the private sector should be completely taken out of the sector, but that the government should regulate carefully to ensure the public doesn’t have to bail out the management failures and that this predatory behaviour is not putting the safety of staff at risk.
The Tory government – and their Lib Dem coalition allies, lest it be forgotten – agreed to this set-up due to their dogmatic obsession that the private sector was always a better and more efficient provider than the state and that short-term cheapest was always best. They have been proven wrong.


labourlist--2020-05-22--The hostile environment in healthcare hurts everyone. We must maintain the pressure to end it

It ’ s encouraging to see more people waking up to the importance of our migrant key workers .
The pandemic has meant that the regular right-wing scare stories have been displaced by frontpage splashes about our healthcare heroes .
Boris Johnson has learned the hard way that you can ’ t get away with publicly praising key workers whilst making their lives harder .
Last night ’ s U-turn on the immigration health surcharge ( IHS ) is a great result – made reality by years of applied pressure against the hostile environment from grassroots activists , and years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into a fairer migration policy .
Unfortunately , it comes against the gloomy backdrop of the government pushing ahead with more anti-migrant policy .
This week , parliament voted through the disastrous immigration bill , marking the second time in a decade that a Conservative government has chosen to retroactively remove the rights of people who have settled here .
The Windrush scandal was the direct consequence of the government ’ s decision to pull the carpet from underneath Commonwealth citizens in 2014 .
From next year , EU nationals will be subject @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including the IHS .
Of course , that ’ s assuming they qualify .
According to the Institute for Public Policy Research , under current immigration proposals , 69 % of the UK ’ s current EU workforce would be ineligible for a visa .
That is 90 % of EU transport and storage workers , 75 % of EU agricultural workers , 59 % of construction workers , and , crucially , 66 % of the people currently working in our health and social care sector .
With 40,000+ nursing and 120,000+ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s one hell of a key worker shortage .
The message to migrant key workers remains clear : thank you for your work and your money ; now please close the door on the way out .
One of the Home Office ’ s first announcements during the pandemic was that many so-called “ low-skilled workers ” in the NHS – carers , nurses , porters , cleaners – will also be unable to apply for UK work visas from January 2021 .
This is just one reason why I tabled a reasoned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tracks .
Waiving the surcharge for healthcare workers alone is a hollow victory if they can ’ t make their lives here .
Labour was right to push to exempt migrant NHS staff and carers from charges during coronavirus .
It ’ s worth pointing out that our de facto policy position remains scrapping the entire 2014 Immigration Act , which includes provisions like the IHS , for everyone they apply to , not just NHS workers and carers .
That means we must end the pernicious charging system for all migrants , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the current time .
Last month , we saw the deadly consequences of current policy when a Fillipino man known only as Elvis died from coronavirus in his own home .
Charity workers said he was deterred from coming forwards by the dual fear of medical costs and being reported to the Home Office .
His tragic death makes it clearer than ever that as well as scrapping the IHS , we should also end data sharing between the Home Office and the NHS .
This is something that the BMA and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support for at the current time .
Coronavirus is another important reminder that public health is precisely that , public , and that nobody in the UK will be free from coronavirus until everybody in our society is free from it .
Universality was the founding principle of the welfare state and must underpin our country ’ s approach to the coronavirus crisis and its economic aftermath : providing help to all who need it to get the country back on its feet .
That includes migrants , wherever they come from , @ @ @ @

It’s encouraging to see more people waking up to the importance of our migrant key workers. The pandemic has meant that the regular right-wing scare stories have been displaced by frontpage splashes about our healthcare heroes. Boris Johnson has learned the hard way that you can’t get away with publicly praising key workers whilst making their lives harder. Last night’s U-turn on the immigration health surcharge (IHS) is a great result – made reality by years of applied pressure against the hostile environment from grassroots activists, and years of a Labour Party channelling this energy into a fairer migration policy. Unfortunately, it comes against the gloomy backdrop of the government pushing ahead with more anti-migrant policy.
This week, parliament voted through the disastrous immigration bill, marking the second time in a decade that a Conservative government has chosen to retroactively remove the rights of people who have settled here. The Windrush scandal was the direct consequence of the government’s decision to pull the carpet from underneath Commonwealth citizens in 2014. From next year, EU nationals will be subject to the same hostile environment measures – including the IHS.
Of course, that’s assuming they qualify. According to the Institute for Public Policy Research, under current immigration proposals, 69% of the UK’s current EU workforce would be ineligible for a visa. That is 90% of EU transport and storage workers, 75% of EU agricultural workers, 59% of construction workers, and, crucially, 66% of the people currently working in our health and social care sector. With 40,000+ nursing and 120,000+ social care vacancies already, that’s one hell of a key worker shortage.
The message to migrant key workers remains clear: thank you for your work and your money; now please close the door on the way out. One of the Home Office’s first announcements during the pandemic was that many so-called “low-skilled workers” in the NHS – carers, nurses, porters, cleaners – will also be unable to apply for UK work visas from January 2021. This is just one reason why I tabled a reasoned amendment to stop the bill in its tracks. Waiving the surcharge for healthcare workers alone is a hollow victory if they can’t make their lives here.
Labour was right to push to exempt migrant NHS staff and carers from charges during coronavirus. It’s worth pointing out that our de facto policy position remains scrapping the entire 2014 Immigration Act, which includes provisions like the IHS, for everyone they apply to, not just NHS workers and carers. That means we must end the pernicious charging system for all migrants, not just those who are most visible at the current time.
Last month, we saw the deadly consequences of current policy when a Fillipino man known only as Elvis died from coronavirus in his own home. Charity workers said he was deterred from coming forwards by the dual fear of medical costs and being reported to the Home Office. His tragic death makes it clearer than ever that as well as scrapping the IHS, we should also end data sharing between the Home Office and the NHS. This is something that the BMA and Doctors of the World have outlined their support for at the current time.
Coronavirus is another important reminder that public health is precisely that, public, and that nobody in the UK will be free from coronavirus until everybody in our society is free from it. Universality was the founding principle of the welfare state and must underpin our country’s approach to the coronavirus crisis and its economic aftermath: providing help to all who need it to get the country back on its feet. That includes migrants, wherever they come from, whatever their occupation.


labourlist--2020-05-22--Cooper wins cross-party support for expansion of free visa extension scheme

Yvette Cooper has tabled a cross-party amendment to the immigration bill that would expand the government ’ s free visa extension scheme and ensure it applies to all health and care staff .
The proposed change has gained the support of Tory MPs Caroline Nokes and Tim Loughton , the SNP ’ s Stuart McDonald , and backbench Labour MPs Clive Betts , Diana Johnson and Andrew Gwynne .
Commenting on the proposal , Cooper said : “ It ’ s very welcome that the government has agreed to lift the Immigration Health Surcharge for NHS and social care workers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to care workers and low-paid NHS staff .
“ However , care workers and low-paid NHS support staff on the frontline are still having to pay hundreds of pounds to go through the visa renewal process during the crisis as they still haven ’ t been included in the free visa extension for NHS medical staff .
“ That ’ s not fair on them and means they aren ’ t being treated equally even though the government has recognised that care workers and support workers are just as much on the frontline @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chair added : “ The Home Affairs Select Committee asked the Home Office on 14th April to expand the visa scheme to include these vitally important lower paid and social care staff .
“ No one providing frontline care in the UK during this crisis should be wrestling with the immigration system or worrying about visa renewal fees .
“ Now the government has agreed to do the right thing on the surcharge and bereavement scheme , I hope they will also accept this amendment and do the same for the visa extension @ @ @ @ @ @ @ written to Priti Patel today , urging the Home Secretary to expand the eligibility for free visa extension to frontline workers in social care and NHS support staff such as porters and cleaners .
The committee has raised the issue before with the Home Office in letters sent on April 14th , May 4th and May 12th .
The move would help health and care staff whose visas would otherwise expire before the end of the year .
Earlier this week , Cooper told the Commons she would defy a three-line Labour whip @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against the Tory legislation at its second reading “ in cross-party spirit ” .
She said : “ I believe that this bill is flawed , but I recognise that legislation on immigration is now needed .
And as select committee chair , I will put forward amendments that I hope will receive cross-party support .
“ In that cross-party spirit , I will not vote against the bill tonight , although if the government ’ s approach does not change I would expect to oppose it when it returns to the House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ immensely important we should be trying to build that new consensus .
And I urge the government to do so because it has the opportunity to do so now.
” Cooper was one of a handful of Labour MPs who purposefully abstained on the bill at second reading , while several others – including frontbenchers – said they did not vote against due to technical difficulties .

Yvette Cooper has tabled a cross-party amendment to the immigration bill that would expand the government’s free visa extension scheme and ensure it applies to all health and care staff.
The proposed change has gained the support of Tory MPs Caroline Nokes and Tim Loughton, the SNP’s Stuart McDonald, and backbench Labour MPs Clive Betts, Diana Johnson and Andrew Gwynne.
Commenting on the proposal, Cooper said: “It’s very welcome that the government has agreed to lift the Immigration Health Surcharge for NHS and social care workers, and to extend the bereavement scheme to care workers and low-paid NHS staff.
“However, care workers and low-paid NHS support staff on the frontline are still having to pay hundreds of pounds to go through the visa renewal process during the crisis as they still haven’t been included in the free visa extension for NHS medical staff.
“That’s not fair on them and means they aren’t being treated equally even though the government has recognised that care workers and support workers are just as much on the frontline as medical staff.”
The select committee chair added: “The Home Affairs Select Committee asked the Home Office on 14th April to expand the visa scheme to include these vitally important lower paid and social care staff.
“No one providing frontline care in the UK during this crisis should be wrestling with the immigration system or worrying about visa renewal fees.
“Now the government has agreed to do the right thing on the surcharge and bereavement scheme, I hope they will also accept this amendment and do the same for the visa extension scheme.”
The home affairs committee has written to Priti Patel today, urging the Home Secretary to expand the eligibility for free visa extension to frontline workers in social care and NHS support staff such as porters and cleaners.
The committee has raised the issue before with the Home Office in letters sent on April 14th, May 4th and May 12th. The move would help health and care staff whose visas would otherwise expire before the end of the year.
Earlier this week, Cooper told the Commons she would defy a three-line Labour whip on the immigration bill and not vote against the Tory legislation at its second reading “in cross-party spirit”.
She said: “I believe that this bill is flawed, but I recognise that legislation on immigration is now needed. And as select committee chair, I will put forward amendments that I hope will receive cross-party support.
“In that cross-party spirit, I will not vote against the bill tonight, although if the government’s approach does not change I would expect to oppose it when it returns to the House.
“Because I think it is immensely important we should be trying to build that new consensus. And I urge the government to do so because it has the opportunity to do so now.”
Cooper was one of a handful of Labour MPs who purposefully abstained on the bill at second reading, while several others – including frontbenchers – said they did not vote against due to technical difficulties.