labourlist--2020-05-04--Civil servants are key workers too, and the government must protect them

Covid-19 has required the state to intervene to protect public health , jobs and businesses .
But after a decade of austerity eroding the capacity of the state to respond to such crises , our civil servants have been tasked with delivering urgent support with reduced capacity and restricted resources .
We naturally associate the term ‘ key worker ’ with our health and care workers who are in daily proximity with the virus – but teachers , bus drivers , posties and supermarket workers have also rightly received the recognition that they deserve for their role in keeping things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been much less recognition for our key workers within the civil service .
Unlike the perception of civil servants as men in grey suits working in Whitehall – typified in BBC sitcom Yes , Minister – the reality is that the civil service is much more varied .
Civil servants live in our communities and work locally in places such as our local JobCentre Plus , court service or tax office .
Given my experience of working across the wider civil service , in a range of areas for over two decades before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough the diverse importance of the civil service in our response to this public health emergency .
The coronavirus pandemic has tasked civil servants with unprecedented challenges .
Department for Work and Pensions and HMRC staff are under severe pressure – working around the clock to register new Universal Credit claimants and implement the government ’ s economic support schemes .
Civil servants are also on the frontline : Border Force employees are at risk of infection from foreign flights , while Ministry of Justice ’ s staff are at risk working in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sadly , civil servants across different departments have lost their lives to Covid-19 , and our thoughts are with their families .
We must remember the context in which the civil service is responding to these challenges .
In the past ten years of the Conservatives ’ austerity agenda , many of these key workers were considered ‘ back office ’ staff and suffered job cuts , real-terms pay cuts and sustained attacks on their pensions .
Analysis undertaken by the Public and Commercial Services Union ( PCS ) has revealed that average @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 9 % and 11 % compared to those in the rest of the public sector , working in health , education and local government .
During this time , the cost of living has risen .
The result of the ideological commitment to small governance is a civil service with an underpaid , undervalued and understaffed workforce – and institutions with a reduced capacity to respond to urgent crises .
According to the Institute for Government , 40 % of DWP staff and 35 % of those in the Department of Health and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
PCS estimated that the DWP is at least 5,000 staff short of what it needs to meet demand during a ‘ normal ’ period – never mind during this crisis , in which we have seen a mass influx of Universal Credit claimants .
Austerity has led to the government constructing a civil service only through a per-unit cost lens – whether in relation to people or floor space – rather than acknowledging its collective social imperative and the social value it derives .
And this can be seen in the response @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lack the necessary personal protective equipment ( PPE ) and , in some cases , management are not enforcing social distancing and shielding guidance .
Border Force staff are not being routinely provided with PPE , while HM Passport Office is trying to make non-essential staff return to their offices before lockdown is lifted .
Workers are not a commodity .
PPE is not an optional extra for key workers , and those at high risk of complications from the virus must be protected .
It is deeply concerning that guidance and support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ execute on behalf of the government , are not being adhered to by some areas of management within the civil service .
The state should be leading by example during this public health crisis .
Key services must be delivered , but Michael Gove and the Cabinet Office must make staff health and safety the priority .
This is not ‘ business as usual ’ , and it is important that we do not return to the previous business as usual where key workers were taken for granted .
One thing is for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ who believe in a decent society , and who have prioritised the safety of the collective , must be recognised .
It is these workers who will be fundamental in rebuilding our economy after the Covid-19 crisis .

Covid-19 has required the state to intervene to protect public health, jobs and businesses. But after a decade of austerity eroding the capacity of the state to respond to such crises, our civil servants have been tasked with delivering urgent support with reduced capacity and restricted resources. We naturally associate the term ‘key worker’ with our health and care workers who are in daily proximity with the virus – but teachers, bus drivers, posties and supermarket workers have also rightly received the recognition that they deserve for their role in keeping things going in our communities.
There has been much less recognition for our key workers within the civil service. Unlike the perception of civil servants as men in grey suits working in Whitehall – typified in BBC sitcom Yes, Minister – the reality is that the civil service is much more varied. Civil servants live in our communities and work locally in places such as our local JobCentre Plus, court service or tax office. Given my experience of working across the wider civil service, in a range of areas for over two decades before entering parliament, I cannot stress enough the diverse importance of the civil service in our response to this public health emergency.
The coronavirus pandemic has tasked civil servants with unprecedented challenges. Department for Work and Pensions and HMRC staff are under severe pressure – working around the clock to register new Universal Credit claimants and implement the government’s economic support schemes. Civil servants are also on the frontline: Border Force employees are at risk of infection from foreign flights, while Ministry of Justice’s staff are at risk working in HM Prison Service, for example. Sadly, civil servants across different departments have lost their lives to Covid-19, and our thoughts are with their families.
We must remember the context in which the civil service is responding to these challenges. In the past ten years of the Conservatives’ austerity agenda, many of these key workers were considered ‘back office’ staff and suffered job cuts, real-terms pay cuts and sustained attacks on their pensions. Analysis undertaken by the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) has revealed that average civil service pay has fallen by between 9% and 11% compared to those in the rest of the public sector, working in health, education and local government. During this time, the cost of living has risen.
The result of the ideological commitment to small governance is a civil service with an underpaid, undervalued and understaffed workforce – and institutions with a reduced capacity to respond to urgent crises. According to the Institute for Government, 40% of DWP staff and 35% of those in the Department of Health and Social Care have been cut since 2010. PCS estimated that the DWP is at least 5,000 staff short of what it needs to meet demand during a ‘normal’ period – never mind during this crisis, in which we have seen a mass influx of Universal Credit claimants.
Austerity has led to the government constructing a civil service only through a per-unit cost lens – whether in relation to people or floor space – rather than acknowledging its collective social imperative and the social value it derives. And this can be seen in the response to Covid-19. Civil servant key workers lack the necessary personal protective equipment (PPE) and, in some cases, management are not enforcing social distancing and shielding guidance. Border Force staff are not being routinely provided with PPE, while HM Passport Office is trying to make non-essential staff return to their offices before lockdown is lifted.
Workers are not a commodity. PPE is not an optional extra for key workers, and those at high risk of complications from the virus must be protected. It is deeply concerning that guidance and support, which civil servants are helping to execute on behalf of the government, are not being adhered to by some areas of management within the civil service. The state should be leading by example during this public health crisis.
Key services must be delivered, but Michael Gove and the Cabinet Office must make staff health and safety the priority. This is not ‘business as usual’, and it is important that we do not return to the previous business as usual where key workers were taken for granted. One thing is for certain: the selfless work of those who believe in a decent society, and who have prioritised the safety of the collective, must be recognised. It is these workers who will be fundamental in rebuilding our economy after the Covid-19 crisis.


labourlist--2020-05-05--World leaders must learn lessons from the past and act now on Covid

At the Labour Campaign for International Development , we are completely in awe of the heroic carers , nurses , doctors , porters , cleaners , posties and everyone fighting this virus on the frontline .
We join the rest of the labour movement in calling for them to get the personal protective equipment ( PPE ) that they need to ensure that they don ’ t lose their lives whilst trying to save ours .
As campaigners fighting for a fairer world , we are also acutely aware of the devastating impact of this virus on people across developing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is only going to get worse .
The poorest countries have weak health care systems , little testing equipment , hardly any ventilators and few medical supplies .
The Central African Republic has just three ventilators for its five million citizens , Uganda has more government ministers than intensive-care beds , and ten African countries have none at all .
But this is not just a healthcare crisis .
Half a billion people could be pushed into poverty across the world as lockdowns come into force and trade is disrupted .
The International @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that almost 60 % of countries in Africa , and over a third in the Americas , are not providing wage protection and income support for workers .
And even where there is support , it ’ s not enough to cover essential costs – as is the case for people in two thirds of the countries across Asia .
Gordon Brown has been right to call for a global deal to tackle this global problem .
As he and Shadow International Development Secretary Preet Gill have argued , there must be a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ availability , accessibility and affordability of a vaccine in every country .
We must also ensure that developing countries get the $ 35bn that the World Health Organisation estimated they need to boost their healthcare systems .
And to prevent mass redundancies and a recession becoming a depression , stimulus packages will need to be provided to low income countries , and G20 governments and businesses will need to work together to finance furlough schemes to keep farmers and workers in international supply chains from falling into poverty .
World leaders are failing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support and coordination needed .
As we have long argued , poverty is political , and this crisis is demonstrating why being in power matters .
It is worth noting how different the G20 ’ s response was to the global recession in 2008 , when we had a Labour government and a Democrat in the White House .
It is certainly a hugely positive step to see the G20 agree a suspension of debt service payments from official bilateral creditors until the end of this year – though as the Jubilee Debt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lenders must also be suspended .
It is good , too , that a summit held yesterday comprised of a group of rich countries – including the UK – has seen pledges made to boost the global health response .
But it is hugely disappointing that the Donald Trump administration has blocked the International Monetary Fund from issuing billions of ‘ special drawing rights ’ ( SDRs ) – its global reserve assets .
Doing so could have provided valuable financial support to the world economy , including developing countries .
$ 600bn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congressional approval .
By comparison , $ 3bn is needed for a vaccine , and $ 5bn for the Universal Social Protection Fund for the poorest countries , for which the ITUC is calling .
Rishi Sunak and other G20 finance ministers must find a way to get SDRs approved or find other ways of raising the funds needed .
While there is so much need at home , it is understandable that some will worry about pursuing an international agenda .
But our movement has always been at the forefront of campaigns @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Thanks in part to campaigns by the co-operative movement , trade unionists , Christians on the Left and party activists – as well as the leadership shown by the last Labour government – huge progress has been made in the fight against global poverty in the last two decades .
For the sake of the women and men now losing their jobs or falling sick , we can not let that progress be undone .
A lesson from the past is that global recessions , and the damage that they do to us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ boldly .
Time is running out – world leaders have a responsibility to act , and act now .

At the Labour Campaign for International Development, we are completely in awe of the heroic carers, nurses, doctors, porters, cleaners, posties and everyone fighting this virus on the frontline. We join the rest of the labour movement in calling for them to get the personal protective equipment (PPE) that they need to ensure that they don’t lose their lives whilst trying to save ours.
As campaigners fighting for a fairer world, we are also acutely aware of the devastating impact of this virus on people across developing countries. Without urgent action, it is only going to get worse. The poorest countries have weak health care systems, little testing equipment, hardly any ventilators and few medical supplies.
The Central African Republic has just three ventilators for its five million citizens, Uganda has more government ministers than intensive-care beds, and ten African countries have none at all. But this is not just a healthcare crisis. Half a billion people could be pushed into poverty across the world as lockdowns come into force and trade is disrupted.
The International Trade Union Congress (ITUC) estimated that almost 60% of countries in Africa, and over a third in the Americas, are not providing wage protection and income support for workers. And even where there is support, it’s not enough to cover essential costs – as is the case for people in two thirds of the countries across Asia.
Gordon Brown has been right to call for a global deal to tackle this global problem. As he and Shadow International Development Secretary Preet Gill have argued, there must be a coordinated effort to create and guarantee the availability, accessibility and affordability of a vaccine in every country. We must also ensure that developing countries get the $35bn that the World Health Organisation estimated they need to boost their healthcare systems.
And to prevent mass redundancies and a recession becoming a depression, stimulus packages will need to be provided to low income countries, and G20 governments and businesses will need to work together to finance furlough schemes to keep farmers and workers in international supply chains from falling into poverty.
World leaders are failing to agree anywhere near the levels of support and coordination needed. As we have long argued, poverty is political, and this crisis is demonstrating why being in power matters. It is worth noting how different the G20’s response was to the global recession in 2008, when we had a Labour government and a Democrat in the White House.
It is certainly a hugely positive step to see the G20 agree a suspension of debt service payments from official bilateral creditors until the end of this year – though as the Jubilee Debt Campaign has argued, debt to private lenders must also be suspended. It is good, too, that a summit held yesterday comprised of a group of rich countries – including the UK – has seen pledges made to boost the global health response.
But it is hugely disappointing that the Donald Trump administration has blocked the International Monetary Fund from issuing billions of ‘special drawing rights’ (SDRs) – its global reserve assets. Doing so could have provided valuable financial support to the world economy, including developing countries.
$600bn could be raised without the need for Congressional approval. By comparison, $3bn is needed for a vaccine, and $5bn for the Universal Social Protection Fund for the poorest countries, for which the ITUC is calling. Rishi Sunak and other G20 finance ministers must find a way to get SDRs approved or find other ways of raising the funds needed.
While there is so much need at home, it is understandable that some will worry about pursuing an international agenda. But our movement has always been at the forefront of campaigns to end global poverty and inequality. Thanks in part to campaigns by the co-operative movement, trade unionists, Christians on the Left and party activists – as well as the leadership shown by the last Labour government – huge progress has been made in the fight against global poverty in the last two decades.
For the sake of the women and men now losing their jobs or falling sick, we cannot let that progress be undone. A lesson from the past is that global recessions, and the damage that they do to us all, are best addressed quickly and boldly. Time is running out – world leaders have a responsibility to act, and act now.


labourlist--2020-05-05--Bridget Phillipson sets out rules for frontbenchers with spending proposals

Bridget Phillipson has set out rules for Labour frontbenchers wanting to develop policies with tax or spend implications , and implicitly criticised Labour ’ s 2019 manifesto .
In a letter to colleagues , the new shadow chief secretary to the Treasury outlined how the party would work as a “ collective frontbench team ” when making policies with “ direct fiscal implications ” .
In an indirect rebuke of the policy development that led to the last manifesto , Phillipson wrote that “ the credibility of our policy programme will not be determined by the plausibility or popularity of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that if her colleagues want to propose a policy with fiscal implications , they should “ notify me and the head of policy in their area in the leader of the opposition ’ s office ” .
Phillipson added : “ It is therefore vitally important that new policies that entail spending commitments , underwrites , tax cuts or tax rises are not developed in isolation but are instead considered as part of Labour ’ s overall economic offer to the country .
“ Equally , it is important that the way that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ across our policy programme so that we can have confidence that any policy costings will be able to withstand public and media scrutiny.
” Labour faced both criticism for the number of policy proposals that formed its offer to the electorate in the December 2019 election , and all 2020 leadership candidates agreed it was “ overloaded ” .
Former strategic advisor to Jeremy Corbyn James Mills tweeted that the Phillipson letter was a “ sensible thing to do ” , and noted that “ we did exactly the same ” under the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ advisor to John McDonnell James Meadway said that “ we did exactly the same thing when John and Peter Dowd were in Shadow Treasury ” and argued that “ any party leadership is going to do the same thing ” .
But in talking of frontbenchers being “ collectively responsible for developing a credible and popular economic policy programme ” , Phillipson ’ s letter hinted at a break from the past by stressing the need for policies without spending implications .
“ The heads of policy in the leader of the opposition @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and develop such interventions short of making spending commitments , including calling for structural reform , executive actions , reviews , regulatory changes and new guidance , ” she said .
Phillipson ended the letter by clarifying to her Labour colleagues that “ the process is not designed to limit the scale of our ambition , but rather to ensure that all our policies are properly calibrated ” .
A YouGov poll conducted during the leadership contest revealed that Labour members overwhelming still support the policies put forward in the 2017 and 2019 @ @

Bridget Phillipson has set out rules for Labour frontbenchers wanting to develop policies with tax or spend implications, and implicitly criticised Labour’s 2019 manifesto.
In a letter to colleagues, the new shadow chief secretary to the Treasury outlined how the party would work as a “collective frontbench team” when making policies with “direct fiscal implications”.
In an indirect rebuke of the policy development that led to the last manifesto, Phillipson wrote that “the credibility of our policy programme will not be determined by the plausibility or popularity of individual policies”.
She set out that if her colleagues want to propose a policy with fiscal implications, they should “notify me and the head of policy in their area in the leader of the opposition’s office”.
Phillipson added: “It is therefore vitally important that new policies that entail spending commitments, underwrites, tax cuts or tax rises are not developed in isolation but are instead considered as part of Labour’s overall economic offer to the country.
“Equally, it is important that the way that policies are costed and modelled is consistent across our policy programme so that we can have confidence that any policy costings will be able to withstand public and media scrutiny.”
Labour faced both criticism for the number of policy proposals that formed its offer to the electorate in the December 2019 election, and all 2020 leadership candidates agreed it was “overloaded”.
Former strategic advisor to Jeremy Corbyn James Mills tweeted that the Phillipson letter was a “sensible thing to do”, and noted that “we did exactly the same” under the previous leadership.
Similarly, the previous advisor to John McDonnell James Meadway said that “we did exactly the same thing when John and Peter Dowd were in Shadow Treasury” and argued that “any party leadership is going to do the same thing”.
But in talking of frontbenchers being “collectively responsible for developing a credible and popular economic policy programme”, Phillipson’s letter hinted at a break from the past by stressing the need for policies without spending implications.
“The heads of policy in the leader of the opposition’s office can help you plan and develop such interventions short of making spending commitments, including calling for structural reform, executive actions, reviews, regulatory changes and new guidance,” she said.
Phillipson ended the letter by clarifying to her Labour colleagues that “the process is not designed to limit the scale of our ambition, but rather to ensure that all our policies are properly calibrated”.
A YouGov poll conducted during the leadership contest revealed that Labour members overwhelming still support the policies put forward in the 2017 and 2019 manifestos.


labourlist--2020-05-05--Jennie Formby resigns and Keir Starmer calls for coronavirus “consensus”

Jennie Formby has announced her resignation as Labour ’ s general secretary .
Her statement yesterday did not shy away from this decision being linked to the election of Keir Starmer , saying explicitly that she applied to the role to support Jeremy Corbyn and “ now we have a new leadership team it is the right time to step down ” .
Commenting on the move this morning , Starmer told BBC Radio 4 : “ It was a mutual agreement and I wish her the very best .
We need to move on as a party.
” And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ priority of Formby ’ s successor , he enthusiastically replied : “ Focus on winning the next general election !
” Who is in the running to replace her ?
We ’ ve put together a very early runners and riders list .
Although there is a commonly held view that this represents “ UNISON ’ s turn ” , the leaked report had an impact , and it is currently thought that this will be a straight fight between Unite ’ s Anneliese Midgley and GMB ’ s Lisa Johnson .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a bit of an outsider himself , might be keen on the idea of bringing in someone from outside the labour movement .
It ’ s easy to imagine that he and chief of staff Morgan McSweeney could favour a council chief executive or nonprofit sector leader .
Of course , that would be a tough ask – not only because trade unions have key votes on Labour ’ s national executive committee , which appoints the general secretary , but also because running large parts of a union offers relevant experience @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
These crucial attributes are almost impossible to gain elsewhere .
And there is a lot to understand about the factionalism that Starmer wants to banish .
Lloyd Russell-Moyle ’ s latest piece for LabourList gives some indication of what is going on within the Labour left right now .
Keir Starmer also talked to the BBC this morning about his latest intervention in the coronavirus crisis .
He has called for a “ national consensus ” on the next steps taken by the UK government .
This sounds remarkably like the commitment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to work , which saw the Prime Minister talk of ‘ consensus ’ outside 10 Downing Street .
And as I said last week , any such consensus would have to be centred around the TUC demands for “ tough new measures ” needed before people were asked to return to their workplaces .
Yet the new draft back-to-work guidelines have been slammed by trade unions .
The GMB says the advice was “ thrown together in a hurry and it shows ” .
They have warned that “ many may refuse to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The TUC is reiterating that it wants “ binding rules for employers to publish their risk assessment and action plan ” , “ clear guidance on the standards employers must meet ” and a “ tough , new approach to enforcement ” .
Starmer has similarly argued that the government draft is “ very very vague with lots of gaps in it ” .
As a result , Labour has set out seven “ core principles ” for next steps – including new targets , guaranteed supply of equipment and the publication of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is protecting the public ’ s health and saving lives , ” the Labour leader said .
The movement has a fight ahead to make sure that the government agrees .

Jennie Formby has announced her resignation as Labour’s general secretary. Her statement yesterday did not shy away from this decision being linked to the election of Keir Starmer, saying explicitly that she applied to the role to support Jeremy Corbyn and “now we have a new leadership team it is the right time to step down”. Commenting on the move this morning, Starmer told BBC Radio 4: “It was a mutual agreement and I wish her the very best. We need to move on as a party.” And asked what should be the number one priority of Formby’s successor, he enthusiastically replied: “Focus on winning the next general election!”
Who is in the running to replace her? We’ve put together a very early runners and riders list. Although there is a commonly held view that this represents “UNISON’s turn”, the leaked report had an impact, and it is currently thought that this will be a straight fight between Unite’s Anneliese Midgley and GMB’s Lisa Johnson. But there is also speculation that Starmer, as a bit of an outsider himself, might be keen on the idea of bringing in someone from outside the labour movement. It’s easy to imagine that he and chief of staff Morgan McSweeney could favour a council chief executive or nonprofit sector leader.
Of course, that would be a tough ask – not only because trade unions have key votes on Labour’s national executive committee, which appoints the general secretary, but also because running large parts of a union offers relevant experience and a thorough understanding of party dynamics. These crucial attributes are almost impossible to gain elsewhere. And there is a lot to understand about the factionalism that Starmer wants to banish. Lloyd Russell-Moyle’s latest piece for LabourList gives some indication of what is going on within the Labour left right now.
Keir Starmer also talked to the BBC this morning about his latest intervention in the coronavirus crisis. He has called for a “national consensus” on the next steps taken by the UK government. This sounds remarkably like the commitment made by Boris Johnson when he returned to work, which saw the Prime Minister talk of ‘consensus’ outside 10 Downing Street. And as I said last week, any such consensus would have to be centred around the TUC demands for “tough new measures” needed before people were asked to return to their workplaces. Yet the new draft back-to-work guidelines have been slammed by trade unions.
The GMB says the advice was “thrown together in a hurry and it shows”. They have warned that “many may refuse to work” under the latest guidance. The TUC is reiterating that it wants “binding rules for employers to publish their risk assessment and action plan”, “clear guidance on the standards employers must meet” and a “tough, new approach to enforcement”.
Starmer has similarly argued that the government draft is “very very vague with lots of gaps in it”. As a result, Labour has set out seven “core principles” for next steps – including new targets, guaranteed supply of equipment and the publication of several national plans. “Our priority is protecting the public’s health and saving lives,” the Labour leader said. The movement has a fight ahead to make sure that the government agrees.


labourlist--2020-05-05--WATCH: Starmer slams consultation on return to work as “thin” and “vague”

Keir Starmer has criticised the government ’ s consultation paper on returning to work as “ vague ” and “ thin ” and urged it to “ agree a standard ” with trade unions , business and political parties .
In an interview with BBC Breakfast this morning , the Labour leader emphasised the need for any such standard to be “ enforceable ” to give the “ best reassurance we can to the public that need to go back to work ” .
Starmer criticised the document published by the government over the weekend , highlighting that it “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ equipment ” but also said that he is “ not setting up a rival camp here ” .
The comments from the Labour leader follow his call for a “ national consensus ” to be built around the next steps of the UK ’ s coronavirus response ahead of talks he is due to participate in with the Prime Minister .
Starmer has confirmed that the party is backing further Covid-19 restrictions and vowed to continue to “ work constructively ” with the government , setting out seven principles in forming the next @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
There have been 190,584 confirmed cases of coronavirus in the UK , but with low levels of testing the true figure is thought to be much higher .
There have been 28,734 recorded deaths associated with the virus .

Keir Starmer has criticised the government’s consultation paper on returning to work as “vague” and “thin” and urged it to “agree a standard” with trade unions, business and political parties.
In an interview with BBC Breakfast this morning, the Labour leader emphasised the need for any such standard to be “enforceable” to give the “best reassurance we can to the public that need to go back to work”.
Starmer criticised the document published by the government over the weekend, highlighting that it “didn’t have much on protective equipment” but also said that he is “not setting up a rival camp here”.
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer calls the government's consultation paper on returning to work "thin" and "vague" He urges government to talk to trade unions, businesses and political parties and "agree a standard" https://t.co/W8Nn0X5uuI #BBCBreakfast pic.twitter.com/Qm2TPyhjNr — BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) May 5, 2020
The comments from the Labour leader follow his call for a “national consensus” to be built around the next steps of the UK’s coronavirus response ahead of talks he is due to participate in with the Prime Minister.
Starmer has confirmed that the party is backing further Covid-19 restrictions and vowed to continue to “work constructively” with the government, setting out seven principles in forming the next part of the country’s strategy.
There have been 190,584 confirmed cases of coronavirus in the UK, but with low levels of testing the true figure is thought to be much higher. There have been 28,734 recorded deaths associated with the virus.


labourlist--2020-05-05--Labour sets speedy timetable for new general secretary appointment

The core group of officers on Labour ’ s national executive committee ( NEC ) met virtually this afternoon to decide the timetable for the appointment of a new general secretary .
The swift timings agreed will see Jennie Formby ’ s successor appointed on May 19th , with the process taking place in the space of just two weeks following her resignation as the most senior party official .
NEC sources have told LabourList that the decision to appoint a replacement for Formby so quickly will likely benefit potential candidate Anneliese Midgley , who currently works at Unite the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gap between the shortlisting by NEC officers on May 18th and the final decision on May 19th .
The appointment process will take place entirely online due to Covid-19 .
The text below has been sent to NEC members as the timetable for the general secretary appointment .
• The application deadline is midnight on Thursday 14th May .
• The NEC officers as the panel will be sent the applications and longlist matrix at 9am on Friday 15th May to review .
• A meeting of the NEC panel will take place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agree the longlist using the shortlisting criteria outlined on the longlisting matrix .
• This will be via teleconference .
• Candidates who are longlisted will be invited to interview on Monday 18th May via zoom .
• Shortlisting will take place from 10.30am on Monday 18th May – via Zoom .
• This will take the form of a five-minute presentation and 20-minute interview of each candidate .
Interview packs and questions will be provided on the day one hour in advance .
• NEC officers will then determine who goes forward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • Final interviews will take place on the 19th May at the NEC meeting via Zoom .
• Each candidate will have a maximum of 35 minutes for their interview .
Five minutes for their presentation and 30 minutes for questions .
All NEC members will need to be present on Zoom for these interviews .
Interview packs and questions will be provided on the day .
• NEC business will be conducted after the new GS has been appointed .
The appointment becomes formal once Labour ’ s annual conference has accepted @ @ @ @ @ @

The core group of officers on Labour’s national executive committee (NEC) met virtually this afternoon to decide the timetable for the appointment of a new general secretary.
The swift timings agreed will see Jennie Formby’s successor appointed on May 19th, with the process taking place in the space of just two weeks following her resignation as the most senior party official.
NEC sources have told LabourList that the decision to appoint a replacement for Formby so quickly will likely benefit potential candidate Anneliese Midgley, who currently works at Unite the Union.
There is only a one-day gap between the shortlisting by NEC officers on May 18th and the final decision on May 19th. The appointment process will take place entirely online due to Covid-19.
The text below has been sent to NEC members as the timetable for the general secretary appointment.
Applications open 5th May 2020.
The application deadline is midnight on Thursday 14th May.
The NEC officers as the panel will be sent the applications and longlist matrix at 9am on Friday 15th May to review.
A meeting of the NEC panel will take place at 1.30pm on Friday 15th May to agree the longlist using the shortlisting criteria outlined on the longlisting matrix.
This will be via teleconference.
Candidates who are longlisted will be invited to interview on Monday 18th May via zoom.
Shortlisting will take place from 10.30am on Monday 18th May – via Zoom.
This will take the form of a five-minute presentation and 20-minute interview of each candidate. Interview packs and questions will be provided on the day one hour in advance.
NEC officers will then determine who goes forward on the shortlist to the NEC.
Final interviews will take place on the 19th May at the NEC meeting via Zoom.
Each candidate will have a maximum of 35 minutes for their interview. Five minutes for their presentation and 30 minutes for questions. All NEC members will need to be present on Zoom for these interviews. Interview packs and questions will be provided on the day.
NEC business will be conducted after the new GS has been appointed.
The appointment becomes formal once Labour’s annual conference has accepted the NEC’s recommendation.


labourlist--2020-05-05--Jonathan Ashworth’s 10 Covid-19 questions for Matt Hancock

Labour ’ s health spokesperson Jonathan Ashworth asked a series of questions of Matt Hancock on the coronavirus crisis during questions to the Health Secretary this afternoon .
He asked the Secretary of State about shortages of personal protective equipment , particularly in terms of gowns , and pressed the minister on the latest figures for care home deaths revealed today .
1 .
Clapping and medals are appreciated .
But does he agree that NHS and care worker deserve fair pay , mental health support and access to PPE ?
2 .
I ’ m hearing reports that we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sterile gowns .
Can he update the House on that front ?
Hancock said that gown supply is “ improving ” and that the distribution system had seen a significant improvement since the appointment of Lord Deighton to head up the government ’ s efforts .
3 .
We also rely on international staff .
Will he scrap the health surcharge they have to pay ?
It seems particularly unfair at the best of times , but especially at this time .
4 .
We are tracking towards having one of the worst @ @ @ @ @ @ @ say we are through the peak , but can the same be said in the care sector given the numbers of deaths reported today ?
The Health Secretary stated that he is “ glad ” to see that the number of care sector deaths released this morning are “ slightly lower ” – but said that there is a “ huge amount of work still to do ” .
He did not make reference to the fact that the UK now has the highest death rate in Europe .
5 .
Does he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health officials , other specialists like environmental health officers , and expertise in primary care ?
Wouldn ’ t that be a better route than outsourcing the call centre work to firms like Serco ?
On mobilising expertise of local authority public and environmental health officials , Hancock said only that it is “ right to draw attention to them ” and praised the work that they are doing during the coronavirus crisis .
6 .
We support digital tools but there are privacy and data concerns , so will he publish a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ us updated on the Isle of Wight trial ?
7 .
Doesn ’ t the disproportionate mortality rates for those in deprived areas and BAME communities show that Covid-19 thrives on inequalities and we need a funded strategy to support low paid , deprived and marginalised communities including enforced protections in the workplace when we transition out of lockdown ?
8 .
What is the attitude of ministers to banning flights or testing at ports of entry given the chief scientific officer told the health select committee today we imported many cases from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 9 .
We now face a mountain of unmet non-Covid clinical need , with two million operations cancelled , treatments delayed , A & E attendance down , cancer referrals dropping – how will the NHS meet this need while also continuing to treat Covid patients ?
10 .
Will the Health Secretary now allocate additional investment to help clear the growing waiting list backlog ?
Referring to the non-coronavirus demand on the health service , Hancock declared that this is “ incredibly important ” and said that his department is working to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ respond to Ashworth ’ s call to allocate additional investment .
He declined to comment on the majority of the questions put to him in the questions session by the Shadow Health Secretary .
Hancock also dodged a question from shadow minister and A & E doctor Rosena Allin-Khan , when criticised over the roll-out of the testing strategy .
The total number of coronavirus cases deaths in the UK , according to the data released this morning , has now reached 32,375 .
The number of confirmed cases in the country is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the figure is thought to be much higher .

Labour’s health spokesperson Jonathan Ashworth asked a series of questions of Matt Hancock on the coronavirus crisis during questions to the Health Secretary this afternoon.
He asked the Secretary of State about shortages of personal protective equipment, particularly in terms of gowns, and pressed the minister on the latest figures for care home deaths revealed today.
1. Clapping and medals are appreciated. But does he agree that NHS and care worker deserve fair pay, mental health support and access to PPE?
2. I’m hearing reports that we may have problems with the stocks of sterile gowns. Can he update the House on that front?
Hancock said that gown supply is “improving” and that the distribution system had seen a significant improvement since the appointment of Lord Deighton to head up the government’s efforts.
3. We also rely on international staff. Will he scrap the health surcharge they have to pay? It seems particularly unfair at the best of times, but especially at this time.
4. We are tracking towards having one of the worst deaths rates in the world. Ministers say we are through the peak, but can the same be said in the care sector given the numbers of deaths reported today?
The Health Secretary stated that he is “glad” to see that the number of care sector deaths released this morning are “slightly lower” – but said that there is a “huge amount of work still to do”. He did not make reference to the fact that the UK now has the highest death rate in Europe.
5. Does he agree we should mobilise local authority public health officials, other specialists like environmental health officers, and expertise in primary care? Wouldn’t that be a better route than outsourcing the call centre work to firms like Serco?
On mobilising expertise of local authority public and environmental health officials, Hancock said only that it is “right to draw attention to them” and praised the work that they are doing during the coronavirus crisis.
6. We support digital tools but there are privacy and data concerns, so will he publish a data protection impact assessment as he keeps us updated on the Isle of Wight trial?
7. Doesn’t the disproportionate mortality rates for those in deprived areas and BAME communities show that Covid-19 thrives on inequalities and we need a funded strategy to support low paid, deprived and marginalised communities including enforced protections in the workplace when we transition out of lockdown?
8. What is the attitude of ministers to banning flights or testing at ports of entry given the chief scientific officer told the health select committee today we imported many cases from Spain and Italy in early March?
9. We now face a mountain of unmet non-Covid clinical need, with two million operations cancelled, treatments delayed, A&E attendance down, cancer referrals dropping – how will the NHS meet this need while also continuing to treat Covid patients?
10. Will the Health Secretary now allocate additional investment to help clear the growing waiting list backlog?
Referring to the non-coronavirus demand on the health service, Hancock declared that this is “incredibly important” and said that his department is working to reopen the NHS. He did not respond to Ashworth’s call to allocate additional investment.
He declined to comment on the majority of the questions put to him in the questions session by the Shadow Health Secretary. Hancock also dodged a question from shadow minister and A&E doctor Rosena Allin-Khan, when criticised over the roll-out of the testing strategy.
The total number of coronavirus deaths in the UK, according to the data released this morning, has now reached 32,375. The number of confirmed cases in the country is 194,990 but with low levels of testing the figure is thought to be much higher.


labourlist--2020-05-05--Sadiq Khan backs post-crisis universal basic income to aid recovery

London mayor Sadiq Khan has backed the idea of a universal basic income to aid economic recovery after the coronavirus crisis – despite UK Labour not supporting the move .
In an email sent this afternoon to party members in the capital , Khan referred to a “ new settlement that offers proper security for all ” that he said “ should include ideas like a universal basic income ” .
In the context of the UK social security system “ buckling , he described the UBI proposal as one that is “ gaining support around the world and would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
When Keir Starmer ’ s spokesperson has been asked about a recovery UBI , as advocated by other opposition parties and Labour MPs such as Clive Lewis , no support has been expressed for the move .
“ We agree that the Covid crisis has confirmed that the current social security system isn ’ t fit for purpose , ” the spokesperson said , pointing out that Labour has called for a “ series of urgent actions ” as a result .
Labour has demanded that the government implement emergency changes to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as increases in the standard allowance and an end to the five-week wait .
But on UBI , the Labour leader ’ s office has remained vague on future policies , saying only : “ Creating an entirely new social security system is unlikely to be possible during the crisis .
“ But as we come out of the pandemic , we ’ ll be making arguments for a new settlement that is more simple , more effective and offers proper protection to people.
” Khan also said in his email that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers “ will be needed long into the future ” – though the Chancellor confirmed on Monday that he wanted to “ wind down the scheme ” .
Although the London mayor was frank about downsides to the Covid-19 restrictions , he argued that “ we shouldn ’ t look backwards to life as it was before this virus ” as it “ exposed the fragility in our society and deep flaws in our economy ” .
In the straight-talking message , Khan told Labour members : “ I want to be honest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ return to life as it was before the virus – instead we face a ‘ new normal ’ even once lockdown is eased.
” Setting out his view of which normal activities may be able to resume and which won ’ t , Khan added : “ We may be able to occasionally see our closest loved ones – but interactions will be limited and for a while there will be no larger gatherings .
“ While non-essential shops will be able to reopen after introducing social distancing measures , it is difficult @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extended to bars , restaurants or social spaces in a practicable way soon .
And most people who are currently able to work from home will need to continue doing so for the foreseeable future.
” He also warned that Londoners using public transport are “ likely to have to use non-medical face coverings ” , and that school and work start times “ will have to be staggered ” to avoid congestion .
Khan confirmed that action will be taken “ to enable many more Londoners to walk or cycle ” , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will have long-term consequences for TfL and other transport providers .
His email concluded : “ The Labour Party must be at the forefront of designing the better , fairer and greener city , country and world we want to see once this crisis is over – particularly as we head into the London elections next year .
”

London mayor Sadiq Khan has backed the idea of a universal basic income to aid economic recovery after the coronavirus crisis – despite UK Labour not supporting the move.
In an email sent this afternoon to party members in the capital, Khan referred to a “new settlement that offers proper security for all” that he said “should include ideas like a universal basic income”.
In the context of the UK social security system “buckling, he described the UBI proposal as one that is “gaining support around the world and would ensure everybody can at least survive”.
When Keir Starmer’s spokesperson has been asked about a recovery UBI, as advocated by other opposition parties and Labour MPs such as Clive Lewis, no support has been expressed for the move.
“We agree that the Covid crisis has confirmed that the current social security system isn’t fit for purpose,” the spokesperson said, pointing out that Labour has called for a “series of urgent actions” as a result.
Labour has demanded that the government implement emergency changes to the much-criticised Universal Credit system, such as increases in the standard allowance and an end to the five-week wait.
But on UBI, the Labour leader’s office has remained vague on future policies, saying only: “Creating an entirely new social security system is unlikely to be possible during the crisis.
“But as we come out of the pandemic, we’ll be making arguments for a new settlement that is more simple, more effective and offers proper protection to people.”
Khan also said in his email that the government furlough scheme currently benefitting 6.3 million workers “will be needed long into the future” – though the Chancellor confirmed on Monday that he wanted to “wind down the scheme”.
Although the London mayor was frank about downsides to the Covid-19 restrictions, he argued that “we shouldn’t look backwards to life as it was before this virus” as it “exposed the fragility in our society and deep flaws in our economy”.
In the straight-talking message, Khan told Labour members: “I want to be honest with you that there will be no return to life as it was before the virus – instead we face a ‘new normal’ even once lockdown is eased.”
Setting out his view of which normal activities may be able to resume and which won’t, Khan added: “We may be able to occasionally see our closest loved ones – but interactions will be limited and for a while there will be no larger gatherings.
“While non-essential shops will be able to reopen after introducing social distancing measures, it is difficult to see how this can safely be extended to bars, restaurants or social spaces in a practicable way soon. And most people who are currently able to work from home will need to continue doing so for the foreseeable future.”
He also warned that Londoners using public transport are “likely to have to use non-medical face coverings”, and that school and work start times “will have to be staggered” to avoid congestion.
Khan confirmed that action will be taken “to enable many more Londoners to walk or cycle”, and noted that these changes in behaviour will have long-term consequences for TfL and other transport providers.
His email concluded: “The Labour Party must be at the forefront of designing the better, fairer and greener city, country and world we want to see once this crisis is over – particularly as we head into the London elections next year.”


labourlist--2020-05-05--We want to see “test, test, test” – not delay, delay, delay

The end of April came and went , sadly with too little focus on Matt Hancock ’ s promised 100,000 coronavirus tests a day by the end of the month .
Granted , on the last day the Health Secretary claimed to have delivered 122,000 tests .
But by May 3rd , the number was back down to 76,500 .
The latest figure is short of both the target and the actual testing capacity of the country .
Why has the government not been able to reach 100,000 tests per day , and why is it not using all the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ UK does not lack cases , nor does the country have a shortage of trained workers or reagents .
Here are three key ways in which this government is failing our country in handling this situation .
The fact of the matter is that this government initially decided to centralise all of its laboratory testing in a few large hubs without fully risk assessing or evaluating the impact properly .
That was – and remains – completely reckless .
What we have now seen is that this has taken longer to set up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ testing centres would not have caused .
Local authorities working with their local NHS counterparts are perfectly placed to step into this space and resolve the problem quickly .
Instead , we now have a government determined to turn to the private sector – in Deloitte , Palantir and others – bypassing our very own expertise in the process .
This is nothing more than the Tories once again attempting to press ahead with their privatisation ideology , at a time when the country is looking the other way and there is less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opposition to continue to put up this challenge and hold this government to account .
There is a failure to coordinate the use of resources .
It is now obvious that the government has failed to use all the resources available to ramp up its testing capacity .
As opposition MPs , we are still unclear as to why that is the case – despite numerous and repeated attempts by myself and colleagues to get answers .
I understand , for example , that Hancock ’ s team decided not to buy foreign-approved @ @ @ @ @ @ @ supplied the UK with 50,000 test kits a day .
We have some of the best laboratories in the world , yet the government chose to centralise testing .
This has left most research laboratories are empty , with trained staff furloughed , while care home workers are being asked to travel hundreds of miles to be tested .
Even the hugely successful NHS coronavirus volunteer pool is reporting that most volunteers have never been called on .
As a result , many frontline NHS staff and care workers have even been actively @ @ @ @ @ @ @ simply unacceptable and , again , nothing short of reckless .
Our care workers and NHS deserve better than this .
We ’ ve seen delay , delay , delay , instead of test , test , test .
It is obvious that this government dithered and delayed at the outset .
By its own admission , the initial focus was entirely on ‘ delay ’ .
This , as we now know , resulted in critical delays in implementing testing and contact-tracing programmes .
Only now is there a serious attempt to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we have heard from Hancock and his team that they have listened to the scientists and experts .
Why then have they ignored world leading experts at the World Health Organisation , who have been saying from the start that countries need to “ test , test , test ” ?
Our government instead focused on delay , attempting to mitigate the spread of the virus and failing .
Other countries were continuing to test and trace while implementing physical distancing and lockdowns .
This is precisely how South Korea was able to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s think carefully .
We have spent over a month in lockdown , and we are still seeing a high number of cases and fatalities on a daily basis .
Now Boris Johnson is talking about easing lockdown and reopening the country , but it is not being clear what these measures will include , or what impact assessment has been done to determine whether these actions will be enough to help stop the spread of the virus .
My fear is that Johnson and Hancock have learned nothing from just over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many times that with a high level of Covid-19 cases , the role of public health is and will be of utmost importance .
Now is the time to engage fully in the development of a comprehensive strategy for social care , and to ensure that local public health functions have the resources that they need to get the job done .

The end of April came and went, sadly with too little focus on Matt Hancock’s promised 100,000 coronavirus tests a day by the end of the month. Granted, on the last day the Health Secretary claimed to have delivered 122,000 tests. But by May 3rd, the number was back down to 76,500.
The latest figure is short of both the target and the actual testing capacity of the country. Why has the government not been able to reach 100,000 tests per day, and why is it not using all the testing capacity?
After all, the UK does not lack cases, nor does the country have a shortage of trained workers or reagents. Here are three key ways in which this government is failing our country in handling this situation.
It’s taking too long to implement.
The fact of the matter is that this government initially decided to centralise all of its laboratory testing in a few large hubs without fully risk assessing or evaluating the impact properly. That was – and remains – completely reckless. What we have now seen is that this has taken longer to set up due to logistical complications that using local testing centres would not have caused.
Local authorities working with their local NHS counterparts are perfectly placed to step into this space and resolve the problem quickly. Instead, we now have a government determined to turn to the private sector – in Deloitte, Palantir and others – bypassing our very own expertise in the process.
This is nothing more than the Tories once again attempting to press ahead with their privatisation ideology, at a time when the country is looking the other way and there is less scrutiny. It is our job in opposition to continue to put up this challenge and hold this government to account.
There is a failure to coordinate the use of resources.
It is now obvious that the government has failed to use all the resources available to ramp up its testing capacity. As opposition MPs, we are still unclear as to why that is the case – despite numerous and repeated attempts by myself and colleagues to get answers. I understand, for example, that Hancock’s team decided not to buy foreign-approved saliva test kits that could have eventually supplied the UK with 50,000 test kits a day.
We have some of the best laboratories in the world, yet the government chose to centralise testing. This has left most research laboratories are empty, with trained staff furloughed, while care home workers are being asked to travel hundreds of miles to be tested.
Even the hugely successful NHS coronavirus volunteer pool is reporting that most volunteers have never been called on. As a result, many frontline NHS staff and care workers have even been actively discouraged from getting tested. This is simply unacceptable and, again, nothing short of reckless. Our care workers and NHS deserve better than this.
We’ve seen delay, delay, delay, instead of test, test, test.
It is obvious that this government dithered and delayed at the outset. By its own admission, the initial focus was entirely on ‘delay’. This, as we now know, resulted in critical delays in implementing testing and contact-tracing programmes. Only now is there a serious attempt to ramp up contact tracing.
Countless times we have heard from Hancock and his team that they have listened to the scientists and experts. Why then have they ignored world leading experts at the World Health Organisation, who have been saying from the start that countries need to “test, test, test”?
Our government instead focused on delay, attempting to mitigate the spread of the virus and failing. Other countries were continuing to test and trace while implementing physical distancing and lockdowns. This is precisely how South Korea was able to dramatically reduce its case numbers.
Let’s think carefully. We have spent over a month in lockdown, and we are still seeing a high number of cases and fatalities on a daily basis. Now Boris Johnson is talking about easing lockdown and reopening the country, but it is not being clear what these measures will include, or what impact assessment has been done to determine whether these actions will be enough to help stop the spread of the virus.
My fear is that Johnson and Hancock have learned nothing from just over a month ago. I have said many times that with a high level of Covid-19 cases, the role of public health is and will be of utmost importance. Now is the time to engage fully in the development of a comprehensive strategy for social care, and to ensure that local public health functions have the resources that they need to get the job done.


labourlist--2020-05-05--WATCH: Hancock tells Dr Rosena Allin-Khan she has the wrong “tone”

Labour MP and A & E doctor Rosena Allin-Khan was told by Matt Hancock to “ take a leaf out of the shadow secretary of state ’ s book in terms of tone ” when she asked the Health Secretary whether the lack of Covid-19 testing had cost lives .
During questions to the spokesperson on health and social care , Allin-Khan described how “ frontline workers like me have had to watch families break into pieces as we deliver the very worst of news to them ” .
She criticised the approach on both community and mass testing for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s strategy had been “ non-existent ” , and claimed that the “ testing figures are now being manipulated ” .
She added : “ Does the Secretary of State commit to a minimum of 100,000 tests each day going forward ?
And does the Secretary of State acknowledge that many frontline workers feel that the government ’ s lack of testing has cost lives ?
” Hancock announced that the government had reached its 100,000 test per day target on April 30th , but this included 39,000 which were sent to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for which there is no timeframe on their completion .
The figure dropped sharply the next day and on May 3rd there were only 76,500 tests carried out , despite continuing reports of a high demand for tests for key workers in the health and care sectors and others .
The UK ’ s coronavirus death toll is now the highest in Europe at 32,375 , according to the Office for National Statistics .
The number of confirmed cases is 190,584 , but with low levels of testing the figure is thought to @ @ @ @

Labour MP and A&E doctor Rosena Allin-Khan was told by Matt Hancock to “take a leaf out of the shadow secretary of state’s book in terms of tone” when she asked the Health Secretary whether the lack of Covid-19 testing had cost lives.
During questions to the spokesperson on health and social care, Allin-Khan described how “frontline workers like me have had to watch families break into pieces as we deliver the very worst of news to them”.
She criticised the approach on both community and mass testing for the virus, saying that the government’s strategy had been “non-existent”, and claimed that the “testing figures are now being manipulated”.
She added: “Does the Secretary of State commit to a minimum of 100,000 tests each day going forward? And does the Secretary of State acknowledge that many frontline workers feel that the government’s lack of testing has cost lives?”
I will respectfully challenge the Government – I want our country to succeed. However, I will not 'watch my tone' when dozens of NHS and care staff are dying unnecessarily. A clip of my Q to the Health Sec today. pic.twitter.com/5jjQRXyIm3 — Dr Rosena Allin-Khan (@DrRosena) May 5, 2020
Hancock announced that the government had reached its 100,000 test per day target on April 30th, but this included 39,000 which were sent to households, had not been returned and for which there is no timeframe on their completion.
The figure dropped sharply the next day and on May 3rd there were only 76,500 tests carried out, despite continuing reports of a high demand for tests for key workers in the health and care sectors and others.
The UK’s coronavirus death toll is now the highest in Europe at 32,375, according to the Office for National Statistics. The number of confirmed cases is 190,584, but with low levels of testing the figure is thought to be much higher.


labourlist--2020-05-05--Society of Labour Lawyers: Legal considerations for lifting the lockdown

Keir is right : it ’ s time to have an adult conversation about easing the lockdown in the UK .
Coronavirus restrictions , including the ones we are currently living under , are vital to stop the spread of Covid-19 and save lives .
But there must be a plan for how these measures will gradually be lifted .
That is why the Society of Labour Lawyers has published a report considering the legal implications of some of the key measures that are likely to be used by the government in the next phase of the crisis .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the pandemic were rushed , and consequently full of holes that are starting to be exposed .
But there has been a remarkable level of compliance from the public and a real spirit of national unity in the face of this unprecedented challenge .
We have all accepted that some quite extreme steps , including a national lockdown , are necessary to bring Covid-19 under control .
We also accept that , as we slowly return to normality , further measures are needed to continue to save lives and prevent our public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for example the use of face masks in public , mass testing of the population , tracking people ’ s movements , immunity passports or maintaining a lockdown for certain high-risk groups whilst easing the restrictions on everyone else .
These measures will be more complicated to implement in practice .
The practical challenges come with difficult moral and ethical questions .
On the one hand , there is the need to protect people ’ s lives and livelihoods .
On the other , we face restrictions on our civil liberties and intrusion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been unacceptable only a few months ago .
Even more challenging is the fact that these restrictions are likely to apply to different people in different ways – risking arbitrariness and unfairness when put into practice .
The purpose of the law is to balance these competing pressures and address these difficult questions in a fair and proportionate way .
The government ’ s comprehensive plan for easing the lockdown must be underpinned by a robust legal framework to ensure that people ’ s rights , wellbeing and legitimate interests are protected .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ government might try , including lifting the lockdown for essential businesses , lower-risk groups or geographical areas .
Whilst this approach is legally possible , it requires careful and evidence-led justification for treating certain groups differently .
There is also a risk that disadvantaged groups may be disproportionately affected , raising significant legal issues .
Digital tools such as mobile apps with tracing functionalities can play an important role in contact tracing and warning .
This allows public health authorities to quickly identify as many contacts as possible with a confirmed case of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rely on private companies for its design and management .
For an app to be rolled out successfully , steps to protect the personal health data of UK citizens must be taken .
This could include contract conditions or legislation imposed on the tech companies involved in collecting the data , ensuring that our health data can not be sold or otherwise used for commercial ends .
The report also looks at how the most vulnerable groups might be ‘ shielded ’ , and whether this could be done voluntarily or would require @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government decides to change the law , there are significant practical and legal problems , in particular in relation to defining clearly the shielded group and properly communicating the new policy .
If the policy is enforced by the law , this requires accepting that vulnerable people will face criminal liability in a way that does not affect the rest of the population .
In addition , restrictions that are disproportionate or lack proper justification are likely to be subject to legal challenge .
In response to our report , Shadow Attorney @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I very much welcome this paper .
It ’ s part of a vital debate to ensure that these necessary laws restricting activity to promote public health have public confidence .
Policy makers and law makers should read the paper .
They don ’ t need to agree with all of it but it focuses the legal debate on the key issues.
” Lord Falconer will be joining the Society of Labour Lawyers for a webinar to discuss the report .
The webinar can be watched live here on Tuesday , May 5th @ @ @ @

Keir is right: it’s time to have an adult conversation about easing the lockdown in the UK. Coronavirus restrictions, including the ones we are currently living under, are vital to stop the spread of Covid-19 and save lives. But there must be a plan for how these measures will gradually be lifted. That is why the Society of Labour Lawyers has published a report considering the legal implications of some of the key measures that are likely to be used by the government in the next phase of the crisis.
The measures implemented by the government to respond to the pandemic were rushed, and consequently full of holes that are starting to be exposed. But there has been a remarkable level of compliance from the public and a real spirit of national unity in the face of this unprecedented challenge. We have all accepted that some quite extreme steps, including a national lockdown, are necessary to bring Covid-19 under control.
We also accept that, as we slowly return to normality, further measures are needed to continue to save lives and prevent our public services being overwhelmed. They might include for example the use of face masks in public, mass testing of the population, tracking people’s movements, immunity passports or maintaining a lockdown for certain high-risk groups whilst easing the restrictions on everyone else. These measures will be more complicated to implement in practice.
The practical challenges come with difficult moral and ethical questions. On the one hand, there is the need to protect people’s lives and livelihoods. On the other, we face restrictions on our civil liberties and intrusion into our private lives that would have been unacceptable only a few months ago. Even more challenging is the fact that these restrictions are likely to apply to different people in different ways – risking arbitrariness and unfairness when put into practice.
The purpose of the law is to balance these competing pressures and address these difficult questions in a fair and proportionate way. The government’s comprehensive plan for easing the lockdown must be underpinned by a robust legal framework to ensure that people’s rights, wellbeing and legitimate interests are protected.
Our report examines various policies that the government might try, including lifting the lockdown for essential businesses, lower-risk groups or geographical areas. Whilst this approach is legally possible, it requires careful and evidence-led justification for treating certain groups differently. There is also a risk that disadvantaged groups may be disproportionately affected, raising significant legal issues.
Digital tools such as mobile apps with tracing functionalities can play an important role in contact tracing and warning. This allows public health authorities to quickly identify as many contacts as possible with a confirmed case of Covid-19 – and the app will likely rely on private companies for its design and management. For an app to be rolled out successfully, steps to protect the personal health data of UK citizens must be taken. This could include contract conditions or legislation imposed on the tech companies involved in collecting the data, ensuring that our health data cannot be sold or otherwise used for commercial ends.
The report also looks at how the most vulnerable groups might be ‘shielded’, and whether this could be done voluntarily or would require a change to existing legislation. If the government decides to change the law, there are significant practical and legal problems, in particular in relation to defining clearly the shielded group and properly communicating the new policy. If the policy is enforced by the law, this requires accepting that vulnerable people will face criminal liability in a way that does not affect the rest of the population. In addition, restrictions that are disproportionate or lack proper justification are likely to be subject to legal challenge.
In response to our report, Shadow Attorney General Lord Falconer QC said: “I very much welcome this paper. It’s part of a vital debate to ensure that these necessary laws restricting activity to promote public health have public confidence. Policy makers and law makers should read the paper. They don’t need to agree with all of it but it focuses the legal debate on the key issues.” Lord Falconer will be joining the Society of Labour Lawyers for a webinar to discuss the report.
The webinar can be watched live here on Tuesday, May 5th, at 6pm.


labourlist--2020-05-06--WATCH: “What was so special about 30th April?” Starmer asks PM

“ What was so special about 30th of April that meant that testing was so high ?
” Keir Starmer asked the Prime Minister at their first Prime Minister ’ s Questions session today .
“ On 30th April , the government claimed success in meeting its 100,000 tests a day target , ” the new Labour leader used his PMQs turn to point out .
“ Since then , as the PM knows , the number has fallen back .
On Monday , there were just 84,000 tests , and that meant 24,000 available tests were not used.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think that the Honourable Gentleman was right last week when he paid tribute to the amazing work… in getting up from 2,000 tests a day in March to 120,000 by the end of April.
” The Prime Minister then announced a new target of 200,000 tests a day by the end of May , and for a further ramping up of testing thereafter .
“ Yes , he ’ s right that capacity currently exceeds demand .
We ’ re working on that .
We ’ re running at about 100,000 a day @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get up to 200,000 a day by the end of this month .
”

“What was so special about 30th of April that meant that testing was so high?” Keir Starmer asked the Prime Minister at their first Prime Minister’s Questions session today.
“On 30th April, the government claimed success in meeting its 100,000 tests a day target,” the new Labour leader used his PMQs turn to point out.
“Since then, as the PM knows, the number has fallen back. On Monday, there were just 84,000 tests, and that meant 24,000 available tests were not used.”
Boris Johnson replied: “Actually I think that the Honourable Gentleman was right last week when he paid tribute to the amazing work… in getting up from 2,000 tests a day in March to 120,000 by the end of April.”
The Prime Minister then announced a new target of 200,000 tests a day by the end of May, and for a further ramping up of testing thereafter.
“Yes, he’s right that capacity currently exceeds demand. We’re working on that. We’re running at about 100,000 a day. But the ambition clearly is to get up to 200,000 a day by the end of this month.”


labourlist--2020-05-06--Labour’s path back to power starts with changing itself

Keir Starmer has a strong mandate for change .
The leadership election confirmed Labour ’ s desire to unite and do what it takes to win again .
With Keir at the helm , Labour can start by taking the following steps necessary to get back into Number 10 .
The new Labour leadership can now set a new narrative and tell the public an honest story about where the party went wrong , how it is changing , and who and what it stands for .
In demonstrating change , deeds are as necessary as words .
A leader @ @ @ @ @ @ @ take decisive action .
This approach is as important for building trust and respect amongst members as it is for getting back lost Labour voters .
Keir needs to give clear signals throughout his leadership that Labour is changing , and those who share his vision will embrace his changes and champion them .
A leader will need a team if he is to secure the swing Labour needs to form this country ’ s next government .
This team needs to have the leader ’ s confidence to take the decisions needed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need to be appointed with the skills , experience and competence to get the job done regardless of their past positions or politics on the left or right of the party , and given responsibility for specific areas of work : • the policy and rule changes necessary to eradicate antisemitism and enact a new independent disciplinary process and any other EHRC recommendations ; • candidates for election selected on experience and competence ; • a new role and status for local government and councillors in our party ; • a relationship with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ development is prioritised , all trade union members views are heard , and their role in getting more working-class people into elected office is made a reality ; • a new consultative relationship with civil society and business , especially SMEs ; • and actions that prove antisemitism , bullying , racism , and any form of harassment has no place in the Labour party ; we will disagree and debate with each other , but we will do so within a new culture of tolerance and mutual respect .
Build unity from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leader ’ s new teammates .
We have always had a vibrant activist base ; an enduring strength other political parties have found it hard to match .
Prioritising training and engaging the membership – even if it has to be virtual for the next few months – in the electoral tasks and challenges ahead of Labour will create a sense of purpose within the membership that will motivate , inspire and build the unity the party desperately needs .
Keir ’ s first electoral test is a year away so there is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ targets and the desire to win .
A properly trained , re-focused and mobilised membership is a formidable force on the ground .
Having a positive and constructive relationship with every member of the NEC is necessary for the leader and his senior team .
In opposition , the leader should never forget it is the party – its members , its staff , all under the direction of the NEC – who will secure his route to Number 10 .
Neil Kinnock sat through every NEC meeting from start to finish during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ delegation will undoubtedly be necessary as we become the most effective opposition we can be , this open-door approach for every NEC member needs to be maintained .
We have a long road back to secure the trust of the voters we need to get back into power .
It may not – and should not – dominate the front pages , but building an internal operation that is effective and relentlessly focused on winning must be a top priority for Keir and his team .
Unless we can create a strong , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ risk continuing to pull in different directions , fighting each other and not the Tories .
It ’ s time to come together and show we are the party ready to lead the country towards a better future .

Keir Starmer has a strong mandate for change. The leadership election confirmed Labour’s desire to unite and do what it takes to win again. With Keir at the helm, Labour can start by taking the following steps necessary to get back into Number 10.
Communication
The new Labour leadership can now set a new narrative and tell the public an honest story about where the party went wrong, how it is changing, and who and what it stands for. In demonstrating change, deeds are as necessary as words. A leader has to say what they mean and take decisive action. This approach is as important for building trust and respect amongst members as it is for getting back lost Labour voters. Keir needs to give clear signals throughout his leadership that Labour is changing, and those who share his vision will embrace his changes and champion them.
Delegation
A leader will need a team if he is to secure the swing Labour needs to form this country’s next government. This team needs to have the leader’s confidence to take the decisions needed to make organisational change happen. People need to be appointed with the skills, experience and competence to get the job done regardless of their past positions or politics on the left or right of the party, and given responsibility for specific areas of work:
a refocused professional staff team with clear goals and tasks;
the policy and rule changes necessary to eradicate antisemitism and enact a new independent disciplinary process and any other EHRC recommendations;
candidates for election selected on experience and competence;
a new role and status for local government and councillors in our party;
a relationship with the whole trade union movement where policy development is prioritised, all trade union members views are heard, and their role in getting more working-class people into elected office is made a reality;
a new consultative relationship with civil society and business, especially SMEs;
and actions that prove antisemitism, bullying, racism, and any form of harassment has no place in the Labour party; we will disagree and debate with each other, but we will do so within a new culture of tolerance and mutual respect.
Build unity from the ground up
Labour members are the leader’s new teammates. We have always had a vibrant activist base; an enduring strength other political parties have found it hard to match. Prioritising training and engaging the membership – even if it has to be virtual for the next few months – in the electoral tasks and challenges ahead of Labour will create a sense of purpose within the membership that will motivate, inspire and build the unity the party desperately needs.
Keir’s first electoral test is a year away so there is time to unite the organisation around electoral targets and the desire to win. A properly trained, re-focused and mobilised membership is a formidable force on the ground.
The importance of Labour’s national executive committee
Having a positive and constructive relationship with every member of the NEC is necessary for the leader and his senior team. In opposition, the leader should never forget it is the party – its members, its staff, all under the direction of the NEC – who will secure his route to Number 10. Neil Kinnock sat through every NEC meeting from start to finish during his time as leader, and though delegation will undoubtedly be necessary as we become the most effective opposition we can be, this open-door approach for every NEC member needs to be maintained.
We have a long road back to secure the trust of the voters we need to get back into power. It may not – and should not – dominate the front pages, but building an internal operation that is effective and relentlessly focused on winning must be a top priority for Keir and his team. Unless we can create a strong, united and disciplined party machine, we risk continuing to pull in different directions, fighting each other and not the Tories. It’s time to come together and show we are the party ready to lead the country towards a better future.


labourlist--2020-05-06--The threat of more austerity is chilling for councils in the Covid crisis

It has already become somewhat of a cliché to talk about not going back to the pre-coronavirus world when this crisis is eventually over , and to harness what positive changes we can in order to address the inequalities that existed in our society before .
Not least to address the causes and unequal impact of the climate crisis .
Of course , as Labour activists , our default setting is to seek to change the world around us .
Yet for councils dealing on the ground with the scale of challenge and re-thinking required by the crisis , we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government eventually to materialise after the warm , soapy headlines of a No 10 daily briefing .
Nor can we wait for the slow machinery of Westminster to grind out some top-down solutions in a year ’ s – or even a few months ’ – time .
As ever , where national politics fails , Labour councils are stepping up and delivering for our communities .
Already in this crisis , councils have picked up the slack – keeping essential services going , delivering food parcels for vulnerable people , filling the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ incompetence , and supporting communities to get each other through these difficult times .
In Lambeth , we ’ re proud to have been one of the first to set up our food distribution hub for vulnerable people , supplementing the meagre efforts of central government by delivering fresh food and care packages for over 8,000 people in just a couple of weeks .
And delivered by cargo bike , too !
It ’ s been no different with our emergency transport response .
We ’ ve responded to the dangers that result @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to follow government regulations and health advice .
And , rightly , the question is being asked : how do we embed the positive changes , particularly fewer cars on our streets and better air quality ?
We can not lurch from one health crisis back to another .
But without bold intervention , we risk seeing a rush back to cars as workers stay away from public transport .
And whilst in lockdown , we have seen increases in speeding at times by more than 50 % .
Over 70 % of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the majority don ’ t own a car .
That means most of our residents have no outside space and are increasingly trying to enjoy the public space available in their local neighbourhood that , in normal times , is still too dominated by rat-running , congestion and speeding traffic .
Last week , we were the first council in the country to launch a Covid-19 emergency transport plan .
It includes temporarily widening our pavements at the worst pinch points to enable safe social distancing ; and looking at interventions that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as restrictions are eased and people need to access local town centres for employment and shopping .
Our plan is informed by , and builds on , our longstanding ambitions set out in our transport strategy last year , to create ‘ healthy routes ’ – safer routes for walking and cycling – and ‘ low traffic neighbourhoods ’ right across the borough .
Through the strategy , and with the projects on which we had been working with TfL – such as the Brixton liveable neighbourhood – we are building a borough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and cycle safely .
Since we began to implement our emergency transport response , we ’ ve learnt that the tube would need to be cut to just 12 % use whilst government social distancing measures remain in place .
So it is all the more important that we manage our transport network in Lambeth , and with TfL , in a safe , sustainable way .
And in a way that will enable healthy choices to be made by our residents to walk and cycle .
We need a transport system that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to help tackle the climate crisis , whilst also supporting our local economy to enable a genuine green recovery .
Of course , none of this has yet been supported by government , which has consistently failed to take meaningful action on climate change , to fund improvements to make neighbourhoods cleaner and greener – or even to support local councils trying to take these emergency measures during this crisis .
In Lambeth , we ’ ve worked with residents and campaign groups who are sick of their roads not being safe , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s walk to school .
But whilst they have shown huge support for action we have taken , they rightly want us to go much further and to fund significant and long-lasting changes to our environment .
It ’ s our ambition to go further .
But we estimate that the government ’ s U-turn on council funding could leave Lambeth over £25m out of pocket after funding our response to Covid-19 .
Already , we have seen Tory councils express concerns of bankruptcy and , as an inner-city council hammered by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cuts , the threat of more austerity is a chilling one for local services that have barely hung on in there for years .
Our message could not be clearer : local services can not be forced to pay the price for this crisis and to build a better future .
We need properly funded local councils , empowered to take the kind of radical interventions our communities need .
In Lambeth , we have the ambition , fantastic partners and the community support to do it and we ’ re already well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ genuine investment , not Tory cuts , to make it a reality .

It has already become somewhat of a cliché to talk about not going back to the pre-coronavirus world when this crisis is eventually over, and to harness what positive changes we can in order to address the inequalities that existed in our society before. Not least to address the causes and unequal impact of the climate crisis. Of course, as Labour activists, our default setting is to seek to change the world around us. Yet for councils dealing on the ground with the scale of challenge and re-thinking required by the crisis, we cannot wait for clarity from central government eventually to materialise after the warm, soapy headlines of a No 10 daily briefing. Nor can we wait for the slow machinery of Westminster to grind out some top-down solutions in a year’s – or even a few months’ – time.
As ever, where national politics fails, Labour councils are stepping up and delivering for our communities. Already in this crisis, councils have picked up the slack – keeping essential services going, delivering food parcels for vulnerable people, filling the personal protective equipment gap left by government incompetence, and supporting communities to get each other through these difficult times. In Lambeth, we’re proud to have been one of the first to set up our food distribution hub for vulnerable people, supplementing the meagre efforts of central government by delivering fresh food and care packages for over 8,000 people in just a couple of weeks. And delivered by cargo bike, too!
It’s been no different with our emergency transport response. We’ve responded to the dangers that result from using our neighbourhoods differently in order to follow government regulations and health advice. And, rightly, the question is being asked: how do we embed the positive changes, particularly fewer cars on our streets and better air quality? We cannot lurch from one health crisis back to another. But without bold intervention, we risk seeing a rush back to cars as workers stay away from public transport. And whilst in lockdown, we have seen increases in speeding at times by more than 50%.
Over 70% of our households in Lambeth live in flats and the majority don’t own a car. That means most of our residents have no outside space and are increasingly trying to enjoy the public space available in their local neighbourhood that, in normal times, is still too dominated by rat-running, congestion and speeding traffic. Last week, we were the first council in the country to launch a Covid-19 emergency transport plan. It includes temporarily widening our pavements at the worst pinch points to enable safe social distancing; and looking at interventions that can reduce road danger in our neighbourhoods as restrictions are eased and people need to access local town centres for employment and shopping.
Our plan is informed by, and builds on, our longstanding ambitions set out in our transport strategy last year, to create ‘healthy routes’ – safer routes for walking and cycling – and ‘low traffic neighbourhoods’ right across the borough. Through the strategy, and with the projects on which we had been working with TfL – such as the Brixton liveable neighbourhood – we are building a borough where everybody will feel able to walk and cycle safely. Since we began to implement our emergency transport response, we’ve learnt that the tube would need to be cut to just 12% use whilst government social distancing measures remain in place. So it is all the more important that we manage our transport network in Lambeth, and with TfL, in a safe, sustainable way. And in a way that will enable healthy choices to be made by our residents to walk and cycle.
We need a transport system that supports us reaching our carbon reduction targets to help tackle the climate crisis, whilst also supporting our local economy to enable a genuine green recovery. Of course, none of this has yet been supported by government, which has consistently failed to take meaningful action on climate change, to fund improvements to make neighbourhoods cleaner and greener – or even to support local councils trying to take these emergency measures during this crisis. In Lambeth, we’ve worked with residents and campaign groups who are sick of their roads not being safe, and sick of pollution marring their children’s walk to school. But whilst they have shown huge support for action we have taken, they rightly want us to go much further and to fund significant and long-lasting changes to our environment.
It’s our ambition to go further. But we estimate that the government’s U-turn on council funding could leave Lambeth over £25m out of pocket after funding our response to Covid-19. Already, we have seen Tory councils express concerns of bankruptcy and, as an inner-city council hammered by a decade of Tory and Lib Dem cuts, the threat of more austerity is a chilling one for local services that have barely hung on in there for years.
Our message could not be clearer: local services cannot be forced to pay the price for this crisis and to build a better future. We need properly funded local councils, empowered to take the kind of radical interventions our communities need. In Lambeth, we have the ambition, fantastic partners and the community support to do it and we’re already well on the journey. But we need genuine investment, not Tory cuts, to make it a reality.