labourlist--2020-10-26--Labour: £150m on “useless” PPE could have paid for free school meals

Labour has revealed that the amount of money the government “ wasted ” on a single contract for “ useless ” personal protective equipment could have paid almost entirely for extending free school meals .
The new analysis highlights that the £157m needed for extending the meals across school holidays is only slightly more than the £150m spent earlier this year on a private contract for masks that could not be used .
Shadow Chancellor Anneliese Dodds has criticised the government decision to lose money on one but refuse to fund the other and accused her counterpart Rishi Sunak of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Commenting on the new analysis and the need to extend the free school meals programme , Dodds said : “ The Chancellor didn ’ t bat an eyelid when millions of pounds of public money were wasted on PPE that couldn ’ t be used .
“ Yet when it comes to keeping kids fed this Christmas , he has nothing to offer but humbug .
This Chancellor has got his priorities wrong .
He won ’ t budge on a circuit breaker that could save lives and livelihoods .
“ He ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to deliver additional economic support for areas under local restrictions .
Now he ’ s letting kids go hungry at Christmas .
He ’ s not helping out – he ’ s standing in the way.
” Conservative MPs rejected proposals from the Labour Party to extend free school meals in a Commons vote last week , with some Tory parliamentarians suggesting the £157m scheme was too expensive .
A similar figure was lost by the government after it signed a contract with private equity company Ayanda Capital earlier this year , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not meet requirements for use by frontline health workers .
The 50 million face masks produced by the firm were made with ear loops instead of head loops .
This made the masks less safe for their wearers as they become far harder to securely fix onto the face .
Shadow cabinet member Rosena Allin-Khan confirmed on Sunday that the Labour Party would be seeking a second Commons vote on the extension to free school meals before the Christmas parliamentary recess .
“ The Labour Party are not going to give up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ children who are going to bed hungry , ” she told Sophy Ridge on Sunday .
“ We certainly will be pushing for a vote before Christmas.
” Various Tory MPs have faced criticism for their reasons for voting against the proposal , including Ben Bradley who is appeared to link free school meal vouchers with giving money to “ crack dens ” and “ brothels ” .
Labour ’ s deputy leader Angela Rayner called on Bradley to apologise , saying : “ Notwithstanding the fact that the vouchers in summer could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this stigmatisation of working class families is disgraceful and disgusting.
” Labour has been critical of the government ’ s private procurement process during the pandemic , which has not followed normal procedures , and has said it unfairly benefits companies connected to Conservative donors .
In one example , the government awarded contracts worth £81.8m to produce PPE to a company co-owned by former chair of the President ’ s Club David Meller , who has donated tens of thousands of pounds to the Tories in the last decade .

Labour has revealed that the amount of money the government “wasted” on a single contract for “useless” personal protective equipment could have paid almost entirely for extending free school meals.
The new analysis highlights that the £157m needed for extending the meals across school holidays is only slightly more than the £150m spent earlier this year on a private contract for masks that could not be used.
Shadow Chancellor Anneliese Dodds has criticised the government decision to lose money on one but refuse to fund the other and accused her counterpart Rishi Sunak of getting “his priorities wrong”.
Commenting on the new analysis and the need to extend the free school meals programme, Dodds said: “The Chancellor didn’t bat an eyelid when millions of pounds of public money were wasted on PPE that couldn’t be used.
“Yet when it comes to keeping kids fed this Christmas, he has nothing to offer but humbug. This Chancellor has got his priorities wrong. He won’t budge on a circuit breaker that could save lives and livelihoods.
“He’s waited to the last possible minute to deliver additional economic support for areas under local restrictions. Now he’s letting kids go hungry at Christmas. He’s not helping out – he’s standing in the way.”
Conservative MPs rejected proposals from the Labour Party to extend free school meals in a Commons vote last week, with some Tory parliamentarians suggesting the £157m scheme was too expensive.
A similar figure was lost by the government after it signed a contract with private equity company Ayanda Capital earlier this year, which included almost £150m on face masks that did not meet requirements for use by frontline health workers.
The 50 million face masks produced by the firm were made with ear loops instead of head loops. This made the masks less safe for their wearers as they become far harder to securely fix onto the face.
Shadow cabinet member Rosena Allin-Khan confirmed on Sunday that the Labour Party would be seeking a second Commons vote on the extension to free school meals before the Christmas parliamentary recess.
“The Labour Party are not going to give up on our young people, on the children who are going to bed hungry,” she told Sophy Ridge on Sunday. “We certainly will be pushing for a vote before Christmas.”
Various Tory MPs have faced criticism for their reasons for voting against the proposal, including Ben Bradley who is appeared to link free school meal vouchers with giving money to “crack dens” and “brothels”.
Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner called on Bradley to apologise, saying: “Notwithstanding the fact that the vouchers in summer could only be used to purchase food, this stigmatisation of working class families is disgraceful and disgusting.”
Labour has been critical of the government’s private procurement process during the pandemic, which has not followed normal procedures, and has said it unfairly benefits companies connected to Conservative donors.
In one example, the government awarded contracts worth £81.8m to produce PPE to a company co-owned by former chair of the President’s Club David Meller, who has donated tens of thousands of pounds to the Tories in the last decade.


labourlist--2020-10-26--ASLEF: Leaked TfL report shows driverless trains could cost up to £7bn

Train drivers ’ union ASLEF has announced that introducing driverless trains on the London Underground would be “ poor value for money ” and cost up to £7bn according to a leaked Transport for London report .
According to the Labour Party-affiliated trade union , the paper suggests that the “ high capital costs ” of upgrading and integrating the new system means driverless Tube trains are not a “ financially positive ” option for London .
The finding undermines the claims of the Prime Minister , who has spoken in favour of making driverless trains a condition for any @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pursued the policy as London mayor .
ASLEF general secretary Mick Whelan said : “ We know that passengers don ’ t want driverless trains .
Whenever they are asked , they always answer with a resounding ‘ No !
’ .
And now we know it is not economically feasible either.
” The leaked analysis was prepared as part of a review into TfL ’ s finances by accounting firm KPMG , which was mandated by the government as a condition for offering the London transport group an initial coronavirus bailout .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ London mayor Sadiq Khan and the government over a TfL bailout as a £1.7bn short-term package to maintain services during the pandemic is set to run out on Saturday .
The government has set out a variety of conditions for any future bailout package , including cutting free travel for under-18s , extending the congestion charge and raising fares , which have been rejected by Khan .
Transport Secretary Grant Shapps declared last week that the government would use “ reserve legislative powers ” to take direct control of TfL if London does @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Prime Minister suggested in July that driverless trains should also be a condition of a future TfL bailout from the government and said London should “ not be the prisoners of the unions any more ” .
Ministers withheld support for TfL ’ s initial £1.6bn support package in May until the London mayor agreed to an increase in the congestion charge and an extension of the ultra-low emission zone charge to include the weekend .
The London mayor accused Johnson of lying in parliament during Prime Minister ’ s Questions last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of having “ bankrupted London ” through mismanagement .
In a LabourList piece on Saturday , Khan wrote : “ As mayor , I simply will not accept these Tory proposals , which would hit Londoners with a triple whammy of higher costs… at a time when so many families are already struggling .
“ The Prime Minister lied , plain and simple , in the House of Commons this week when he said Transport for London ( TfL ) only needed emergency national funding now due to actions I had taken prior @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that before the coronavirus I was fixing the financial mess at TfL that I ’ d inherited from Boris Johnson when he was mayor .
Over the course of four years , I had reduced TfL ’ s deficit by 71 % and increased cash reserves by 13 % .
” Commenting on the newly leaked report , ASLEF London Underground organiser Finn Brennan said : “ These documents show that not only is there no business case for this , but it would make TfL ’ s financial position much worse @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of London , his failed vanity projects cost Londoners almost £1bn .
But this is dwarfed by the vast cost of his ideological obsession with driverless trains.
” The union organiser added : “ ASLEF has always pointed out that driverless trains on the London Underground are a politically-driven fantasy .
These documents show that we are right .
“ And if the government tries to force TfL to waste huge sums on this pointless exercise , it would suck resources away from projects that could have real positive benefits for passenger safety @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The London Underground , which made the majority of its revenue from fares before the pandemic , has seen a 60 % drop in the number of passengers using the service since coronavirus hit , according to the most recent figures .

Train drivers’ union ASLEF has announced that introducing driverless trains on the London Underground would be “poor value for money” and cost up to £7bn according to a leaked Transport for London report.
According to the Labour Party-affiliated trade union, the paper suggests that the “high capital costs” of upgrading and integrating the new system means driverless Tube trains are not a “financially positive” option for London.
The finding undermines the claims of the Prime Minister, who has spoken in favour of making driverless trains a condition for any future TfL bailout from the government and pursued the policy as London mayor.
ASLEF general secretary Mick Whelan said: “We know that passengers don’t want driverless trains. Whenever they are asked, they always answer with a resounding ‘No!’. And now we know it is not economically feasible either.”
The leaked analysis was prepared as part of a review into TfL’s finances by accounting firm KPMG, which was mandated by the government as a condition for offering the London transport group an initial coronavirus bailout.
The news follows an ongoing dispute between London mayor Sadiq Khan and the government over a TfL bailout as a £1.7bn short-term package to maintain services during the pandemic is set to run out on Saturday.
The government has set out a variety of conditions for any future bailout package, including cutting free travel for under-18s, extending the congestion charge and raising fares, which have been rejected by Khan.
Transport Secretary Grant Shapps declared last week that the government would use “reserve legislative powers” to take direct control of TfL if London does not submit to the government impositions.
The Prime Minister suggested in July that driverless trains should also be a condition of a future TfL bailout from the government and said London should “not be the prisoners of the unions any more”.
Ministers withheld support for TfL’s initial £1.6bn support package in May until the London mayor agreed to an increase in the congestion charge and an extension of the ultra-low emission zone charge to include the weekend.
The London mayor accused Johnson of lying in parliament during Prime Minister’s Questions last Wednesday after the Prime Minister accused Khan of having “bankrupted London” through mismanagement.
In a LabourList piece on Saturday, Khan wrote: “As mayor, I simply will not accept these Tory proposals, which would hit Londoners with a triple whammy of higher costs… at a time when so many families are already struggling.
“The Prime Minister lied, plain and simple, in the House of Commons this week when he said Transport for London (TfL) only needed emergency national funding now due to actions I had taken prior to the pandemic.
“The truth is that before the coronavirus I was fixing the financial mess at TfL that I’d inherited from Boris Johnson when he was mayor. Over the course of four years, I had reduced TfL’s deficit by 71% and increased cash reserves by 13%.”
Commenting on the newly leaked report, ASLEF London Underground organiser Finn Brennan said: “These documents show that not only is there no business case for this, but it would make TfL’s financial position much worse.
“When Boris Johnson was mayor of London, his failed vanity projects cost Londoners almost £1bn. But this is dwarfed by the vast cost of his ideological obsession with driverless trains.”
The union organiser added: “ASLEF has always pointed out that driverless trains on the London Underground are a politically-driven fantasy. These documents show that we are right.
“And if the government tries to force TfL to waste huge sums on this pointless exercise, it would suck resources away from projects that could have real positive benefits for passenger safety and bankrupt the entire Tube network.”
The London Underground, which made the majority of its revenue from fares before the pandemic, has seen a 60% drop in the number of passengers using the service since coronavirus hit, according to the most recent figures.


labourlist--2020-10-26--Schools will continue to help the vulnerable even if the government won’t

Conservative MP Alec Shelbrooke has said that he didn ’ t vote to extend free school meals during holidays in the coronavirus crisis because he was wary of “ adding additional administrative burden to schools ” .
While it is always nice to hear concerns about teacher workload from an MP – especially one that has consistently voted in favour of real-term cuts to school funding – it is important to expose this sentiment for the offensive nonsense that it is .
The simple fact is that schools have stepped up throughout this crisis to support families in need .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ school staff – both teaching and non-teaching – have gone above and beyond to limit the impact of the crisis on the children that we are fortunate enough to serve .
Throughout lockdown , schools remained open so that vulnerable children were able to continue learning .
Lessons were taught , independent study spaces were staffed and hot meals were provided .
At the height of the crisis , teachers , support staff and dinner ladies put children ’ s interests above their own .
They provided a sense of normality and safety @ @ @ @ @ @ @ When the pandemic turned the world upside down , schools transformed into community centres , offering support to families in need .
Advice offered on applying for Universal Credit for parents thrown into unemployment by the effects of lockdown .
Food parcels ordered , packaged and delivered to families who needed them .
School budgets squeezed to provide laptops and learning materials to children who needed to study .
Free school meal vouchers ordered , despite a website that crashed at the slightest level of demand .
When September brought an insistence for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ second wave , teachers answered the call .
They rolled up their sleeves and got to work , writing contingency plan after contingency plan to create an environment that was a safe place for children to learn and staff to work .
All of this was done in the face of ever-changing – and often contradictory – government advice , which was often released on a Friday night in a meek effort to avoid scrutiny .
Eventually , thanks to the efforts of school leaders and estates staff , children were welcomed back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fully reopen , staff have ensured that the experience for pupils has been as normal as possible .
Year group bubbles , staggered starts , face coverings at social times and countless other safety measures that were put in place to allow schools to reopen have changed things .
But thanks to the kindness and warmth of teachers and teaching assistants , children have been able to take these changes in their stride .
Learning has continued , friendships have blossomed and the simple joys of childhood have restarted .
This has happened @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of schools has placed on staff .
Remote learning must be planned alongside normal classes to ensure that children who are isolating or shielding don ’ t miss out on the education to which they are entitled .
Pupils need to be offered catch-up lessons to ensure that attainment gaps that grew during lockdown don ’ t become a chasm of underachievement in the future .
Many teachers now need to cover lessons for staff who have been forced to self-isolate due to exposure to positive cases .
School leaders are having to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ colds and the symptoms of Covid-19 so that they can decide which pupils can stay in school and who should isolate .
School budgets are being stretched ever thinner to pay for cleaning products and face masks with no expectation of that money being replaced .
This brings us to free school meals and the government ’ s refusal to provide food for the 3.4 million children living in poverty .
Although it was good to see the issue receiving the national prominence it deserved , you shouldn ’ t assume that schools @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in .
Teachers have been raising money for the families hit hardest by the crisis since September .
Staff at my school raised over £5,000 through a virtual marathon – but ours is not an isolated example .
Up and down the country , thousands of food parcels have been bought and sent out by schools to children who are in need .
While MPs have discussed and prevaricated , schools have been getting ready .
The last act of a long half-term by many teachers will have been to deliver a bag @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of hunger for a local family .
So while Alec Shelbrooke , Phillip Davies and countless other Tory MPs will spend half-term scraping the barrel of their conscience for excuses to not support Marcus Rashford , school staff will keep going .
We will continue to do whatever it takes , without judgement or complaint , to support the children who need it most .
Not because we want to , but because the last decade of Tory austerity and negligence means that we must .

Conservative MP Alec Shelbrooke has said that he didn’t vote to extend free school meals during holidays in the coronavirus crisis because he was wary of “adding additional administrative burden to schools”. While it is always nice to hear concerns about teacher workload from an MP – especially one that has consistently voted in favour of real-term cuts to school funding – it is important to expose this sentiment for the offensive nonsense that it is.
The simple fact is that schools have stepped up throughout this crisis to support families in need. Without fuss or complaint, thousands of school staff – both teaching and non-teaching – have gone above and beyond to limit the impact of the crisis on the children that we are fortunate enough to serve.
Throughout lockdown, schools remained open so that vulnerable children were able to continue learning. Lessons were taught, independent study spaces were staffed and hot meals were provided. At the height of the crisis, teachers, support staff and dinner ladies put children’s interests above their own. They provided a sense of normality and safety for pupils who really needed it.
When the pandemic turned the world upside down, schools transformed into community centres, offering support to families in need. Advice offered on applying for Universal Credit for parents thrown into unemployment by the effects of lockdown. Food parcels ordered, packaged and delivered to families who needed them. School budgets squeezed to provide laptops and learning materials to children who needed to study. Free school meal vouchers ordered, despite a website that crashed at the slightest level of demand.
When September brought an insistence for schools to re-open despite fears of a second wave, teachers answered the call. They rolled up their sleeves and got to work, writing contingency plan after contingency plan to create an environment that was a safe place for children to learn and staff to work. All of this was done in the face of ever-changing – and often contradictory – government advice, which was often released on a Friday night in a meek effort to avoid scrutiny. Eventually, thanks to the efforts of school leaders and estates staff, children were welcomed back on time.
Now that schools are fully reopen, staff have ensured that the experience for pupils has been as normal as possible. Year group bubbles, staggered starts, face coverings at social times and countless other safety measures that were put in place to allow schools to reopen have changed things. But thanks to the kindness and warmth of teachers and teaching assistants, children have been able to take these changes in their stride. Learning has continued, friendships have blossomed and the simple joys of childhood have restarted.
This has happened despite the increased demands that the reopening of schools has placed on staff. Remote learning must be planned alongside normal classes to ensure that children who are isolating or shielding don’t miss out on the education to which they are entitled. Pupils need to be offered catch-up lessons to ensure that attainment gaps that grew during lockdown don’t become a chasm of underachievement in the future.
Many teachers now need to cover lessons for staff who have been forced to self-isolate due to exposure to positive cases. School leaders are having to learn the differences between common coughs and colds and the symptoms of Covid-19 so that they can decide which pupils can stay in school and who should isolate. School budgets are being stretched ever thinner to pay for cleaning products and face masks with no expectation of that money being replaced.
This brings us to free school meals and the government’s refusal to provide food for the 3.4 million children living in poverty. Although it was good to see the issue receiving the national prominence it deserved, you shouldn’t assume that schools were waiting for the government to step in. Teachers have been raising money for the families hit hardest by the crisis since September. Staff at my school raised over £5,000 through a virtual marathon – but ours is not an isolated example.
Up and down the country, thousands of food parcels have been bought and sent out by schools to children who are in need. While MPs have discussed and prevaricated, schools have been getting ready. The last act of a long half-term by many teachers will have been to deliver a bag of shopping that will prevent a week of hunger for a local family.
So while Alec Shelbrooke, Phillip Davies and countless other Tory MPs will spend half-term scraping the barrel of their conscience for excuses to not support Marcus Rashford, school staff will keep going. We will continue to do whatever it takes, without judgement or complaint, to support the children who need it most. Not because we want to, but because the last decade of Tory austerity and negligence means that we must.


labourlist--2020-10-26--Labour-led parliamentary group calls for action to combat anti-Sikh hate

All-party parliamentary group for British Sikhs chair Preet Kaur Gill has written to the government after the publication of a report calling for action to address increasing hatred towards the Sikh community .
In a letter sent to Home Secretary Priti Patel and Communities Secretary Robert Jenrick , the Shadow International Development Secretary and first British female Sikh MP highlighted the APPG report recommendations .
The paper calls on the UK government to offer more funding to combat anti-Sikh hatred and for the issue to be treated similarly to Islamophobic and antisemitic discrimination .
Gill said : “ The scale @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a phenomenon that is largely invisible to government and the wider public .
Official Home Office data for the last two years shows the level of reported hate crimes targeting Sikhs has increased by over 70 % .
“ However , the increased reporting is the result of Sikh community organisations raising awareness of the need to report and has been achieved with no government funding or support .
This must now change as hate crimes against the Sikh community are on the increase and should not be hidden away and ignored.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ was commissioned after a meeting of the parliamentary group earlier this month concluded that government plans to tackle hate crime had largely focused on antisemitism and Islamophobia .
The group argued that the phrases ‘ antisemitism ’ and ‘ Islamophobia ’ are well-established in government and media circles , while in comparison hate crimes perpetrated against the Sikh community are often overlooked .
The newly released report calls for the establishment of an official term and definition for hate crimes against the Sikh community through consultation with the government and the wider public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ APPG has also expressed concern that a lack of government funding has undermined efforts to report and track the number of hate crimes being targeted against people in the Sikh community each year .
The government annually provides £14m of funding to the Community Security Trust , which helps fund the reporting of antisemitic hate crimes , while Tell Mama has received over £1m since 2012 to increase the reporting of Islamophobic hate crimes .
The Sikh Federation argued in 2016 that their community had been “ invisible to the government since 9/11 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crimes after one in five Sikhs reported experiencing public discrimination in the 2016 UK Sikh Survey .
The then Communities Secretary Sajid Javid announced in January 2017 that new government funding would be earmarked specifically to support the Sikh community , but nearly four years later no such funding has been delivered .
The APPG has recommended that the government financially supports the work of the Sikh Network and Sikh Council to track hate crimes against their community with start-up grants and annual funding for the next three to five years .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ funding will help the community-run initiatives establish 15 new Sikh hate crime reporting centres at Gurdwaras across the UK and an app and website for reporting hate crimes .
The number of hate crimes committed in England and Wales doubled between 2013 and 2018 , with 103,379 hate crime incidents occurring in 2018-19 , according to Home Office figures released in 2019 .

All-party parliamentary group for British Sikhs chair Preet Kaur Gill has written to the government after the publication of a report calling for action to address increasing hatred towards the Sikh community.
In a letter sent to Home Secretary Priti Patel and Communities Secretary Robert Jenrick, the Shadow International Development Secretary and first British female Sikh MP highlighted the APPG report recommendations.
The paper calls on the UK government to offer more funding to combat anti-Sikh hatred and for the issue to be treated similarly to Islamophobic and antisemitic discrimination.
Gill said: “The scale of hate crimes targeting the Sikh community is a phenomenon that is largely invisible to government and the wider public. Official Home Office data for the last two years shows the level of reported hate crimes targeting Sikhs has increased by over 70%.
“However, the increased reporting is the result of Sikh community organisations raising awareness of the need to report and has been achieved with no government funding or support. This must now change as hate crimes against the Sikh community are on the increase and should not be hidden away and ignored.”
The APPG report into anti-Sikh hatred was commissioned after a meeting of the parliamentary group earlier this month concluded that government plans to tackle hate crime had largely focused on antisemitism and Islamophobia.
The group argued that the phrases ‘antisemitism’ and ‘Islamophobia’ are well-established in government and media circles, while in comparison hate crimes perpetrated against the Sikh community are often overlooked.
The newly released report calls for the establishment of an official term and definition for hate crimes against the Sikh community through consultation with the government and the wider public over the next 60 days.
The APPG has also expressed concern that a lack of government funding has undermined efforts to report and track the number of hate crimes being targeted against people in the Sikh community each year.
The government annually provides £14m of funding to the Community Security Trust, which helps fund the reporting of antisemitic hate crimes, while Tell Mama has received over £1m since 2012 to increase the reporting of Islamophobic hate crimes.
The Sikh Federation argued in 2016 that their community had been “invisible to the government since 9/11” despite a rising tide of hate crimes after one in five Sikhs reported experiencing public discrimination in the 2016 UK Sikh Survey.
The then Communities Secretary Sajid Javid announced in January 2017 that new government funding would be earmarked specifically to support the Sikh community, but nearly four years later no such funding has been delivered.
The APPG has recommended that the government financially supports the work of the Sikh Network and Sikh Council to track hate crimes against their community with start-up grants and annual funding for the next three to five years.
The parliamentary group has said it hopes government funding will help the community-run initiatives establish 15 new Sikh hate crime reporting centres at Gurdwaras across the UK and an app and website for reporting hate crimes.
The number of hate crimes committed in England and Wales doubled between 2013 and 2018, with 103,379 hate crime incidents occurring in 2018-19, according to Home Office figures released in 2019.


labourlist--2020-10-27--WATCH: In conversation with… Sarah Jones MP

Join us at 6pm on Wednesday , October 28th , for our latest “ In conversation with… ” online event @ @ @ @ @ and Labour ’ s shadow minister for policing and fire Sarah Jones .
If readers @ @ @ @ @ the policy brief held by Jones , which is the focus of the event , @ @ @ @ @ them to us in advance .
You will also be able to offer suggestions during @ @ @ @ @ page will refresh automatically to show the livestream below when the event starts at 6pm @ @ @ @ @ able to watch it directly on YouTube by clicking here .

Join us at 6pm on Wednesday, October 28th, for our latest “In conversation with…” online event featuring LabourList editor Sienna Rodgers and Labour’s shadow minister for policing and fire Sarah Jones.
If readers have suggestions for questions about the policy brief held by Jones, which is the focus of the event, please feel free to email them to us in advance. You will also be able to offer suggestions during the live broadcast.
This page will refresh automatically to show the livestream below when the event starts at 6pm. You will also be able to watch it directly on YouTube by clicking here.


labourlist--2020-10-27--How Labour policy will be shaped by Doreen Lawrence’s work on racism

The review that Keir Starmer commissioned from Baroness Doreen Lawrence back in April has been released today .
Exploring the disproportionate impact of the coronavirus crisis on Black , Asian and minority ethnic communities , the Labour peer has used quantitative data , written submissions and conversations over Zoom to conclude that the virus has both “ exposed ” structural racism in the UK and itself “ fuelled ” racism .
This is evident in the way that police forces are up to seven times more likely to fine BAME people than white people .
And Lawrence concludes that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to protect people ahead of the second wave ” .
The Lawrence Review sets out 20 recommendations ( as she explains in the video posted by Starmer this morning , “ you don ’ t need to have 100 recommendations , you need to have some really strong ones ” ) .
These proposals include suspending ‘ no recourse to public funds ’ – the immigration condition that stops many migrants from accessing government support – during the Covid crisis .
This is something that Labour has committed to before in the pandemic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ LabourList piece .
But a new policy is that Labour supports initiating a review of ‘ NRPF ’ , specifically its impact on public health and health inequalities .
The other key aim with this report is that Labour does not want it to sit on a shelf and gather dust .
The recommendations are both immediate , with measures that could be taken by the government within weeks such as ensuring that employer risk assessments are published , and more long-term , including the end of the ‘ hostile environment ’ and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the second category goes the big new commitment to be launched alongside the review : Starmer says Labour in government will introduce a ‘ Race Equality Act ’ .
The contents of this report will be built upon over the coming years by Lawrence and the party more broadly to determine what goes into the landmark piece of legislation .
I ’ m also told that the Labour peer will be closely involved in determining how the work that went into this review and the developments that follow translate into concrete policy for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
As the party ’ s race relations adviser , the leadership plans for Doreen Lawrence ’ s contributions to be central to the policy platform of Starmer ’ s Labour – and a key figure shaping priorities in government if he succeeds in getting the keys to No 10 .
Sign up to LabourList ’ s morning email for everything Labour , every weekday morning .

The review that Keir Starmer commissioned from Baroness Doreen Lawrence back in April has been released today. Exploring the disproportionate impact of the coronavirus crisis on Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities, the Labour peer has used quantitative data, written submissions and conversations over Zoom to conclude that the virus has both “exposed” structural racism in the UK and itself “fuelled” racism. This is evident in the way that police forces are up to seven times more likely to fine BAME people than white people. And Lawrence concludes that the government simply has “not done enough to protect people ahead of the second wave”.
The Lawrence Review sets out 20 recommendations (as she explains in the video posted by Starmer this morning, “you don’t need to have 100 recommendations, you need to have some really strong ones”). These proposals include suspending ‘no recourse to public funds’ – the immigration condition that stops many migrants from accessing government support – during the Covid crisis. This is something that Labour has committed to before in the pandemic, as Jonathan Reynolds showed in his LabourList piece. But a new policy is that Labour supports initiating a review of ‘NRPF’, specifically its impact on public health and health inequalities.
The other key aim with this report is that Labour does not want it to sit on a shelf and gather dust. The recommendations are both immediate, with measures that could be taken by the government within weeks such as ensuring that employer risk assessments are published, and more long-term, including the end of the ‘hostile environment’ and implementing a race equality strategy. In the second category goes the big new commitment to be launched alongside the review: Starmer says Labour in government will introduce a ‘Race Equality Act’.
The contents of this report will be built upon over the coming years by Lawrence and the party more broadly to determine what goes into the landmark piece of legislation. I’m also told that the Labour peer will be closely involved in determining how the work that went into this review and the developments that follow translate into concrete policy for Labour’s next general election manifesto. As the party’s race relations adviser, the leadership plans for Doreen Lawrence’s contributions to be central to the policy platform of Starmer’s Labour – and a key figure shaping priorities in government if he succeeds in getting the keys to No 10. Sign up to LabourList’s morning email for everything Labour, every weekday morning.


labourlist--2020-10-27--Exclusive: Interview with Labour NEC Welsh rep candidate Carwyn Jones

You might be wondering why someone who has served as a Senedd member for 21 years and the Welsh First Minister for nine years would want to throw his hat in the ring to fight for a seat on Labour ’ s national executive committee .
Does he not feel like he needs a bit of a rest ?
Apparently not .
“ I want to put my shoulder to the wheel and make sure that we get a Labour government elected across the UK again , ” Carwyn Jones tells me .
“ And that ’ s why I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sure that we have an NEC that is a critical friend of the leadership , but is also committing to seeing a Labour government elected again.
” Carwyn identifies experience as his key offer to members – in government , in winning elections and in having already been a member of the NEC as the Welsh Labour leader .
“ I want to bring that experience to the table , ” he explains .
“ To help to shape the path for the election of a Labour government at the next UK general @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he says , is about experience of “ what it takes to win a battle ” .
The current rep is appointed by leader Mark Drakeford , and is therefore directly accountable only to him .
( The Scottish NEC seat is held directly by Richard Leonard . )
But the post is now changing .
This election will give the successful candidate a mandate from the membership .
Carwyn stresses the importance of the Welsh rep to be representative of members .
He tells me the position “ can ’ t just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But throughout our chat , he is keen to emphasise striking a balance between criticising the leader and working to get Keir Starmer into Downing Street .
“ We all have to remember that every member of the NEC is part of the project of getting a Labour government elected once again.
” He explains that this requires a commitment from members of the NEC to this objective , while adding that they must be prepared to be critical of Starmer to make Labour “ more effective as a party ” .
He @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The worst thing that we can do is get involved in public arguments with each other .
We never win elections in those circumstances.
” But Carwyn adds that members don ’ t have to agree all the time and that debate within the party is important .
His remarks around party unity bring to mind Starmer ’ s leadership campaign .
Carwyn tells me he is associated with no particular section of the party and stresses that he always saw himself as a “ leader of one party , as a member @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ I will do whatever I feel is right for the party based on principles and on policy , and not on being wedded to any particular group or faction.
” On the other challenges for Labour on its path to Downing Street , Carwyn highlights constitutional issues .
He emphasises that to win overall in 2024 , the party will need to secure a substantial number of seats in Scotland .
And for him , this is indicative of the need for Labour to make a “ constitutional offer not just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the UK ” .
He describes a partnership of nations where some issues – defence , borders and immigration , fiscal and monetary union – are handled at a UK level and others are best devolved .
The choice need not be between independence and devolution , he explains , adding : “ There is another option we can offer as a party and it ’ s going to be our duty to do so.
” I ask him about Welsh independence .
Has Covid boosted its support ?
“ There ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he admits .
“ But we still know that independence has the support of around a third of the population , although it is much higher than it ever was.
” His support for remaining in the union is steadfast , as he describes the UK as a “ great socialist objective ” in terms of its redistributive power – “ ensuring the money goes where it ’ s needed ” .
He explains : “ There are some elements of the UK that are fundamental to our beliefs as socialists.
” What @ @ @ @ @ @ @ independence for Wales now commands the support of 39 % of Welsh Labour voters .
The party must be careful here and make sure not to lose those voters as it did in Scotland .
The difficulty , as he highlights , is offering something that goes beyond what we can offer at the moment – but that does not go as far as independence .
Carwyn supported Starmer in the leadership election earlier this year , and tells me the new UK Labour leader is doing “ exceptionally well given the circumstances @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had the chance to “ chart his own course ” since taking the top job , as Covid has dominated the political environment .
“ The fact that we are now at least level-pegging in the polls at a time of national crisis shows that a huge amount of work has been done in a short space of time , ” Carwyn says .
“ It ’ s clear now that the public have more trust in Keir than they do in Boris Johnson.
” And he compares the Prime Minister ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the devolved nations , remarking that if “ England had followed Scotland and Wales , then Johnson ’ s popularity would be sky high – but it isn ’ t ” .
Carwyn tells me Drakeford has “ grown into ” his role during Covid and he has nothing but praise for the Welsh Labour leader .
Drakeford is trusted as someone who is “ calm , collective and has full control over the facts , which Boris Johnson doesn ’ t ” .
People do not want a “ showman ” , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ They don ’ t want somebody who comes out with strange phrases – they want somebody whose words they can trust.
” He is fully behind the ‘ firebreak ’ lockdown that came into effect last Friday , and so are most of his constituents .
He says it again comes down to a matter of trust for his residents .
“ They trust the Welsh Labour government to take the right decisions… they don ’ t trust the Tories in Whitehall.
” I ask him about his NEC rival , Mick @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
He tells me that the two are mates , and reminds me that his Senedd colleague had been the treasurer of his leadership campaign in 2009 .
“ We ’ re not personally hostile to each other , ” he says .
I point out that Mick has more nominations than him , but the former First Minister appears unfazed .
He highlights that nomination decisions are often taken by a “ relatively small number of people ” and refers me back to his leadership campaign : “ I had fewer nominations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and of course when it came to the actual election I was fortunate to win fairly comfortably.
” Carwyn won in 2009 securing 52 % of the vote against Edwina Hart ’ s 29.2 % and Huw Lewis ’ 18.8 % .
Nominations are nice to have , he explains .
But the contest is in the hands of the members , and this candidate fancies his chances .

You might be wondering why someone who has served as a Senedd member for 21 years and the Welsh First Minister for nine years would want to throw his hat in the ring to fight for a seat on Labour’s national executive committee. Does he not feel like he needs a bit of a rest? Apparently not. “I want to put my shoulder to the wheel and make sure that we get a Labour government elected across the UK again,” Carwyn Jones tells me. “And that’s why I want to do it: to make sure that we have an NEC that is a critical friend of the leadership, but is also committing to seeing a Labour government elected again.”
Carwyn identifies experience as his key offer to members – in government, in winning elections and in having already been a member of the NEC as the Welsh Labour leader. “I want to bring that experience to the table,” he explains. “To help to shape the path for the election of a Labour government at the next UK general election.” Being an NEC member, he says, is about experience of “what it takes to win a battle”. The current rep is appointed by leader Mark Drakeford, and is therefore directly accountable only to him. (The Scottish NEC seat is held directly by Richard Leonard.) But the post is now changing. This election will give the successful candidate a mandate from the membership.
Carwyn stresses the importance of the Welsh rep to be representative of members. He tells me the position “can’t just be unquestioning of the leadership”. But throughout our chat, he is keen to emphasise striking a balance between criticising the leader and working to get Keir Starmer into Downing Street. “We all have to remember that every member of the NEC is part of the project of getting a Labour government elected once again.” He explains that this requires a commitment from members of the NEC to this objective, while adding that they must be prepared to be critical of Starmer to make Labour “more effective as a party”.
He argues the need for discipline: “The worst thing that we can do is get involved in public arguments with each other. We never win elections in those circumstances.” But Carwyn adds that members don’t have to agree all the time and that debate within the party is important. His remarks around party unity bring to mind Starmer’s leadership campaign. Carwyn tells me he is associated with no particular section of the party and stresses that he always saw himself as a “leader of one party, as a member of one party”. He declares: “I will do whatever I feel is right for the party based on principles and on policy, and not on being wedded to any particular group or faction.”
On the other challenges for Labour on its path to Downing Street, Carwyn highlights constitutional issues. He emphasises that to win overall in 2024, the party will need to secure a substantial number of seats in Scotland. And for him, this is indicative of the need for Labour to make a “constitutional offer not just to Scotland, but across the whole of the UK”. He describes a partnership of nations where some issues – defence, borders and immigration, fiscal and monetary union – are handled at a UK level and others are best devolved. The choice need not be between independence and devolution, he explains, adding: “There is another option we can offer as a party and it’s going to be our duty to do so.”
I ask him about Welsh independence. Has Covid boosted its support? “There’s an element of that,” he admits. “But we still know that independence has the support of around a third of the population, although it is much higher than it ever was.” His support for remaining in the union is steadfast, as he describes the UK as a “great socialist objective” in terms of its redistributive power – “ensuring the money goes where it’s needed”. He explains: “There are some elements of the UK that are fundamental to our beliefs as socialists.” What worries the former First Minister is that independence for Wales now commands the support of 39% of Welsh Labour voters. The party must be careful here and make sure not to lose those voters as it did in Scotland. The difficulty, as he highlights, is offering something that goes beyond what we can offer at the moment – but that does not go as far as independence.
Carwyn supported Starmer in the leadership election earlier this year, and tells me the new UK Labour leader is doing “exceptionally well given the circumstances”. He feels Starmer has not had the chance to “chart his own course” since taking the top job, as Covid has dominated the political environment. “The fact that we are now at least level-pegging in the polls at a time of national crisis shows that a huge amount of work has been done in a short space of time,” Carwyn says. “It’s clear now that the public have more trust in Keir than they do in Boris Johnson.” And he compares the Prime Minister’s popularity against that of the leaders in the devolved nations, remarking that if “England had followed Scotland and Wales, then Johnson’s popularity would be sky high – but it isn’t”.
Carwyn tells me Drakeford has “grown into” his role during Covid and he has nothing but praise for the Welsh Labour leader. Drakeford is trusted as someone who is “calm, collective and has full control over the facts, which Boris Johnson doesn’t”. People do not want a “showman”, the former Welsh Labour leader explains. “They don’t want somebody who comes out with strange phrases – they want somebody whose words they can trust.” He is fully behind the ‘firebreak’ lockdown that came into effect last Friday, and so are most of his constituents. He says it again comes down to a matter of trust for his residents. “They trust the Welsh Labour government to take the right decisions… they don’t trust the Tories in Whitehall.”
I ask him about his NEC rival, Mick Antoniw, who I interviewed last month. He tells me that the two are mates, and reminds me that his Senedd colleague had been the treasurer of his leadership campaign in 2009. “We’re not personally hostile to each other,” he says. I point out that Mick has more nominations than him, but the former First Minister appears unfazed. He highlights that nomination decisions are often taken by a “relatively small number of people” and refers me back to his leadership campaign: “I had fewer nominations when I went through this in 2009 and of course when it came to the actual election I was fortunate to win fairly comfortably.” Carwyn won in 2009 securing 52% of the vote against Edwina Hart’s 29.2% and Huw Lewis’ 18.8%. Nominations are nice to have, he explains. But the contest is in the hands of the members, and this candidate fancies his chances.


labourlist--2020-10-27--TUC calls on government to address “disproportionate” BAME unemployment

The TUC has declared that “ ministers must get to grips with how to stop disproportionate BAME unemployment ” after it was revealed that 22 % of BAME workers furloughed during lockdown have since lost their jobs .
A study from independent think tank the Resolution Foundation released today , titled ‘ Jobs , Jobs , Jobs ’ , has highlighted that 19 % of furloughed young people have become unemployed in recent months .
The new report , based on an online survey of 6,061 adults , expresses fears about the effects of the national furlough scheme being wound @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could currently be at 7 % .
Commenting on the new report , TUC general secretary Frances O ’ Grady said : “ Losing your job is terrible at any time , but it ’ s especially hard now when few employers are recruiting new workers .
“ Stopping the devastation of mass unemployment must be the government ’ s top priority .
The ‘ kickstart ’ scheme must get young unemployed workers into good jobs on the real living wage .
“ Ministers must get to grips with how to stop disproportionate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the wages guarantee in the job support scheme to 80 % , to protect jobs in the tough winter ahead .
“ The country should invest now to create good new jobs in green tech , in social care and in the public services we all rely on .
Stopping mass unemployment and everyone having a decent job with fair pay is how we get out of this recession.
” The Resolution Foundation has found that around half of surveyed workers who have been furloughed during the crisis have returned to work full-time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ partially furloughed and 9 % have lost their jobs .
The report suggests that the post-furlough fall into unemployment is most common among 18- to 24-year-olds and BAME workers , as well as those previously on insecure contracts , 22 % of whom have been made unemployed .
It indicates that the UK unemployment rate could be 7 % , well above the latest official figure of 4.5 % for the three months to August , and estimated that youth unemployment is as high as 20 % – the highest levels in four @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who have lost their jobs after March found work by September , the report says , with this figure falling to 33 % among young people and 36 % for those in hard-hit sectors such as hospitality .
The report also indicates that 28 % of staff still in work in September are worried about further redundancies , have been told redundancies will take place , or have been told they will be made redundant themselves .
London has been particularly badly affected by rising unemployment according to the new study , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unemployed , on furlough or on fewer hours living in the capital .
The Resolution Foundation ’ s Kathleen Henehan said : “ The first eight months of the Covid crisis have been marked by an almighty economic shock and unprecedented support that has cushioned the impact in terms of people ’ s livelihoods .
“ But the true nature of Britain ’ s jobs crisis is starting to reveal itself .
Around one-in-five young people , and over one-in-five BAME workers , have fallen straight from furloughing into unemployment .
“ Worryingly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have lost their jobs during the pandemic have been able to find work since .
This suggests that even if the public health crisis recedes in a few months ’ time , Britain ’ s jobs crisis will be with us for far longer.
” The Labour Party has repeatedly expressed fears about the sharp rise in unemployment that will likely follow the winding down of the furlough scheme by the Chancellor at the end of this month .
Its replacement , the job support scheme , is far less generous and in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ just 230,000 jobs and leave just under two million people in otherwise viable professions unemployed .
The Chancellor has since announced changes to the scheme and put forward a local furlough for areas under restrictions , but Labour has argued that the plan is still flawed , with one party source saying it had “ more holes in it than Swiss cheese ” .
Labour argued last month that the government had “ failed to act to protect Black , Asian and minority ethnic communities ” after a report showed BAME people were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lost their job as a result of Covid .

The TUC has declared that “ministers must get to grips with how to stop disproportionate BAME unemployment” after it was revealed that 22% of BAME workers furloughed during lockdown have since lost their jobs.
A study from independent think tank the Resolution Foundation released today, titled ‘Jobs, Jobs, Jobs’, has highlighted that 19% of furloughed young people have become unemployed in recent months.
The new report, based on an online survey of 6,061 adults, expresses fears about the effects of the national furlough scheme being wound down this month and suggests UK unemployment could currently be at 7%.
Commenting on the new report, TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady said: “Losing your job is terrible at any time, but it’s especially hard now when few employers are recruiting new workers.
“Stopping the devastation of mass unemployment must be the government’s top priority. The ‘kickstart’ scheme must get young unemployed workers into good jobs on the real living wage.
“Ministers must get to grips with how to stop disproportionate BAME unemployment. And they should up the wages guarantee in the job support scheme to 80%, to protect jobs in the tough winter ahead.
“The country should invest now to create good new jobs in green tech, in social care and in the public services we all rely on. Stopping mass unemployment and everyone having a decent job with fair pay is how we get out of this recession.”
The Resolution Foundation has found that around half of surveyed workers who have been furloughed during the crisis have returned to work full-time, a third are still fully or partially furloughed and 9% have lost their jobs.
The report suggests that the post-furlough fall into unemployment is most common among 18- to 24-year-olds and BAME workers, as well as those previously on insecure contracts, 22% of whom have been made unemployed.
It indicates that the UK unemployment rate could be 7%, well above the latest official figure of 4.5% for the three months to August, and estimated that youth unemployment is as high as 20% – the highest levels in four decades.
Just 43% of those who have lost their jobs after March found work by September, the report says, with this figure falling to 33% among young people and 36% for those in hard-hit sectors such as hospitality.
The report also indicates that 28% of staff still in work in September are worried about further redundancies, have been told redundancies will take place, or have been told they will be made redundant themselves.
London has been particularly badly affected by rising unemployment according to the new study, with 28% of surveyed workers who were unemployed, on furlough or on fewer hours living in the capital.
The Resolution Foundation’s Kathleen Henehan said: “The first eight months of the Covid crisis have been marked by an almighty economic shock and unprecedented support that has cushioned the impact in terms of people’s livelihoods.
“But the true nature of Britain’s jobs crisis is starting to reveal itself. Around one-in-five young people, and over one-in-five BAME workers, have fallen straight from furloughing into unemployment.
“Worryingly, fewer than half of those who have lost their jobs during the pandemic have been able to find work since. This suggests that even if the public health crisis recedes in a few months’ time, Britain’s jobs crisis will be with us for far longer.”
The Labour Party has repeatedly expressed fears about the sharp rise in unemployment that will likely follow the winding down of the furlough scheme by the Chancellor at the end of this month.
Its replacement, the job support scheme, is far less generous and in its initial form was predicted to save just 230,000 jobs and leave just under two million people in otherwise viable professions unemployed.
The Chancellor has since announced changes to the scheme and put forward a local furlough for areas under restrictions, but Labour has argued that the plan is still flawed, with one party source saying it had “more holes in it than Swiss cheese”.
Labour argued last month that the government had “failed to act to protect Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities” after a report showed BAME people were almost three times as likely to have lost their job as a result of Covid.


labourlist--2020-10-27--Covid rules will not receive “unquestioning support” from Scottish Labour

Richard Leonard has declared that the new Scottish lockdown framework will not receive “ unquestioning support ” from Labour , and has criticised the SNP government for failing to secure “ public consent ” .
During a Holyrood debate on Scotland ’ s proposed new coronavirus framework today , the Scottish Labour leader expressed fears about people becoming the “ victims of a struggle between two governments ” .
Leonard said : “ This new framework , which comes into force in six days time , like the lockdown of hospitality and like last week ’ s extension to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unquestioning support out in the country , and so it does not win unquestioning support from Labour .
“ People understand that the choices are stark .
But in a democracy , they can only be made with the establishment of trust and so the winning of public consent by persuasion – and not coercion .
“ The rising public hesitancy , which the government now faces , is in part born out of a fatigue , a tiredness in the desperate search for the light at the end of this tunnel .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of growing restlessness and discontent that yet more is being asked without the compelling and persuasive evidence needed to back it up.
” The Scottish Labour leader added : “ Now , many working people are facing the grim prospect of unemployment and joblessness in the lead up to Christmas , and that is why they want a government and a parliament which is on their side .
“ So it is essential that they do not become the victims of a struggle between two governments .
We want the two governments to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ interests of public health of people and of these jobs .
“ We agree that the Tory government should increase and extend support for businesses and workers in Scotland , but the SNP government needs to be bolder , too .
This framework feels like it ’ s going to be with us for some time .
“ That is why it ’ s so important that we get it right .
That is why we need people to be able to support it – not out fear of the repercussions , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it will help us all.
” Leonard ’ s intervention reiterates criticisms of the proposed new lockdown framework for Scotland , with the Scottish Labour leader saying last week that there was a “ real danger of confusion among the public ” over the new rules .
The new tiered system will see regions placed under one of five tiers , with classifications being reviewed on a weekly basis .
It builds on restrictions that were placed on the hospitality sector several weeks before .
The Scottish Labour leader took a tough line @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Holyrood administration needed to stop treating the Scottish hospitality sector like “ Sodom and Gomorrah ” .
Leonard ’ s comments contrast with the approach taken by UK opposition leader Keir Starmer , who has called for a ‘ circuit breaker ’ lockdown but has not whipped Labour MPs to vote against other measures .

Richard Leonard has declared that the new Scottish lockdown framework will not receive “unquestioning support” from Labour, and has criticised the SNP government for failing to secure “public consent”.
During a Holyrood debate on Scotland’s proposed new coronavirus framework today, the Scottish Labour leader expressed fears about people becoming the “victims of a struggle between two governments”.
Leonard said: “This new framework, which comes into force in six days time, like the lockdown of hospitality and like last week’s extension to the lockdown of hospitality, has not won unquestioning support out in the country, and so it does not win unquestioning support from Labour.
“People understand that the choices are stark. But in a democracy, they can only be made with the establishment of trust and so the winning of public consent by persuasion – and not coercion.
“The rising public hesitancy, which the government now faces, is in part born out of a fatigue, a tiredness in the desperate search for the light at the end of this tunnel.
“But it is also born out of growing restlessness and discontent that yet more is being asked without the compelling and persuasive evidence needed to back it up.”
The Scottish Labour leader added: “Now, many working people are facing the grim prospect of unemployment and joblessness in the lead up to Christmas, and that is why they want a government and a parliament which is on their side.
“So it is essential that they do not become the victims of a struggle between two governments. We want the two governments to cooperate, not compete, in the interests of public health of people and of these jobs.
“We agree that the Tory government should increase and extend support for businesses and workers in Scotland, but the SNP government needs to be bolder, too. This framework feels like it’s going to be with us for some time.
“That is why it’s so important that we get it right. That is why we need people to be able to support it – not out fear of the repercussions, but out of a belief that sticking to it will help us all.”
.@LabourRichard says the new lockdown framework does not have Labour's "unquestioning support" and warns about public restlessness without "persuasive evidence" Live updates: https://t.co/BILzh6DuKk pic.twitter.com/HcJk2azBMN — BBC Scotland News (@BBCScotlandNews) October 27, 2020
Leonard’s intervention reiterates criticisms of the proposed new lockdown framework for Scotland, with the Scottish Labour leader saying last week that there was a “real danger of confusion among the public” over the new rules.
The new tiered system will see regions placed under one of five tiers, with classifications being reviewed on a weekly basis. It builds on restrictions that were placed on the hospitality sector several weeks before.
The Scottish Labour leader took a tough line on the initial restrictions and declared that the Holyrood administration needed to stop treating the Scottish hospitality sector like “Sodom and Gomorrah”.
Leonard’s comments contrast with the approach taken by UK opposition leader Keir Starmer, who has called for a ‘circuit breaker’ lockdown but has not whipped Labour MPs to vote against other measures.


labourlist--2020-10-27--It’s time to bust the ‘Brexit betrayal’ myth of the Labour left

In the aftermath of Labour ’ s 2019 general election defeat , there were two explanations ready to go .
The first , favoured by the party ’ s right-wing , said we were ‘ too left ’ .
The second , endorsed by sections of its left , was that we were ‘ too Remain ’ .
I argued at the time that these were closer to propaganda than analysis .
They were better placed to reassure party members and lay the ground for the coming leadership contest than they were to explain the defeat .
Not much has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Labour Together and others into the defeat , these remain the dominant accounts .
The Brexit argument has evolved further into a narrative of betrayal .
Remain-supporting left-wingers , the story goes , collaborated with Corbynsceptics to throw the election and remove the left from the party ’ s leadership .
The problem is not just that it ’ s untrue , but that the myth serves as a major obstacle on the left ’ s route to power .
Last December , Labour suffered its worst defeat since 1935 , in an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Any analysis of the outcome must consider the role of the referendum .
But the ‘ betrayal myth ’ goes further .
It does not just identify Brexit as a key factor – it suggests that saboteurs pushed the party from a Brexit position that would have won the election to one that was bound to lose .
It does not add up .
What are the facts ?
We know that between 2017 and 2019 Labour lost more Remain voters than Leave voters , but while Remainers were concentrated in strong Labour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ favour of Leave .
The result was that all but two of the English seats lost between the two elections had voted Leave .
Why did we lose these Leave voters ?
The question suggests an obvious answer : they wanted to leave .
But this can not explain the long-term trends .
Over the past decade , Labour ’ s support in England has become increasingly concentrated in Remain areas .
This process was underway well before the referendum even took place .
In 2010 , there were already on average 800 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ than Leave seats and this figure has risen steadily – 3,500 more in 2015 , 5,200 more in 2017 , 6,400 more in 2019 .
If the trend began before the referendum was even called , then it can not , by definition , have been caused by the referendum itself .
The truth is that Remainers and Leavers differ in many respects , not just their view on the European Union .
On most issues , Remainers are more closely aligned to Labour ’ s values and policies .
They are more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to accept as British the children of immigrants and to support the movement for women ’ s rights .
Leave voters are more likely to hold reactionary views on asylum seekers , believe torture is acceptable in some circumstances and think benefit payments are too high .
On a whole range of issues totally unrelated to Brexit , Leave voters were bound to find themselves disagreeing with Jeremy Corbyn .
This is more about deindustrialisation , homeownership and age than it is about Europe .
Was Labour ’ s Brexit position a betrayal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ position would not have won the 2019 election .
A pledge to leave the EU would have undoubtedly held onto some Leave voters , but it is unclear how many .
It would have probably slowed down the decade-long ‘ Remainification ’ of Labour ’ s vote , but it would have neither halted nor reversed it .
We also don ’ t know how many Remain voters the party would have lost in such a scenario , and whether this would have cost Labour seats elsewhere .
Leaked internal polling suggests that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ referendum it would have 124 seats – more than double the 60 we lost in reality .
Of course , we will never be able to know for certain .
Regardless of whether a different Brexit position would have cost us seats or allowed us to hold onto a few more , it looks highly unlikely that any position would have led to an election victory .
We would have still lost , just in a different way .
My concern with the betrayal narrative is not just its poor analysis , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the left .
It undermines the Labour left ’ s own arguments on electioneering and party democracy .
The left has always rejected triangulating to appease swing voters .
When the party shifted to the right under Tony Blair , it did so to reach ‘ middle England ’ .
The party ’ s left argued , correctly , that chasing swing voters may be effective in the short term but if the party ignores the needs of its core supporters , they will eventually become alienated and defect to other parties , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or even disengage entirely .
In 2015 , a key promise of Corbynism was to take the party back to its roots and deliver for its base .
The Brexit betrayal myth , by contrast , suggests that the party ’ s position on the defining issue of the day should cater to the minority of its voters who wanted to leave the EU just because they live in marginal constituencies .
Once you accept that , you cede ground on every other issue .
The betrayal myth also undermines party democracy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a member-led policy process .
It is hard to overstate how much Labour members wanted to Remain .
As Corbyn recently recalled : “ The party could have just reiterated the 2017 policy… But the strength of support in the party was absolutely huge – as was reflected in the pressures of the 2018 conference.
” Polling of party members at the time confirms his analysis .
At the 2018 Labour conference , over 100 constituency parties submitted motions calling for a second referendum , more than for any previous topic in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ passed overwhelmingly .
Even after the election defeat , 64 % of party members still felt that the party ’ s position on Brexit was either correct or insufficiently pro-Remain .
It is simply not possible to argue for Labour to have adopted a pro-Leave position without fatally undermining the case for party democracy .
But that is precisely what the betrayal myth does .
Where next for the left ?
It does not always feel like it , but the Labour left is in a significantly stronger position than it was six @ @ @ @ @ @ @ project , we are much bigger .
There are more of us , and we have new organisations and institutions through which we can continue to build the movement .
Without Corbynism , we would not have Tribune , Momentum or The World Transformed .
But , ultimately , we are still not big enough .
We were defeated in December because the public did not believe we could deliver on our promises .
In hindsight , this is not that surprising .
We had fewer than five years to persuade the population @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with very little to start from .
Although we were not successful , we have laid the groundwork .
We have a lot more to build from now than we did in 2015 .
The betrayal myth will hold us back .
It teaches us to triangulate , even though this can never lead to transformative change .
It tells members to be silent when we need their voice to shape Labour ’ s future .
The majority of Labour ’ s members and voters wanted to stop Brexit .
They tried to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s internal democracy .
They used the left ’ s preferred tactics to fight for a position held by the majority of the left .
This is no betrayal of Corbynism – it is exactly what Corbynism promised .

In the aftermath of Labour’s 2019 general election defeat, there were two explanations ready to go. The first, favoured by the party’s right-wing, said we were ‘too left’. The second, endorsed by sections of its left, was that we were ‘too Remain’. I argued at the time that these were closer to propaganda than analysis. They were better placed to reassure party members and lay the ground for the coming leadership contest than they were to explain the defeat.
Not much has changed since. Despite excellent analysis from Labour Together and others into the defeat, these remain the dominant accounts. The Brexit argument has evolved further into a narrative of betrayal. Remain-supporting left-wingers, the story goes, collaborated with Corbynsceptics to throw the election and remove the left from the party’s leadership. The problem is not just that it’s untrue, but that the myth serves as a major obstacle on the left’s route to power.
Does Brexit explain Labour’s 2019 defeat?
Last December, Labour suffered its worst defeat since 1935, in an election that was defined by Brexit. Any analysis of the outcome must consider the role of the referendum. But the ‘betrayal myth’ goes further. It does not just identify Brexit as a key factor – it suggests that saboteurs pushed the party from a Brexit position that would have won the election to one that was bound to lose. It does not add up.
What are the facts? We know that between 2017 and 2019 Labour lost more Remain voters than Leave voters, but while Remainers were concentrated in strong Labour constituencies, marginal seats were disproportionately in favour of Leave. The result was that all but two of the English seats lost between the two elections had voted Leave.
Why did we lose these Leave voters? The question suggests an obvious answer: they wanted to leave. But this cannot explain the long-term trends. Over the past decade, Labour’s support in England has become increasingly concentrated in Remain areas. This process was underway well before the referendum even took place. In 2010, there were already on average 800 more Labour voters in English Remain constituencies than Leave seats and this figure has risen steadily – 3,500 more in 2015, 5,200 more in 2017, 6,400 more in 2019. If the trend began before the referendum was even called, then it cannot, by definition, have been caused by the referendum itself.
The truth is that Remainers and Leavers differ in many respects, not just their view on the European Union. On most issues, Remainers are more closely aligned to Labour’s values and policies. They are more likely to oppose US foreign policy, to accept as British the children of immigrants and to support the movement for women’s rights. Leave voters are more likely to hold reactionary views on asylum seekers, believe torture is acceptable in some circumstances and think benefit payments are too high. On a whole range of issues totally unrelated to Brexit, Leave voters were bound to find themselves disagreeing with Jeremy Corbyn. This is more about deindustrialisation, homeownership and age than it is about Europe.
Was Labour’s Brexit position a betrayal of the left?
A different Brexit position would not have won the 2019 election. A pledge to leave the EU would have undoubtedly held onto some Leave voters, but it is unclear how many. It would have probably slowed down the decade-long ‘Remainification’ of Labour’s vote, but it would have neither halted nor reversed it. We also don’t know how many Remain voters the party would have lost in such a scenario, and whether this would have cost Labour seats elsewhere. Leaked internal polling suggests that had the party not promised a second referendum it would have 124 seats – more than double the 60 we lost in reality. Of course, we will never be able to know for certain.
Regardless of whether a different Brexit position would have cost us seats or allowed us to hold onto a few more, it looks highly unlikely that any position would have led to an election victory. We would have still lost, just in a different way. My concern with the betrayal narrative is not just its poor analysis, but that I think it is self-defeating for the left. It undermines the Labour left’s own arguments on electioneering and party democracy.
The left has always rejected triangulating to appease swing voters. When the party shifted to the right under Tony Blair, it did so to reach ‘middle England’. The party’s left argued, correctly, that chasing swing voters may be effective in the short term but if the party ignores the needs of its core supporters, they will eventually become alienated and defect to other parties, such as the SNP or UKIP, or even disengage entirely. In 2015, a key promise of Corbynism was to take the party back to its roots and deliver for its base. The Brexit betrayal myth, by contrast, suggests that the party’s position on the defining issue of the day should cater to the minority of its voters who wanted to leave the EU just because they live in marginal constituencies. Once you accept that, you cede ground on every other issue.
The betrayal myth also undermines party democracy. The Labour left has always argued for a member-led policy process. It is hard to overstate how much Labour members wanted to Remain. As Corbyn recently recalled: “The party could have just reiterated the 2017 policy… But the strength of support in the party was absolutely huge – as was reflected in the pressures of the 2018 conference.” Polling of party members at the time confirms his analysis.
At the 2018 Labour conference, over 100 constituency parties submitted motions calling for a second referendum, more than for any previous topic in the party’s history. The motion passed overwhelmingly. Even after the election defeat, 64% of party members still felt that the party’s position on Brexit was either correct or insufficiently pro-Remain. It is simply not possible to argue for Labour to have adopted a pro-Leave position without fatally undermining the case for party democracy. But that is precisely what the betrayal myth does.
Where next for the left?
It does not always feel like it, but the Labour left is in a significantly stronger position than it was six years ago. Thanks to the Corbyn project, we are much bigger. There are more of us, and we have new organisations and institutions through which we can continue to build the movement. Without Corbynism, we would not have Tribune, Momentum or The World Transformed.
But, ultimately, we are still not big enough. We were defeated in December because the public did not believe we could deliver on our promises. In hindsight, this is not that surprising. We had fewer than five years to persuade the population of the value of transformative socialism, with very little to start from. Although we were not successful, we have laid the groundwork. We have a lot more to build from now than we did in 2015.
The betrayal myth will hold us back. It teaches us to triangulate, even though this can never lead to transformative change. It tells members to be silent when we need their voice to shape Labour’s future. The majority of Labour’s members and voters wanted to stop Brexit. They tried to do just that by using the party’s internal democracy. They used the left’s preferred tactics to fight for a position held by the majority of the left. This is no betrayal of Corbynism – it is exactly what Corbynism promised.


labourlist--2020-10-27--New data “alarming” as Black people four times more likely to be sectioned

Dr Rosena Allin-Khan has described as “ alarming ” new data that shows Black people in England were four times more likely to be sectioned under the Mental Health Act last year than white people .
NHS figures released today reveal that Black people were detained for mental health reasons at a rate of 321.7 per 100,000 people in 2019-20 , which is four times higher than the 73.4 per 100,000 rate among white people .
Labour ’ s shadow mental health minister has responded to the numbers by calling on the government to create a national strategy to tackle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new Lawrence Review .
Commenting on the health service figures and the need to implement a nationwide strategy to deal with racial inequalities in healthcare , Allin-Khan said : “ These figures make for alarming reading .
“ The racial disparity of detentions under the Mental Health Act underlines the need to address health inequalities , and to ensure provision is widely accessible and support is suitable for all .
“ As Doreen Lawrence has called for today , the government must urgently implement a national strategy to tackle health inequality.
” People @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as a last resort measure , by doctors under the Mental Health Act – or ‘ sectioned ’ – in the interests of their own health or safety , or in an effort to protect other people .
Every year since ethnicity-related Mental Health Act data started being collected by the NHS in 2016 , figures have consistently revealed that Black people are four times more likely to be sectioned than white people .
As well as being more likely to be sectioned , Black people were over ten times more likely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) , under which a patient is treated in the community but is subject to recall to a hospital for assessment .
50,893 new detentions under the Mental Health Act were recorded in the new statistics , but the overall national totals are likely to be higher as many providers submitted incomplete data or no data at all .
The NHS estimates that , based on the providers that did consistently submit good quality detention statistics , there was a 0.8 % increase in the overall number of mental health sections compared to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were also found to be factors that affected the likelihood of being sectioned , with both men and those aged between 18 and 34 being more likely to be detained , albeit at a much lower rate than Black people .
The news comes as Labour leader Keir Starmer committed to implementing a ‘ Race Equality Act ’ and the party released a new a report on the disproportionate impact of the coronavirus crisis on minority ethnic communities .
Baroness Lawrence was tasked by Labour in April with investigating how Black , Asian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by Covid-19 and government policies during the pandemic .
Noting that the UK government “ has not done enough to protect people ahead of the second wave ” of the virus , the paper urges ministers to set out an urgent plan that will benefit BAME communities during Covid .
Her report sets out 20 recommendations for the government , including a national strategy to tackle health inequalities and the urgent undertaking of equality impact assessments on the government ’ s Covid support schemes .
It also called for the government to set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impact of Covid on ethnic minorities , who have been badly affected both economically and health-wise by the pandemic .
Black people have been found to be at a higher risk of death from coronavirus .
In one report from the first wave of the pandemic , Black people were found to be almost twice as likely to die from Covid than white people .
Labour argued last month that the government had “ failed to act to protect Black , Asian and minority ethnic communities ” after a report showed BAME people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have lost their job as a result of Covid .

Dr Rosena Allin-Khan has described as “alarming” new data that shows Black people in England were four times more likely to be sectioned under the Mental Health Act last year than white people.
NHS figures released today reveal that Black people were detained for mental health reasons at a rate of 321.7 per 100,000 people in 2019-20, which is four times higher than the 73.4 per 100,000 rate among white people.
Labour’s shadow mental health minister has responded to the numbers by calling on the government to create a national strategy to tackle health inequality, as demanded by the new Lawrence Review.
Commenting on the health service figures and the need to implement a nationwide strategy to deal with racial inequalities in healthcare, Allin-Khan said: “These figures make for alarming reading.
“The racial disparity of detentions under the Mental Health Act underlines the need to address health inequalities, and to ensure provision is widely accessible and support is suitable for all.
“As Doreen Lawrence has called for today, the government must urgently implement a national strategy to tackle health inequality.”
People with a mental disorder can be detained, as a last resort measure, by doctors under the Mental Health Act – or ‘sectioned’ – in the interests of their own health or safety, or in an effort to protect other people.
Every year since ethnicity-related Mental Health Act data started being collected by the NHS in 2016, figures have consistently revealed that Black people are four times more likely to be sectioned than white people.
As well as being more likely to be sectioned, Black people were over ten times more likely to face Community Treatment Orders (CTOs), under which a patient is treated in the community but is subject to recall to a hospital for assessment.
50,893 new detentions under the Mental Health Act were recorded in the new statistics, but the overall national totals are likely to be higher as many providers submitted incomplete data or no data at all.
The NHS estimates that, based on the providers that did consistently submit good quality detention statistics, there was a 0.8% increase in the overall number of mental health sections compared to the previous year.
Age and gender were also found to be factors that affected the likelihood of being sectioned, with both men and those aged between 18 and 34 being more likely to be detained, albeit at a much lower rate than Black people.
The news comes as Labour leader Keir Starmer committed to implementing a ‘Race Equality Act’ and the party released a new a report on the disproportionate impact of the coronavirus crisis on minority ethnic communities.
Baroness Lawrence was tasked by Labour in April with investigating how Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities have been affected by Covid-19 and government policies during the pandemic.
Noting that the UK government “has not done enough to protect people ahead of the second wave” of the virus, the paper urges ministers to set out an urgent plan that will benefit BAME communities during Covid.
Her report sets out 20 recommendations for the government, including a national strategy to tackle health inequalities and the urgent undertaking of equality impact assessments on the government’s Covid support schemes.
It also called for the government to set out a plan for tackling the disproportionate impact of Covid on ethnic minorities, who have been badly affected both economically and health-wise by the pandemic.
Black people have been found to be at a higher risk of death from coronavirus. In one report from the first wave of the pandemic, Black people were found to be almost twice as likely to die from Covid than white people.
Labour argued last month that the government had “failed to act to protect Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities” after a report showed BAME people were almost three times as likely to have lost their job as a result of Covid.


labourlist--2020-10-27--30 Labour MPs urge Sunak to put minimum wage floor in job support

A group of 30 Labour MPs have written to Chancellor Rishi Sunak today to urge the government to set a minimum wage floor within the coronavirus job support schemes being offered .
The Labour left signatories of the letter organised by Richard Burgon are calling on the Chancellor to ensure that no worker in the UK is paid less than the minimum wage during the pandemic .
The ‘ national living wage ’ – for those aged 25 and over – is supposed to be £8.72 an hour , the national minimum wage for those aged between 21 and 25 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 20 is £6.45 an hour .
But under Sunak ’ s new local furlough scheme being implemented from November , minimum wage workers can be paid just two thirds of the minimum rates if their workplaces are forced to shut .
The so-called ‘ national living wage ’ available to workers aged 25 and over can be paid as low as £5.81 per hour , equivalent to the minimum wage level of 11 years ago , as Burgon recently pointed out in the Commons .
The Chancellor ’ s local furlough for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the toughest Covid restrictions , will see the government pay 67 % of a worker ’ s wage if their employer ’ s business is forced to close .
Under the new job support scheme ( JSS ) , which was changed last week to be more generous to employers , workers who go down to a fifth of their hours will receive just over 73 % of their normal salary .
The Low Pay Commission has estimated that 35 % in hair and beauty jobs , 29 % of hospitality jobs and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or below the minimum wage – all sectors hit hard by Covid-19 .
Labour MPs are making the case for a floor in the Covid-19 job support schemes under which pay can not be set – or they say the government risks causing hardship and “ undermining ” the national minimum wage .
Burgon , the MP for Leeds East who ran for the deputy leadership earlier this year , said : “ Even before this crisis , many minimum wage workers were struggling to get by .
Now they are going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Given the cost of rent , bills and food have stayed the same , how can we expect people to manage on just two-thirds of the minimum wage ?
It ’ s called the National Minimum Wage for a reason – the government needs to act to ensure that nobody is paid less than it.
” The letter ’ s signatories , including many figures from the last Labour leadership such as Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell , are exclusively from the left of the party and from the opposition backbenches .
Below @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Rishi Sunak .
Minimum wage workers in workplaces forced to shut in very high virus areas will , from next week , be paid just two-thirds of the minimum wage under the Job Support Scheme .
For workers aged 25 and over , this will be as low as just £5.81 per hour , equivalent to the minimum wage level of 11 years ago .
For younger workers it will be even less .
Many workers in businesses not forced to close also face being paid less than the minimum wage .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ on less than the minimum wage .
Without such a minimum wage floor to the Job Support Scheme during this pandemic many of our constituents will receive pay that is completely inadequate to meet even their basic needs .
Even before the pandemic many of them were struggling to make ends meet because of low pay .
A high proportion of workers in the sectors hit hardest by this pandemic are paid the minimum wage , and many will already have lost a significant amount of their income as a result of this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to ensure that this public health crisis does not become a social crisis for millions of people .
The introduction of the minimum wage was an important step forward in the campaign against low pay and that must not be undermined during this pandemic .
We ask you to urgently review this matter and introduce a minimum wage floor to financial support during this pandemic so no worker is paid less than the minimum wage .

A group of 30 Labour MPs have written to Chancellor Rishi Sunak today to urge the government to set a minimum wage floor within the coronavirus job support schemes being offered.
The Labour left signatories of the letter organised by Richard Burgon are calling on the Chancellor to ensure that no worker in the UK is paid less than the minimum wage during the pandemic.
The ‘national living wage’ – for those aged 25 and over – is supposed to be £8.72 an hour, the national minimum wage for those aged between 21 and 25 is £8.20 and for those aged 18 to 20 is £6.45 an hour.
But under Sunak’s new local furlough scheme being implemented from November, minimum wage workers can be paid just two thirds of the minimum rates if their workplaces are forced to shut.
The so-called ‘national living wage’ available to workers aged 25 and over can be paid as low as £5.81 per hour, equivalent to the minimum wage level of 11 years ago, as Burgon recently pointed out in the Commons.
The Chancellor’s local furlough for businesses in Tier 3 areas, under the toughest Covid restrictions, will see the government pay 67% of a worker’s wage if their employer’s business is forced to close.
Under the new job support scheme (JSS), which was changed last week to be more generous to employers, workers who go down to a fifth of their hours will receive just over 73% of their normal salary.
The Low Pay Commission has estimated that 35% in hair and beauty jobs, 29% of hospitality jobs and 19% of retail jobs pay at or below the minimum wage – all sectors hit hard by Covid-19.
Labour MPs are making the case for a floor in the Covid-19 job support schemes under which pay cannot be set – or they say the government risks causing hardship and “undermining” the national minimum wage.
Burgon, the MP for Leeds East who ran for the deputy leadership earlier this year, said: “Even before this crisis, many minimum wage workers were struggling to get by. Now they are going to be forced further into poverty.
“Given the cost of rent, bills and food have stayed the same, how can we expect people to manage on just two-thirds of the minimum wage? It’s called the National Minimum Wage for a reason – the government needs to act to ensure that nobody is paid less than it.”
The letter’s signatories, including many figures from the last Labour leadership such as Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell, are exclusively from the left of the party and from the opposition backbenches.
Below is the full text of the letter to Rishi Sunak.
Dear Chancellor,
A Minimum Wage Floor in the Job Support Scheme
Minimum wage workers in workplaces forced to shut in very high virus areas will, from next week, be paid just two-thirds of the minimum wage under the Job Support Scheme.
For workers aged 25 and over, this will be as low as just £5.81 per hour, equivalent to the minimum wage level of 11 years ago. For younger workers it will be even less.
Many workers in businesses not forced to close also face being paid less than the minimum wage.
No-one should ever be expected to live on less than the minimum wage.
Without such a minimum wage floor to the Job Support Scheme during this pandemic many of our constituents will receive pay that is completely inadequate to meet even their basic needs. Even before the pandemic many of them were struggling to make ends meet because of low pay.
A high proportion of workers in the sectors hit hardest by this pandemic are paid the minimum wage, and many will already have lost a significant amount of their income as a result of this pandemic. The Government has a responsibility to ensure that this public health crisis does not become a social crisis for millions of people.
The introduction of the minimum wage was an important step forward in the campaign against low pay and that must not be undermined during this pandemic.
We ask you to urgently review this matter and introduce a minimum wage floor to financial support during this pandemic so no worker is paid less than the minimum wage.
Yours sincerely,
Richard Burgon MP
Diane Abbott MP
Tahir Ali MP
Paula Barker MP
Apsana Begum MP
Olivia Blake MP
Ian Byrne MP
Jeremy Corbyn MP
Jon Cruddas MP
Mary Foy MP
Margaret Greenwood MP
Rachel Hopkins MP
Kim Johnson MP
Ian Lavery MP
Clive Lewis MP
Tony Lloyd MP
Rebecca Long-Bailey MP
John McDonnell MP
Ian Mearns MP
Grahame Morris MP
Kate Osamor MP
Kate Osborne MP
Bell Ribeiro-Addy MP
Lloyd Russell-Moyle MP
Zarah Sultana MP
Jon Trickett MP
Claudia Webbe MP
Mick Whitley MP
Nadia Whittome MP
Beth Winter MP
Mohammad Yasin MP