labourlist--2020-03-12--“Chancellor, you are sowing the seeds of disappointment” – McDonnell’s Budget response

Below is the full text of the speech delivered by Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell in the House of Commons today , in response to the Budget announced on Wednesday .
As we face the coronavirus crisis it ’ s vital that we demonstrate to the people of our country that we are meeting this crisis head-on and that we will defeat it .
And we will .
As I have already said , this is no time for partisan political knockabout or for that matter political publicity stunts .
We have lives to save so we must all work together @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and parties across this House to protect our people and to contribute to the world-wide effort to overcome the outbreak of this virus .
So we welcome the government ’ s package of measures announced yesterday .
We must ensure , though , that alongside the medical and scientific strategy to contain , mitigate and halt the spread of the virus , the economic strategy is equally comprehensive .
We agree with the government that the NHS must receive whatever resources it needs .
Let me at this stage pay tribute to and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always are rising to this challenge with their usual professionalism and dedication .
We acknowledge that they are doing so at a time when they are already under extreme pressures .
The other key service that we need to support in this emergency is of course social care .
It is unclear from government statements so far what additional support is being provided to social care .
Social care is in crisis already in this country .
One and a half million people – before this virus outbreak – were not receiving the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 120,000 staff vacancies and many of the private providers have been on the financial edge for some time .
The majority of people who do receive social care are older , disabled or vulnerable people .
These are the people most at risk from the coronavirus infection .
We have an £8bn funding gap in social care budgets , as the result of ten years of austerity .
Providers and local authorities are already stretched to near breaking point .
We need to know how much additional support is being provided specifically to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in place if individual providers are unable to cope .
A large section of our care workforce is now also under threat from the government ’ s recently announced immigration policy .
The GMB union calculates that the government ’ s immigration policy will cost the care sector 500,000 staff .
Without foreign care workers our care system would collapse .
The message is clear to the Home Secretary : do not put our social care system at risk .
Pragmatism must override ideology .
Social care in this country also still often @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Usually to the older women in families .
It is many of these women whose pension age was increased without proper consultation or notification , who were effectively robbed of many years of their pension and who this government , despite all of Johnson ’ s pre-election promises , has refused to compensate .
When I met WASPI women last week , it ’ s no wonder they were angry still .
If there is to be any good to come from the developing tragedy of the coronavirus outbreak it must be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It is now overwhelmingly clear that no government can inflict a decade of cuts and austerity on our public services – like the NHS and social care services – without impacting upon their resilience in a time of crisis .
Ten years of cuts and failure to invest in services have meant we are extremely ill prepared for dealing with this type of large-scale health risk to our community .
We know the NHS is already under intense pressure after years of underfunding and understaffing .
17,000 beds have been cut .
Bed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week .
Critical care bed occupancy was 80 % .
These are the beds we rely on in episodes like the coronavirus .
The NHS is short of 100,000 staff – including over 40,000 nurses and thousands of doctors .
But we also have to recognise that the NHS needs putting on a longer-term stable footing with secure financial backing for the long term .
Just as we have over the coronavirus outbreak , we must listen to the clinicians and experts when it comes to what is needed .
It shouldn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the NHS the resources it needs .
Turning to the support to individuals and businesses : we welcome many of the measures the Chancellor set out yesterday .
The Budget stated that statutory sick pay ( SSP ) will be paid from the first day of sickness absence and that people would be compensated for self-isolation .
But the government guidance appears to exclude workers on zero-hours contracts , part-time workers , and people earning below the lower earnings limit of £118 per week , saying they are ineligible for SSP and can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Let ’ s be clear : will these people be covered ?
Sick pay is currently set at the extremely low rate of £94.25 .
That ’ s about £18 a day , while average pre-tax earnings are £511 per week , in nominal terms .
Without lifting statutory sick pay , all but the most financially secure will err on the side of caution and self-isolate .
All but the most financially secure will be asked to take a significant pay cut in order to self-isolate .
That leaves people , inevitably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ For those being directed by government to universal credit , can I ask : What , if anything , has been done to reduce the five-week delay in receiving Universal Credit and ensure there are staffing resources within DWP to cope ?
The chancellor announced yesterday a £500m fund for councils to administer .
Could the minister clarify how much this means for each local authority ?
And will the hard-stretched local authorities receive support for delivering this ?
Councils are also being asked to administer £2.2bn of funding to support businesses to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resourcing will councils be given , as they are asked to take on more responsibilities after ten years of being hollowed out ?
The government urgently needs to provide the certainty that the public deserves .
Our worry is that because this package isn ’ t comprehensive , it ultimately won ’ t make us safer and may put our people at risk .
Although it has been reported that there has been some communication between finance ministers , it ’ s certainly not clear that it is of the scale or depth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ result , whatever statements have been made have not had the effect of steadying markets or reassuring people more generally that there is an internationally agreed strategy to address the economic consequences of this emergency .
Whatever criticism people may have of Gordon Brown ’ s policy strategy in the banking crisis , nobody can question the international leadership he showed and the focus and determination he brought to dealing with those events globally .
I regret that we have not seen that leadership , commitment , political , diplomatic and indeed managerial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Chancellor .
As in the past , the UK could and should play a critical role in mobilising the international bodies we have , in particular the UN , to agree a global response to deal not just with the current wave of this pandemic but possible subsequent waves .
In addition to the emergency we face with coronavirus we mustn ’ t lose sight of the two other crises we face .
One is the crisis in our public services , and in the levels of poverty and inequality in our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the existential threat of climate change .
Yesterday ’ s Budget failed to address the social emergency .
A social emergency that sees 4.5m of our children living in poverty .
70 per cent of those children are living in households where an adult is in work .
There was nothing in the Budget to relieve the hardships inflicted on our community by universal credit , the bedroom tax , and – especially for disabled people – the work capability assessment .
In fact the government ’ s own table accompanying the Budget @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the worst as a result of tax decisions made in this Budget and the last spending round , with the bulk of the benefits flowing to higher paid households .
Some people are saying this could have been a Labour Budget .
Those people haven ’ t looked hard enough at who wins and who loses from this Budget .
Not one family will be lifted out of in-work poverty because of what was announced yesterday .
We heard again the government ’ s aspiration to get a national living wage to two-thirds @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s not a real living wage .
And it ’ s an aspiration for five years ’ time .
And only if “ economic conditions allow ” .
Worryingly , there is nothing of any substance in the Budget to tackle the long-term crises in each of our public services .
Let ’ s take the justice system .
In prisons , there has been a sharp rise in deaths , violence , self-harm , and suicides , all linked to cuts , according to the Institute for government .
The House of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ £1.2bn gap in justice funding .
So the small sums in this Budget like £175m for prison maintenance – just won ’ t cut it .
Not one prison officer will be safer on the landings because of this Budget .
And on domestic violence : according to Women ’ s Aid , ten domestic abuse victims are turned away from women ’ s refuges every day because of a lack of space .
This Budget needed to commit £173m to ensure no survivor is turned away .
It hasn ’ t done @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Domestic Violence Bill simply can not be delivered .
Not one women ’ s refuge can feel assured it will get the funding it needs .
When , as the NEU has said , class sizes are rising , subjects are being dropped , and inadequate pay is making the education staffing crisis worse .
There will be few teachers from whom pressure will be lifted .
On housing , derisory sums earmarked for rough sleeping when we know at least £1bn is needed to reverse the cuts in homelessness services @ @ @ @ @ @ @ homelessness .
We heard that from the Prime Minister when he was mayor of London – that rough sleeping would be ended in London by the 2012 Olympics .
Rough sleeping doubled during the Prime Minister ’ s second term as mayor .
Not one library will be reopened as a result of this Budget .
Not one youth centre .
Not one Sure Start Centre .
The IFS told us that £54bn of day to day spending was needed , outside of health and social care , to return per head to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t meet that target .
Why hasn ’ t the government gone further ?
People need to understand what conservatism is in this country .
The Conservative Party will say or do anything it can to gain and retain power , except shift power and wealth to working people .
Just look at what they did yesterday : Choosing to keep Entrepreneurs ’ Relief largely intact – a tax relief where 5,000 individuals make an average of £350,000 each .
A u-turn on its tax on foreign buyers of UK property , reducing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ % .
Reducing the amount of money earmarked for rough sleeping .
So much , Mr speaker , for “ the people ’ s priorities ” .
The social emergency has been created by a fundamental failure of economic policy .
We warned them that austerity would damage the economy .
Ten years later the verdict is clear .
Yesterday the ONS reported that , prior to the coronavirus outbreak , growth in the three months to January was 0.0 % .
Manufacturing output down by 1.2 % over the same period , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ widespread weakness ” .
Productivity growth over the last ten years has been at a 0.3 % average .
Dismal pay growth , in the slowest economic recovery for a century , described by the chief economist of the Bank of England as a “ pay disaster ” .
Now , in this Budget , a 0.4 % downgrade for GDP this year , before calculating the impact of the coronavirus .
The weakest official growth outlook on record , according to the Resolution Foundation .
Pay growth weakening in every year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will hit every household by £600 a year .
And of course the Tories have failed to tackle in this Budget longstanding challenges at the heart of our tax system .
Like how we treat capital alongside income fairly , how local councils can have stable funding , or how we rationalise the long list of tax reliefs that provide opportunities for tax avoidance and evasion .
The Tories have not scrambled together this Budget because good economic performance has made it possible .
They have plagiarised Labour ideas – from rewriting the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ railways back into public ownership.The Tories have always preferred gimmicky ideas and this week ’ s Budget shows that Tory tendency again – this time on infrastructure .
A gimmicky grab-bag of projects announced , while the government puts off the national infrastructure strategy .
And even those announcements are disappointing .
No commitment to deliver funding for the full northern powerhouse rail project .
A £500m investment in electric vehicle charging infrastructure , four-fifths of which is a re-announcement from 2017 .
A pothole fund , repeating a policy announced twice under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enough to repair a quarter of potholes .
And an overall infrastructure pledge that only goes about halfway towards filling up the £192bn infrastructure hole that the Tories created by underinvesting between 2010 and 2020 .
Again , the Tories have given us very little detail on who will build this infrastructure – and who gains from this investment .
On broadband , their £5bn investment will be a subsidy to private providers like Virgin .
And there is no sense in this Budget that the Tories have any understanding of the skills @ @ @ @ @ @ @ infrastructure can be delivered .
Let ’ s not forget the third emergency we ’ re facing today .
Future generations will never forgive this government for its failure to address climate change in this budget .
Infrastructure investment , if properly planned , could have been an opportunity to shift the tracks on which this economy runs .
The government has missed that opportunity .
The IPPR ’ s environmental justice commission has said £33bn a year in green investment was needed for the Government to achieve only its weak target of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has fallen woefully short of that target .
Instead the Chancellor has opted for £27bn for roads , which currently contribute 90 % of the UK ’ s transport emissions .
They ’ ve committed less than one fifth of that , on buses and cycling .
Fuel duty still frozen , with no effective assistance to encourage the shift to less polluting cars and public transport .
There is no new support for renewable energy sources like wind and solar In the year when we host COP26 , this budget will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The lessons we have to learn from this Budget are these : It shouldn ’ t take a medical crisis before a government wakes up to fund the NHS adequately .
It shouldn ’ t take a collapse in the economy and the threat of recession to force the government to invest .
It shouldn ’ t take our children striking to take climate change seriously .
Ten years of immense suffering for nothing .
For the pursuit of ideology , a political and economic experiment that ’ s failed , and will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been the most significant since the Second World War and a turning point .
As time has allowed scrutiny of this Budget , it ’ s become clear it failed .
It doesn ’ t come close to reverse the damage of the last ten years of austerity .
I caution the Chancellor , you are sowing the seeds of disappointment and disillusionment which could stir up a form of politics none of us wish our country to experience .

Below is the full text of the speech delivered by Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell in the House of Commons today, in response to the Budget announced on Wednesday.
As we face the coronavirus crisis it’s vital that we demonstrate to the people of our country that we are meeting this crisis head-on and that we will defeat it. And we will. As I have already said, this is no time for partisan political knockabout or for that matter political publicity stunts. We have lives to save so we must all work together. We will work with the government and parties across this House to protect our people and to contribute to the world-wide effort to overcome the outbreak of this virus. So we welcome the government’s package of measures announced yesterday.
We must ensure, though, that alongside the medical and scientific strategy to contain, mitigate and halt the spread of the virus, the economic strategy is equally comprehensive. We agree with the government that the NHS must receive whatever resources it needs. Let me at this stage pay tribute to and thank our NHS staff, who as always are rising to this challenge with their usual professionalism and dedication. We acknowledge that they are doing so at a time when they are already under extreme pressures.
The other key service that we need to support in this emergency is of course social care. It is unclear from government statements so far what additional support is being provided to social care. Social care is in crisis already in this country. One and a half million people – before this virus outbreak – were not receiving the care they need. There are over 120,000 staff vacancies and many of the private providers have been on the financial edge for some time. The majority of people who do receive social care are older, disabled or vulnerable people. These are the people most at risk from the coronavirus infection.
We have an £8bn funding gap in social care budgets, as the result of ten years of austerity. Providers and local authorities are already stretched to near breaking point. We need to know how much additional support is being provided specifically to social care and what contingency plans are in place if individual providers are unable to cope.
A large section of our care workforce is now also under threat from the government’s recently announced immigration policy. The GMB union calculates that the government’s immigration policy will cost the care sector 500,000 staff. Without foreign care workers our care system would collapse. The message is clear to the Home Secretary: do not put our social care system at risk. Pragmatism must override ideology. Social care in this country also still often falls on the shoulders of family members. Usually to the older women in families.
It is many of these women whose pension age was increased without proper consultation or notification, who were effectively robbed of many years of their pension and who this government, despite all of Johnson’s pre-election promises, has refused to compensate. When I met WASPI women last week, it’s no wonder they were angry still. If there is to be any good to come from the developing tragedy of the coronavirus outbreak it must be the lessons we learn from it.
It is now overwhelmingly clear that no government can inflict a decade of cuts and austerity on our public services – like the NHS and social care services – without impacting upon their resilience in a time of crisis. Ten years of cuts and failure to invest in services have meant we are extremely ill prepared for dealing with this type of large-scale health risk to our community. We know the NHS is already under intense pressure after years of underfunding and understaffing.
17,000 beds have been cut. Bed occupancy levels were at 94% last week. Critical care bed occupancy was 80%. These are the beds we rely on in episodes like the coronavirus. The NHS is short of 100,000 staff – including over 40,000 nurses and thousands of doctors. But we also have to recognise that the NHS needs putting on a longer-term stable footing with secure financial backing for the long term. Just as we have over the coronavirus outbreak, we must listen to the clinicians and experts when it comes to what is needed. It shouldn’t take a crisis to secure for the NHS the resources it needs.
Turning to the support to individuals and businesses: we welcome many of the measures the Chancellor set out yesterday. The Budget stated that statutory sick pay (SSP) will be paid from the first day of sickness absence and that people would be compensated for self-isolation. But the government guidance appears to exclude workers on zero-hours contracts, part-time workers, and people earning below the lower earnings limit of £118 per week, saying they are ineligible for SSP and can make a claim for Universal Credit.
Let’s be clear: will these people be covered? Sick pay is currently set at the extremely low rate of £94.25. That’s about £18 a day, while average pre-tax earnings are £511 per week, in nominal terms. Without lifting statutory sick pay, all but the most financially secure will err on the side of caution and self-isolate. All but the most financially secure will be asked to take a significant pay cut in order to self-isolate. That leaves people, inevitably, choosing between health and hardship. For those being directed by government to universal credit, can I ask: What, if anything, has been done to reduce the five-week delay in receiving Universal Credit and ensure there are staffing resources within DWP to cope?
The chancellor announced yesterday a £500m fund for councils to administer. Could the minister clarify how much this means for each local authority? And will the hard-stretched local authorities receive support for delivering this? Councils are also being asked to administer £2.2bn of funding to support businesses to help meet ongoing business costs. What resourcing will councils be given, as they are asked to take on more responsibilities after ten years of being hollowed out?
The government urgently needs to provide the certainty that the public deserves. Our worry is that because this package isn’t comprehensive, it ultimately won’t make us safer and may put our people at risk. Although it has been reported that there has been some communication between finance ministers, it’s certainly not clear that it is of the scale or depth of coordination of 2007/8.
As a result, whatever statements have been made have not had the effect of steadying markets or reassuring people more generally that there is an internationally agreed strategy to address the economic consequences of this emergency. Whatever criticism people may have of Gordon Brown’s policy strategy in the banking crisis, nobody can question the international leadership he showed and the focus and determination he brought to dealing with those events globally.
I regret that we have not seen that leadership, commitment, political, diplomatic and indeed managerial ability from either the Prime Minister or the Chancellor. As in the past, the UK could and should play a critical role in mobilising the international bodies we have, in particular the UN, to agree a global response to deal not just with the current wave of this pandemic but possible subsequent waves.
In addition to the emergency we face with coronavirus we mustn’t lose sight of the two other crises we face. One is the crisis in our public services, and in the levels of poverty and inequality in our society. The other is of course the existential threat of climate change.
Yesterday’s Budget failed to address the social emergency. A social emergency that sees 4.5m of our children living in poverty. 70 per cent of those children are living in households where an adult is in work. There was nothing in the Budget to relieve the hardships inflicted on our community by universal credit, the bedroom tax, and – especially for disabled people – the work capability assessment.
In fact the government’s own table accompanying the Budget shows that the bottom 10% fare the worst as a result of tax decisions made in this Budget and the last spending round, with the bulk of the benefits flowing to higher paid households. Some people are saying this could have been a Labour Budget. Those people haven’t looked hard enough at who wins and who loses from this Budget. Not one family will be lifted out of in-work poverty because of what was announced yesterday.
We heard again the government’s aspiration to get a national living wage to two-thirds of median earnings. But it’s not a real living wage. And it’s an aspiration for five years’ time. And only if “economic conditions allow”.
Worryingly, there is nothing of any substance in the Budget to tackle the long-term crises in each of our public services. Let’s take the justice system. In prisons, there has been a sharp rise in deaths, violence, self-harm, and suicides, all linked to cuts, according to the Institute for government. The House of Commons justice committee has pointed to a £1.2bn gap in justice funding. So the small sums in this Budget like £175m for prison maintenance – just won’t cut it. Not one prison officer will be safer on the landings because of this Budget.
And on domestic violence: according to Women’s Aid, ten domestic abuse victims are turned away from women’s refuges every day because of a lack of space. This Budget needed to commit £173m to ensure no survivor is turned away. It hasn’t done that. Without this funding, measures in the Domestic Violence Bill simply cannot be delivered. Not one women’s refuge can feel assured it will get the funding it needs.
When, as the NEU has said, class sizes are rising, subjects are being dropped, and inadequate pay is making the education staffing crisis worse. There will be few teachers from whom pressure will be lifted.
On housing, derisory sums earmarked for rough sleeping when we know at least £1bn is needed to reverse the cuts in homelessness services. The Chancellor said he would end homelessness. We heard that from the Prime Minister when he was mayor of London – that rough sleeping would be ended in London by the 2012 Olympics. Rough sleeping doubled during the Prime Minister’s second term as mayor.
Not one library will be reopened as a result of this Budget. Not one youth centre. Not one Sure Start Centre. The IFS told us that £54bn of day to day spending was needed, outside of health and social care, to return per head to 2010 levels. This Budget doesn’t meet that target. Why hasn’t the government gone further? People need to understand what conservatism is in this country. The Conservative Party will say or do anything it can to gain and retain power, except shift power and wealth to working people.
Just look at what they did yesterday: Choosing to keep Entrepreneurs’ Relief largely intact – a tax relief where 5,000 individuals make an average of £350,000 each. A u-turn on its tax on foreign buyers of UK property, reducing the surcharge from 3% to 2%. Reducing the amount of money earmarked for rough sleeping. So much, Mr speaker, for “the people’s priorities”. The social emergency has been created by a fundamental failure of economic policy.
We warned them that austerity would damage the economy. Ten years later the verdict is clear. Yesterday the ONS reported that, prior to the coronavirus outbreak, growth in the three months to January was 0.0%. Manufacturing output down by 1.2% over the same period, because of what the ONS described as “widespread weakness”. Productivity growth over the last ten years has been at a 0.3% average. Dismal pay growth, in the slowest economic recovery for a century, described by the chief economist of the Bank of England as a “pay disaster”.
Now, in this Budget, a 0.4% downgrade for GDP this year, before calculating the impact of the coronavirus. The weakest official growth outlook on record, according to the Resolution Foundation. Pay growth weakening in every year of the forecast. An outlook that will hit every household by £600 a year. And of course the Tories have failed to tackle in this Budget longstanding challenges at the heart of our tax system. Like how we treat capital alongside income fairly, how local councils can have stable funding, or how we rationalise the long list of tax reliefs that provide opportunities for tax avoidance and evasion.
The Tories have not scrambled together this Budget because good economic performance has made it possible. They have plagiarised Labour ideas – from rewriting the Green Book to bringing some of the railways back into public ownership.The Tories have always preferred gimmicky ideas and this week’s Budget shows that Tory tendency again – this time on infrastructure. A gimmicky grab-bag of projects announced, while the government puts off the national infrastructure strategy. And even those announcements are disappointing.
No commitment to deliver funding for the full northern powerhouse rail project. A £500m investment in electric vehicle charging infrastructure, four-fifths of which is a re-announcement from 2017. A pothole fund, repeating a policy announced twice under Theresa May, that will only be enough to repair a quarter of potholes. And an overall infrastructure pledge that only goes about halfway towards filling up the £192bn infrastructure hole that the Tories created by underinvesting between 2010 and 2020.
Again, the Tories have given us very little detail on who will build this infrastructure – and who gains from this investment. On broadband, their £5bn investment will be a subsidy to private providers like Virgin. And there is no sense in this Budget that the Tories have any understanding of the skills investment that is needed to ensure that infrastructure can be delivered.
Let’s not forget the third emergency we’re facing today. Future generations will never forgive this government for its failure to address climate change in this budget. Infrastructure investment, if properly planned, could have been an opportunity to shift the tracks on which this economy runs. The government has missed that opportunity.
The IPPR’s environmental justice commission has said £33bn a year in green investment was needed for the Government to achieve only its weak target of net-zero emissions by 2050. The Chancellor has fallen woefully short of that target. Instead the Chancellor has opted for £27bn for roads, which currently contribute 90% of the UK’s transport emissions. They’ve committed less than one fifth of that, on buses and cycling. Fuel duty still frozen, with no effective assistance to encourage the shift to less polluting cars and public transport. There is no new support for renewable energy sources like wind and solar In the year when we host COP26, this budget will be seen a betrayal of future generations.
The lessons we have to learn from this Budget are these: It shouldn’t take a medical crisis before a government wakes up to fund the NHS adequately. It shouldn’t take a collapse in the economy and the threat of recession to force the government to invest. It shouldn’t take our children striking to take climate change seriously. Ten years of immense suffering for nothing. For the pursuit of ideology, a political and economic experiment that’s failed, and will continue to fail.
This Budget should have been the most significant since the Second World War and a turning point. As time has allowed scrutiny of this Budget, it’s become clear it failed. It doesn’t come close to reverse the damage of the last ten years of austerity. I caution the Chancellor, you are sowing the seeds of disappointment and disillusionment which could stir up a form of politics none of us wish our country to experience.


labourlist--2020-03-12--Memo to leadership candidates: scrapping tuition fees is ineffective and unaffordable

The Labour leadership contest has so far proved to be both inward-looking and dull .
Major policy debates have been muted , and differences in opinion have been few and far between .
Yet the challenge we face to both realise our values and restore confidence in the Labour Party are hugely testing and hideously complex .
The current level of debate is neither an interesting nor useful place for the party to be .
The challenges created by growing inequality and stagnating social mobility are issues that should be central to our discussion .
They should play a key @ @ @ @ @ @ @ direction .
Over the last two months , letters have landed on the doormats of young people across the country aspiring to go to Oxford and Cambridge .
That includes young people in my own constituency .
In the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham , the letters tell a compelling story of the continuing inequality communities like mine face .
Only 62 students felt able to apply for a place at our leading universities , and only 12 were offered a place .
It ’ s a pathetic improvement on last year @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people applied and 11 were offered a place .
To put that into perspective , Eton College , with 1,300 children on their school roll , ships off between 80 to 100 students to Oxford and Cambridge every year .
Dagenham Park School in our borough has a similar number of students on their school roll .
But this year only one young person applied to Oxford and Cambridge from this state school and they were rejected .
The inequality goes beyond access to Oxford and Cambridge and pervades the entire higher education @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ latest figures revealed that while 61 % of those in the highest socio-economic quintile go to university , only 19 % of those in the lowest socio-economic quintile secure a university place .
And while 28.2 % of those in the highest socio-economic quintile who go to university get into a top university , only 2.9 % of those in the lowest socio-economic quintile go to a top university .
Yet all the Labour leadership candidates appear to be in total agreement in their approach to higher education .
Support for making @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s headline policy has been unanimous .
But this completely misunderstands the problem we face .
Social mobility has frozen and for too many poor people the system is not working .
This is where Labour ’ s attention should be .
Our ambition ought to be to equalise life chances and the belief that abolishing tuition fees will further that aim is mistaken .
The policy is not politically salient , it lacks financially credibility and it does not help us to promote greater equality .
Indeed , one could argue that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the middle classes who would benefit most from the abolition of fees , because middle class children are more likely to go to university in the first place .
The annual extra cost of this policy exceeds £9bn .
Just think what that money could buy if we were to invest it in high quality early years services .
Early intervention with highly qualified and well-paid staff would completely transform children ’ s life chances and give young people the opportunity to really develop their potential .
That , more than abolishing all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ stark statistics of inequality that the university figures expose .
Barking and Dagenham is both a working-class and a diverse borough ; we only have state schools serving our community .
Here , young people ’ s experience in their secondary schools is utterly central to their future prospects .
Investing in these schools would do more to get more young people into university than subsidising the fees of young people who may well have attended a private school .
The reasons why working-class and BAME students are underrepresented at Britain ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That ’ s why it is essential that the Labour leadership contenders engage in a more substantive debate .
There are plenty of ideas that experts have put forward , and these could have a substantial impact in boosting social mobility .
We need to challenge the prejudices and culture of elite institutions .
And the data shows that there is huge variation between institutions as well .
Why does Mansfield College in Oxford manage to recruit over 90 % of its undergraduate students from state schools , whereas Trinity College lags behind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from private schools ?
What do those figures tell us about how exclusive many institutions still are ?
Especially when the research evidence tells us that young people from state schools outperform those educated privately during their time at Oxford .
Why not partner schools in deprived areas with the top colleges and then have a small quota of reserved places available to the best pupils from the school if they meet the entry requirements ?
Why not link funding with how successful universities are at recruiting students from deprived and diverse background @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better partnerships between schools and universities , so that the two sectors stop blaming each other and start working together in partnership to get more kids from deprived areas into our top universities ?
Joint working , shared teaching and a collaborative approach might be transformative .
The Sutton Trust has recommended heavily reducing tuition fees for the poorest students , and I agree .
Focusing financial support on those who need it most by reintroducing means tested maintenance grants also makes sense .
It would be a targeted , fairer and more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ university manageable for struggling families .
Tackling the absence of social mobility at Britain ’ s top universities should be a priority for any truly progressive Labour politician .
Simply reiterating the strapline pledge to ‘ abolish all tuition fees ’ is both ineffective and unaffordable .
We need a bolder , braver and more radical approach from all our leadership candidates if they want to reach beyond the party members and genuinely confront the inequality that pervades British society in 2020 .

The Labour leadership contest has so far proved to be both inward-looking and dull. Major policy debates have been muted, and differences in opinion have been few and far between. Yet the challenge we face to both realise our values and restore confidence in the Labour Party are hugely testing and hideously complex. The current level of debate is neither an interesting nor useful place for the party to be.
The challenges created by growing inequality and stagnating social mobility are issues that should be central to our discussion. They should play a key part in the debate about our future direction. Over the last two months, letters have landed on the doormats of young people across the country aspiring to go to Oxford and Cambridge. That includes young people in my own constituency. In the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham, the letters tell a compelling story of the continuing inequality communities like mine face.
Only 62 students felt able to apply for a place at our leading universities, and only 12 were offered a place. It’s a pathetic improvement on last year’s figures, when 45 young people applied and 11 were offered a place. To put that into perspective, Eton College, with 1,300 children on their school roll, ships off between 80 to 100 students to Oxford and Cambridge every year. Dagenham Park School in our borough has a similar number of students on their school roll. But this year only one young person applied to Oxford and Cambridge from this state school and they were rejected.
The inequality goes beyond access to Oxford and Cambridge and pervades the entire higher education system. The Institute for Fiscal Studies’ latest figures revealed that while 61% of those in the highest socio-economic quintile go to university, only 19% of those in the lowest socio-economic quintile secure a university place. And while 28.2% of those in the highest socio-economic quintile who go to university get into a top university, only 2.9% of those in the lowest socio-economic quintile go to a top university.
Yet all the Labour leadership candidates appear to be in total agreement in their approach to higher education. Support for making the abolition of tuition fees Labour’s headline policy has been unanimous. But this completely misunderstands the problem we face. Social mobility has frozen and for too many poor people the system is not working. This is where Labour’s attention should be.
Our ambition ought to be to equalise life chances and the belief that abolishing tuition fees will further that aim is mistaken. The policy is not politically salient, it lacks financially credibility and it does not help us to promote greater equality. Indeed, one could argue that it is simply an open bribe to the middle classes who would benefit most from the abolition of fees, because middle class children are more likely to go to university in the first place.
The annual extra cost of this policy exceeds £9bn. Just think what that money could buy if we were to invest it in high quality early years services. Early intervention with highly qualified and well-paid staff would completely transform children’s life chances and give young people the opportunity to really develop their potential. That, more than abolishing all tuition fees, would radically change the stark statistics of inequality that the university figures expose.
Barking and Dagenham is both a working-class and a diverse borough; we only have state schools serving our community. Here, young people’s experience in their secondary schools is utterly central to their future prospects. Investing in these schools would do more to get more young people into university than subsidising the fees of young people who may well have attended a private school.
The reasons why working-class and BAME students are underrepresented at Britain’s top universities are complex and structural. That’s why it is essential that the Labour leadership contenders engage in a more substantive debate. There are plenty of ideas that experts have put forward, and these could have a substantial impact in boosting social mobility.
We need to challenge the prejudices and culture of elite institutions. And the data shows that there is huge variation between institutions as well. Why does Mansfield College in Oxford manage to recruit over 90% of its undergraduate students from state schools, whereas Trinity College lags behind with over half of its students coming from private schools? What do those figures tell us about how exclusive many institutions still are? Especially when the research evidence tells us that young people from state schools outperform those educated privately during their time at Oxford.
Why not partner schools in deprived areas with the top colleges and then have a small quota of reserved places available to the best pupils from the school if they meet the entry requirements? Why not link funding with how successful universities are at recruiting students from deprived and diverse background? Why not provide funds to stimulate better partnerships between schools and universities, so that the two sectors stop blaming each other and start working together in partnership to get more kids from deprived areas into our top universities? Joint working, shared teaching and a collaborative approach might be transformative.
The Sutton Trust has recommended heavily reducing tuition fees for the poorest students, and I agree. Focusing financial support on those who need it most by reintroducing means tested maintenance grants also makes sense. It would be a targeted, fairer and more cost-effective way of making the finances of university manageable for struggling families.
Tackling the absence of social mobility at Britain’s top universities should be a priority for any truly progressive Labour politician. Simply reiterating the strapline pledge to ‘abolish all tuition fees’ is both ineffective and unaffordable. We need a bolder, braver and more radical approach from all our leadership candidates if they want to reach beyond the party members and genuinely confront the inequality that pervades British society in 2020.


labourlist--2020-03-12--Sadiq Khan still isn’t being invited to coronavirus COBRA meetings

Sadiq Khan , the Labour mayor of London , has confirmed that he still isn ’ t being invited by 10 Downing Street to attend COBRA meetings despite the coronavirus pandemic affecting the capital .
When taking calls from Londoners on LBC on Thursday morning , Khan was asked whether it was normal for London mayors to be involved in COBRA discussions .
The mayor replied : “ I ’ ve been to many COBRA meetings , and one of the things that impresses me when there is a national crisis – whether it ’ s a terror attack , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put aside party politics.
” Khan added : “ We ’ re a global city , so it is the normal practice for the mayor of London to be around the table… It is odd [ that he has not been invited ] , but I ’ ve got to do my best as the mayor with the evidence that I ’ ve got .
“ We ’ re in contact with No 10 .
Each time they ’ ve held a COBRA , today is the third one , and I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ media , I ’ ve said , ‘ hold on a sec , shouldn ’ t the mayor of London be there ?
’ .
“ Not in a pompous way , but shouldn ’ t I be there , bearing in mind Heathrow , Gatwick , Stansted , City Airport , Eurostar serve our city ?
We ’ ve got a diverse population .
And the answer is ‘ no , you ’ re not invited ’ .
” It is understood that representatives of devolved administrations have been invited to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coronavirus outbreak that has now become a pandemic .
The Prime Minister ’ s spokesman gave the reason after the first meeting that Khan is not being invited because the COBRA discussions are designed to deliver a “ national response ” .
Boris Johnson is charing another meeting of the emergency COBRA committee this afternoon , and the Prime Minister is subsequently expected to confirm that Britain is now in the “ delay ” phase of the pandemic response .
In the LBC session , Khan also criticised the decision by President @ @ @ @ @ @ @ countries , though not the UK .
The mayor suggested the policy was made “ on a whim rather than on evidence ” .
The mayor said he had received advice form the Chief Medical Officer on whether the local elections in May , including the London mayoral contest , should be delayed due to the pandemic .
“ His advice was quite clear .
It stuck with me .
He said there is no logical reason to postpone or cancel the elections , ” Khan relayed during the LBC phone-in session .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the polling station , it ’ s really important to make postal votes as easy as possible .
If there is a very small risk , the way to make the risk even smaller in relation to the virus is wiping the pencils .
”

Sadiq Khan, the Labour mayor of London, has confirmed that he still isn’t being invited by 10 Downing Street to attend COBRA meetings despite the coronavirus pandemic affecting the capital.
When taking calls from Londoners on LBC on Thursday morning, Khan was asked whether it was normal for London mayors to be involved in COBRA discussions.
The mayor replied: “I’ve been to many COBRA meetings, and one of the things that impresses me when there is a national crisis – whether it’s a terror attack, or something else – is how governments put aside party politics.”
Khan added: “We’re a global city, so it is the normal practice for the mayor of London to be around the table… It is odd [that he has not been invited], but I’ve got to do my best as the mayor with the evidence that I’ve got.
“We’re in contact with No 10. Each time they’ve held a COBRA, today is the third one, and I’ve got wind of it through the media, I’ve said, ‘hold on a sec, shouldn’t the mayor of London be there?’.
“Not in a pompous way, but shouldn’t I be there, bearing in mind Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted, City Airport, Eurostar serve our city? We’ve got a diverse population. And the answer is ‘no, you’re not invited’.”
It is understood that representatives of devolved administrations have been invited to the weekly COBRA meetings held in relation to the coronavirus outbreak that has now become a pandemic.
The Prime Minister’s spokesman gave the reason after the first meeting that Khan is not being invited because the COBRA discussions are designed to deliver a “national response”.
Boris Johnson is charing another meeting of the emergency COBRA committee this afternoon, and the Prime Minister is subsequently expected to confirm that Britain is now in the “delay” phase of the pandemic response.
In the LBC session, Khan also criticised the decision by President Trump to suspend flights from Schengen area countries, though not the UK. The mayor suggested the policy was made “on a whim rather than on evidence”.
The mayor said he had received advice form the Chief Medical Officer on whether the local elections in May, including the London mayoral contest, should be delayed due to the pandemic.
“His advice was quite clear. It stuck with me. He said there is no logical reason to postpone or cancel the elections,” Khan relayed during the LBC phone-in session.
“If somebody is worried about going to the polling station, it’s really important to make postal votes as easy as possible. If there is a very small risk, the way to make the risk even smaller in relation to the virus is wiping the pencils.”


labourlist--2020-03-12--Boris Johnson has abandoned the Red Wall – and launched a power grab from Whitehall

Don ’ t be taken in by the headlines .
Three months ago , the Tories parked their tanks on Labour ’ s lawn , shattering the ‘ Red Wall ’ and promising to overturn an economic model that has stripped good jobs and spending power from towns across Britain for 40 years .
This was the Budget that was supposed to deliver .
It didn ’ t .
The promised investment has not materialised .
We were told there would be £600bn for infrastructure but the reality adds up to only a tenth of that .
Money for roads @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but nothing new .
The rest has been kicked down the road .
There is £4.2bn for city regions but delve into the detail in the red book and there is a problem .
The treasury is planning to summon just three metro mayors to London to decide how this money should be spent and are already telling the others how they ’ d like it to be spent .
The red book says the treasury would like a Sheffield ‘ supertram ’ or tram-train pilots in Greater Manchester .
So much for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every nation and region people need more power .
This Budget shows that under this government , they will not get it .
Make no mistake – this is a power grab for Boris Johnson .
It entrenches power in Whitehall and reinforces an economic model which has failed our towns for decades .
It has left us with a mess .
Instead of cleaner , more reliable buses and trains we ’ re getting new roads and a freeze on fuel duty for the tenth year in a row .
Car usage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ gas emissions .
Commuters in the Red Wall towns are being forced into their cars by a government which has failed to provide cheaper , more reliable alternatives .
I don ’ t blame commuters ; I blame ten years of Tory rule .
There ’ s a nod to climate change with £800m promised for a new carbon capture and storage project .
We have been here before .
In 2011 , David Cameron wasted four years asking companies to bid for a similar project before cancelling it at the final hour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like Workington and Hastings outside of the city regions ?
The government continues to bet the house on city regions delivering growth ; forgetting that many coastal towns fall outside city regions .
Just weeks after winning those seats at the election , they have already been written off .
The reason may lie in the one word the Chancellor was careful not to say – Brexit .
Johnson is determined we exit the transition period in December whatever the cost .
Yesterday his government refused to reveal the economic impact of that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the reason that very little materialised yesterday .
The Tories simply will not have the money to keep the promises that won them an eighty-seat majority .
They also left a big gaping hole in yesterday ’ s Budget – social care .
Young people have been leaving Red Wall communities for decades ; leaving those areas at the sharp end of the social care crisis .
No new money was announced yesterday .
Directing money to the NHS but ignoring social care will mean more older people having to go to hospital @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This is a disaster .
The government say they are committed to cross-party working on social care .
I want Labour to take them up on that offer , because otherwise we risk failing our older people .
The one thing Red Wall areas need is good jobs .
We know how to achieve this .
Abolish local enterprise partnerships and give the £12bn to councils to invest in transport , digital infrastructure and skills and the investment will come .
If you want to level up the Red Wall , you have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Right after the election Dominic Cummings promised to rip up the rule book .
This Budget does nothing of the sort .
Instead Sunak announced more reviews .
People didn ’ t vote for reviews .
They voted to get things done .
Areas that need investment should get it .
Business rates should be scrapped and replaced with a land value tax and internet companies must pay their fair share .
Money for schools and to tackle the highest levels of child poverty for 60 years , funding for further education and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ become a priority .
This is the first test for the new Red Wall Tories .
Will they stand up for their new constituents , or for a government that has abandoned them ?
With this Budget , Johnson has shown that he doesn ’ t understands what the Red Wall needs and will not hand over power to those who do .
This is a huge moment for Labour .
Our task is to empower people and communities , not bureaucrats in Whitehall .
I am determined that we will step forward @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better .
This is our path back to power and we must seize .

Don’t be taken in by the headlines. Three months ago, the Tories parked their tanks on Labour’s lawn, shattering the ‘Red Wall’ and promising to overturn an economic model that has stripped good jobs and spending power from towns across Britain for 40 years. This was the Budget that was supposed to deliver. It didn’t. The promised investment has not materialised. We were told there would be £600bn for infrastructure but the reality adds up to only a tenth of that. Money for roads, buses, and flooding are welcome but nothing new. The rest has been kicked down the road.
There is £4.2bn for city regions but delve into the detail in the red book and there is a problem. The treasury is planning to summon just three metro mayors to London to decide how this money should be spent and are already telling the others how they’d like it to be spent. The red book says the treasury would like a Sheffield ‘supertram’ or tram-train pilots in Greater Manchester. So much for the independence of metro mayors. In every nation and region people need more power. This Budget shows that under this government, they will not get it. Make no mistake – this is a power grab for Boris Johnson. It entrenches power in Whitehall and reinforces an economic model which has failed our towns for decades.
It has left us with a mess. Instead of cleaner, more reliable buses and trains we’re getting new roads and a freeze on fuel duty for the tenth year in a row. Car usage is now the biggest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Commuters in the Red Wall towns are being forced into their cars by a government which has failed to provide cheaper, more reliable alternatives. I don’t blame commuters; I blame ten years of Tory rule. There’s a nod to climate change with £800m promised for a new carbon capture and storage project. We have been here before. In 2011, David Cameron wasted four years asking companies to bid for a similar project before cancelling it at the final hour.
Where is the offer to places like Workington and Hastings outside of the city regions? The government continues to bet the house on city regions delivering growth; forgetting that many coastal towns fall outside city regions. Just weeks after winning those seats at the election, they have already been written off. The reason may lie in the one word the Chancellor was careful not to say – Brexit. Johnson is determined we exit the transition period in December whatever the cost. Yesterday his government refused to reveal the economic impact of that political decision. This may well be the reason that very little materialised yesterday. The Tories simply will not have the money to keep the promises that won them an eighty-seat majority.
They also left a big gaping hole in yesterday’s Budget – social care. Young people have been leaving Red Wall communities for decades; leaving those areas at the sharp end of the social care crisis. No new money was announced yesterday. Directing money to the NHS but ignoring social care will mean more older people having to go to hospital for care or stranded at home. This is a disaster. The government say they are committed to cross-party working on social care. I want Labour to take them up on that offer, because otherwise we risk failing our older people.
The one thing Red Wall areas need is good jobs. We know how to achieve this. Abolish local enterprise partnerships and give the £12bn to councils to invest in transport, digital infrastructure and skills and the investment will come. If you want to level up the Red Wall, you have to level up people in them. Right after the election Dominic Cummings promised to rip up the rule book. This Budget does nothing of the sort. Instead Sunak announced more reviews. People didn’t vote for reviews. They voted to get things done. Areas that need investment should get it. Business rates should be scrapped and replaced with a land value tax and internet companies must pay their fair share. Money for schools and to tackle the highest levels of child poverty for 60 years, funding for further education and lifelong learning should count as investment and become a priority.
This is the first test for the new Red Wall Tories. Will they stand up for their new constituents, or for a government that has abandoned them? With this Budget, Johnson has shown that he doesn’t understands what the Red Wall needs and will not hand over power to those who do. This is a huge moment for Labour. Our task is to empower people and communities, not bureaucrats in Whitehall. I am determined that we will step forward and show that the future can be better. This is our path back to power and we must seize.


labourlist--2020-03-12--Lisa Nandy postpones campaign events in response to coronavirus

Lisa Nandy has announced that her leadership campaign has taken the decision to postpone scheduled members ’ campaign events in response to the spread of coronavirus , or Covid-19 , in the UK .
The contender to be the next Labour leader made the announcement on Twitter this morning , stating that “ leadership is about taking responsibility and showing consideration for others ” .
Commenting on the announcement , a spokesperson for the campaign said : “ Public safety and the wellbeing of members is our absolute priority .
In light of the spread of COVID-19 , we have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ events in order to minimise any potential risk to public health .
“ We ’ ll be continuing to use digital platforms , social media and our phone banking app to speak directly with members over the coming weeks.
” On the type of events that this will affect , the campaign stated : “ We have cancelled all our member ’ s events including planned rally ’ s and smaller members events across the all regions of the UK.
” LabourList understands that the campaign for Rebecca Long-Bailey is also postponing public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organise more online events to make sure members can still participate .
The announcement from Nandy comes after the World Health Organisation declared the virus a pandemic , with the total number of diagnosed cases worldwide exceeding 126,000 .
Boris Johnson is set to hold another emergency COBRA meeting this afternoon , in which he is expected to escalate the UK ’ s response to Covid-19 to the next phase – focusing on delaying rather than containment .
Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar announced this morning that the country would be closing all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ universities and strongly advised against indoor meetings of more than 100 people .
Voting in the Labour leadership and deputy election is currently ongoing .
Those eligible have until April 2nd to complete and return their ballot either online or by post .
The result will be announced on April 4th .

Lisa Nandy has announced that her leadership campaign has taken the decision to postpone scheduled members’ campaign events in response to the spread of coronavirus, or Covid-19, in the UK.
The contender to be the next Labour leader made the announcement on Twitter this morning, stating that “leadership is about taking responsibility and showing consideration for others”.
Commenting on the announcement, a spokesperson for the campaign said: “Public safety and the wellbeing of members is our absolute priority. In light of the spread of COVID-19, we have taken the decision to postpone upcoming public events in order to minimise any potential risk to public health.
“We’ll be continuing to use digital platforms, social media and our phone banking app to speak directly with members over the coming weeks.”
On the type of events that this will affect, the campaign stated: “We have cancelled all our member’s events including planned rally’s and smaller members events across the all regions of the UK.”
LabourList understands that the campaign for Rebecca Long-Bailey is also postponing public members’ events, and will instead organise more online events to make sure members can still participate.
The announcement from Nandy comes after the World Health Organisation declared the virus a pandemic, with the total number of diagnosed cases worldwide exceeding 126,000.
Boris Johnson is set to hold another emergency COBRA meeting this afternoon, in which he is expected to escalate the UK’s response to Covid-19 to the next phase – focusing on delaying rather than containment.
Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar announced this morning that the country would be closing all schools, childcare facilities, colleges and universities and strongly advised against indoor meetings of more than 100 people.
Voting in the Labour leadership and deputy election is currently ongoing. Those eligible have until April 2nd to complete and return their ballot either online or by post. The result will be announced on April 4th.


labourlist--2020-03-12--No, Rishi Sunak did not just deliver a Labour budget

Did Rishi Sunak just deliver a Labour budget ?
The government expects to borrow almost £100bn more this parliament as a result of the spending plans announced yesterday ( not including urgent coronavirus measures ) .
Jeremy Corbyn described the Budget as “ an admission of failure ” and “ an admission that austerity has been a failed experiment ” , while John McDonnell said the “ Tories want to be congratulated for starting to rebuild what they destroyed ” .
These are the top lines of the Labour leadership ’ s response , and they appear to suggest that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Yet this narrative doesn ’ t seem helpful to Labour ’ s future electoral prospects – and increased borrowing does not a Labour budget make .
There were gaping holes in the Budget , particularly social care .
The offer on statutory sick pay was not strengthened beyond bringing it forward to day one , which means the pay is still incredibly low and not available to many gig economy workers or the self-employed .
There was little sight of any ‘ green budget ’ .
Generally , Sunak took advantage of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is going towards infrastructure rather than public services .
It made no real attempt to fix our social security system , nor did it offer local government the funding it desperately needs – in fact , business rates have been scrapped for some small businesses .
The inadequacy of where the spending was allocated is not the only reason that Labour should not be celebrating this budget nor claiming any kind of victory .
Labour ’ s 2019 manifesto didn ’ t just propose to splash the cash – it was radical on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lives by scrapping punitive welfare assessments , it promoted the principle of universalism .
The document may have been ‘ overloaded ’ and poorly sold to the public .
But the future of Labour is not well-served if , when judging the Budget , power dynamics are ignored in favour of a metric focussing on whether expansionary fiscal policy was used .
Covid-19 has now been classified as a pandemic , and the Prime Minister is set to confirm today that the UK will move to the ‘ delay ’ stage of its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what this will mean in practice .
The government is still not keen on closing parliament , despite the potential of MPs to be ‘ super spreaders ’ as they travel more than most and meet lots of people every day .
Six MPs including three ministers , plus a number of staffers , are now self-isolating .
Councillors such as Alice Perry have called for the May elections to be postponed , but there are no plans to do so yet .
Is canvassing really a good idea at this time ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the concerns over the government ’ s response after Matt Hancock delivered a coronavirus statement in the Commons last night .
The editor-in-chief of The Lancet , among others , has suggested that “ we are perhaps placing too much emphasis on behavioural science ” , Ashworth said .
The influence of the ‘ nudge unit ’ on the advice being dispensed is certainly not something that I find reassuring .
Hancock did not address that question , instead choosing to invoke a straw man : “ There are some voices that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our response entirely on the science , but I think that they are wrong.
” Hopefully the measures announced today will instill more confidence , and Labour will be able to raise further concerns in its meeting on the forthcoming emergency legislation .
• Friday : Shami Chakrabarti panel event on how society is failing victims of sexual violence at LSE ( free to attend , 6pm )

Did Rishi Sunak just deliver a Labour budget? The government expects to borrow almost £100bn more this parliament as a result of the spending plans announced yesterday (not including urgent coronavirus measures). Jeremy Corbyn described the Budget as “an admission of failure” and “an admission that austerity has been a failed experiment”, while John McDonnell said the “Tories want to be congratulated for starting to rebuild what they destroyed”. These are the top lines of the Labour leadership’s response, and they appear to suggest that Labour has scored some kind of victory. Yet this narrative doesn’t seem helpful to Labour’s future electoral prospects – and increased borrowing does not a Labour budget make.
There were gaping holes in the Budget, particularly social care. The offer on statutory sick pay was not strengthened beyond bringing it forward to day one, which means the pay is still incredibly low and not available to many gig economy workers or the self-employed. There was little sight of any ‘green budget’. Generally, Sunak took advantage of globally low interest rates but the spending is going towards infrastructure rather than public services. It made no real attempt to fix our social security system, nor did it offer local government the funding it desperately needs – in fact, business rates have been scrapped for some small businesses.
The inadequacy of where the spending was allocated is not the only reason that Labour should not be celebrating this budget nor claiming any kind of victory. Labour’s 2019 manifesto didn’t just propose to splash the cash – it was radical on ownership, it offered to improve daily lives by scrapping punitive welfare assessments, it promoted the principle of universalism. The document may have been ‘overloaded’ and poorly sold to the public. But the future of Labour is not well-served if, when judging the Budget, power dynamics are ignored in favour of a metric focussing on whether expansionary fiscal policy was used.
Covid-19 has now been classified as a pandemic, and the Prime Minister is set to confirm today that the UK will move to the ‘delay’ stage of its response. It is unclear so far what this will mean in practice. The government is still not keen on closing parliament, despite the potential of MPs to be ‘super spreaders’ as they travel more than most and meet lots of people every day. Six MPs including three ministers, plus a number of staffers, are now self-isolating. Councillors such as Alice Perry have called for the May elections to be postponed, but there are no plans to do so yet. Is canvassing really a good idea at this time?
Labour’s Jonathan Ashworth raised some of the concerns over the government’s response after Matt Hancock delivered a coronavirus statement in the Commons last night. The editor-in-chief of The Lancet, among others, has suggested that “we are perhaps placing too much emphasis on behavioural science”, Ashworth said. The influence of the ‘nudge unit’ on the advice being dispensed is certainly not something that I find reassuring. Hancock did not address that question, instead choosing to invoke a straw man: “There are some voices that are saying that we should not base our response entirely on the science, but I think that they are wrong.” Hopefully the measures announced today will instill more confidence, and Labour will be able to raise further concerns in its meeting on the forthcoming emergency legislation.


labourlist--2020-03-13--“The real hero of Jaws is the mayor” – a Johnsonian approach to coronavirus?

“ The real hero of Jaws is the mayor , a wonderful politician .
A gigantic fish is eating all your constituents and he decides to keep the beach open.
” This quote from Boris Johnson has resurfaced as he faces criticism for not taking more stringent action in response to coronavirus .
Following the COBRA meeting held yesterday , with the true number of cases in the country estimated to be up to 10,000 , the government has moved from the ‘ contain ’ to ‘ delay ’ phase .
But the PM is holding off on taking further @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with mild symptoms should self-isolate but declined to ban large public meetings , as Scotland has , or close schools like the Irish Republic announced yesterday .
He ’ s coming under increasing pressure to do more and Labour ’ s health spokesperson Jon Ashworth has urged the UK government to explain why it is taking such a different approach to others .
Deputy leadership candidate and doctor Rosena Allin-Khan told LabourList recently that the government has been “ slow to act ” , and even Tory ex-Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt broke ranks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he ’ s “ surprised and concerned ” with the UK ’ s approach .
The Labour Party has cancelled its special conference scheduled for April 4th , in which it had planned to announce the result of the leadership elections .
The results will now be revealed at a “ scaled back event ” , and the party is currently deciding what that will look like in practice .
Leadership and deputy hustings have also been cancelled , including the BAME hustings event due to take place in London tomorrow .
General @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the news yesterday afternoon , along with the decision that Welsh Labour conference and Scottish Labour women ’ s conference would be cancelled and rearranged for a later date .
The party said it is currently taking advice on whether to cancel all meetings held by local constituency parties as well , while some have reportedly taken the decision to cancel some meetings themselves .
Given that the membership tends to be older than the general population , this could be a wise move .
Meanwhile , the Electoral Commission has recommended that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ May should be postponed due to “ growing risks to the delivery of the polls ” in light of the spreading virus .
The body tweeted yesterday afternoon that it had written to the government , and the chief executive told ministers that the impact of the health crisis would mean that “ significant numbers ” of people would not be able to vote .
The electoral authority advised pushing the elections into the Autumn instead .
The move would see polls set to take place in less than eight weeks for mayors @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all across the country cancelled .
Labour ’ s local government spokesperson Andrew Gwynne said that he agreed with the advice , and reminded people that the resources of local councils – who administer the elections – should be focused on the coronavirus .
A stark reminder that local authorities will see an increasing and unprecedented burden to their frontline care services as more cases emerge in the coming weeks .
Sign up to LabourList ’ s morning email for everything Labour , every weekday morning .

“The real hero of Jaws is the mayor, a wonderful politician. A gigantic fish is eating all your constituents and he decides to keep the beach open.” This quote from Boris Johnson has resurfaced as he faces criticism for not taking more stringent action in response to coronavirus. Following the COBRA meeting held yesterday, with the true number of cases in the country estimated to be up to 10,000, the government has moved from the ‘contain’ to ‘delay’ phase. But the PM is holding off on taking further decisive measures. Johnson advised that those with mild symptoms should self-isolate but declined to ban large public meetings, as Scotland has, or close schools like the Irish Republic announced yesterday. He’s coming under increasing pressure to do more and Labour’s health spokesperson Jon Ashworth has urged the UK government to explain why it is taking such a different approach to others. Deputy leadership candidate and doctor Rosena Allin-Khan told LabourList recently that the government has been “slow to act”, and even Tory ex-Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt broke ranks yesterday to tell Channel 4 News that he’s “surprised and concerned” with the UK’s approach.
The Labour Party has cancelled its special conference scheduled for April 4th, in which it had planned to announce the result of the leadership elections. The results will now be revealed at a “scaled back event”, and the party is currently deciding what that will look like in practice. Leadership and deputy hustings have also been cancelled, including the BAME hustings event due to take place in London tomorrow. General secretary Jennie Formby emailed Labour MPs with the news yesterday afternoon, along with the decision that Welsh Labour conference and Scottish Labour women’s conference would be cancelled and rearranged for a later date. The party said it is currently taking advice on whether to cancel all meetings held by local constituency parties as well, while some have reportedly taken the decision to cancel some meetings themselves. Given that the membership tends to be older than the general population, this could be a wise move.
Meanwhile, the Electoral Commission has recommended that local elections due to take place in May should be postponed due to “growing risks to the delivery of the polls” in light of the spreading virus. The body tweeted yesterday afternoon that it had written to the government, and the chief executive told ministers that the impact of the health crisis would mean that “significant numbers” of people would not be able to vote. The electoral authority advised pushing the elections into the Autumn instead. The move would see polls set to take place in less than eight weeks for mayors, councils and police and crime commissioners all across the country cancelled. Labour’s local government spokesperson Andrew Gwynne said that he agreed with the advice, and reminded people that the resources of local councils – who administer the elections – should be focused on the coronavirus. A stark reminder that local authorities will see an increasing and unprecedented burden to their frontline care services as more cases emerge in the coming weeks. Sign up to LabourList’s morning email for everything Labour, every weekday morning.


labourlist--2020-03-13--Austerity isn’t over, IFS Budget analysis shows

Labour has said that analysis of the Budget by the Institute for Fiscal Studies ( IFS ) shows that austerity is not over , and that the government ’ s spending plans were “ over-hyped and underwhelming ” .
The research released by the think tank in the wake of the parliamentary statement on Wednesday notes that spending per person for public services will remain “ well below 2010-11 levels ” .
The organisation examined the coronavirus measures outlined , concluding that it “ does much less ” for those having to reduce production , especially in the manufacturing sector @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sick pay .
The analysis also observed that “ the decisions made in this Budget don ’ t provide great confidence that the government is willing to grasp the nettle ” on achieving its net-zero emissions target .
Commenting on the IFS ’ s assessment , John McDonnell said : “ The Budget is already unravelling , with it becoming increasingly clear that the current and capital spending commitments are over-hyped and underwhelming when subject to proper scrutiny .
“ The IFS has confirmed that this Budget means austerity is not at an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ net-zero emissions across government , and puts forward a coronavirus package that is regrettably full of holes .
“ This is a publicity-seeking Budget without a plan or a strategy underpinning it , and it is likely to leave people expecting much from this government feeling sorely disappointed.
” The research stated that , outside of health , spending per capita will be 14 % lower than in 2010 and around 19 % lower when you account for money pledged to replace existing funding coming from the EU .
The Budget made little @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of cuts to local councils .
There was no mention of social care or social services , or local community services such as libraries and youth centres .
No new sources of local revenue were announced for local government , and there was no indication of any movement on rate capping or of a council tax revaluation .
Local councils across the country have seen their funding from central government cut by up to as much as 80 % in some areas over the past decade .
Treasury analysis shows that the poorest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as a result of the Budget , while the eighth and ninth deciles of the income distribution benefit the most .

Labour has said that analysis of the Budget by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) shows that austerity is not over, and that the government’s spending plans were “over-hyped and underwhelming”.
The research released by the think tank in the wake of the parliamentary statement on Wednesday notes that spending per person for public services will remain “well below 2010-11 levels”.
The organisation examined the coronavirus measures outlined, concluding that it “does much less” for those having to reduce production, especially in the manufacturing sector, and those not entitled to statutory sick pay.
The analysis also observed that “the decisions made in this Budget don’t provide great confidence that the government is willing to grasp the nettle” on achieving its net-zero emissions target.
Commenting on the IFS’s assessment, John McDonnell said: “The Budget is already unravelling, with it becoming increasingly clear that the current and capital spending commitments are over-hyped and underwhelming when subject to proper scrutiny.
“The IFS has confirmed that this Budget means austerity is not at an end, lacks a plan to achieve net-zero emissions across government, and puts forward a coronavirus package that is regrettably full of holes.
“This is a publicity-seeking Budget without a plan or a strategy underpinning it, and it is likely to leave people expecting much from this government feeling sorely disappointed.”
The research stated that, outside of health, spending per capita will be 14% lower than in 2010 and around 19% lower when you account for money pledged to replace existing funding coming from the EU.
The Budget made little mention of resources to undo ten years of cuts to local councils. There was no mention of social care or social services, or local community services such as libraries and youth centres.
No new sources of local revenue were announced for local government, and there was no indication of any movement on rate capping or of a council tax revaluation.
Local councils across the country have seen their funding from central government cut by up to as much as 80% in some areas over the past decade.
Treasury analysis shows that the poorest tenth of UK households will be worse-off as a result of the Budget, while the eighth and ninth deciles of the income distribution benefit the most.


labourlist--2020-03-13--Labour cancels local meetings as government agrees to postpone May elections

Labour has advised all local parties to cancel their meetings and campaigning activities , as the government decides to suspend the council and mayoral elections due to take place in May .
The party sent an email to all local party secretaries this afternoon , in which it advised constituency parties to “ cancel all meetings ” and “ suspend campaigning ” due to the coronavirus pandemic .
The government then announced that the local elections – including polls for mayors , councils and police and crime commissioners – will be postponed by up to 12 months .
The Electoral @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the elections this morning , and Labour backed the call in a letter to the electoral authority .
In the letter , Labour ’ s general secretary Jenny Formby said : “ We share your concerns about the ability of local authorities to deliver the elections in advance and on the day , at the same time as continuing to manage vital services that will have increased pressure on them due to the coronavirus .
“ We also have serious concerns about the health and wellbeing of our staff and members who would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ May 7th.
” The decision on the local elections follows that of Labour to cancel its special conference on April 4th , at which it was set to reveal the results of the leadership and deputy leadership elections .
Leadership and deputy hustings have been cancelled , including the BAME hustings arranged to take place tomorrow .
Welsh Labour conference and the Scottish Labour Women ’ s conference have been postponed .
The move to suspend the local elections will require parliament to pass legislation .
The government says it is following scientific @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expected to hit the UK in between ten to 14 weeks , and the elections would have taken place in just under eight weeks ’ time .
Below is the full text of the letter sent by Formby to the Electoral Commission .
We were pleased to read your letter dated 12 March to Cabinet Ministers in which you raise concerns about the real risks to the successful delivery of the scheduled 7 May elections because of the spread of the coronavirus .
Of course we always want democratic processes to continue as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but we believe you are right to raise serious concerns .
The Labour Party takes our public health responsibilities seriously and , having discussed these concerns today , we have agreed to support your request to postpone the elections .
We share your concerns about the ability of local authorities to deliver the elections in advance and on the day , at the same time as continuing to manage vital services that will have increased pressure on them due to the coronavirus .
We also have serious concerns about the health and wellbeing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be campaigning in the run up to 7 May .
As such , we have today advised our Constituency Labour Parties to cancel all campaigning and meetings .
We agree that the direct and indirect effects of the coronavirus mean there is likely to be a significant numbers of registered electors who would not have the opportunity to vote , or feel inclined to vote – hampering the democratic process regardless .
As well as the public health considerations for the electorate , the primary focus for local council staff as we head @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the UK must be to ensure the continuation of critical public services like social care , home care and refuse collection .
These frontline staff should not be diverted to administer local elections .
Local elections ( and the General Election ) in 2001 were postponed because of the foot and mouth outbreak .
This is a far more serious situation affecting human health .
So , as well as being led by the medical advice , we must also be guided by other official advice and therefore postpone these elections as you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ letter to you to the other political parties .
Below is the full text of the email sent to all local Labour parties .
You will have seen that in light of the spread of coronavirus , the Labour party has taken the decision to cancel the leadership elections special conference arranged for 4 April in order to safeguard our members and staff and to protect public health .
Welsh Labour Conference and Scottish Labour Women ’ s Conference and the remaining leadership hustings have also been cancelled .
We are now advising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaigning .
We have today written to the Electoral Commission supporting its call for the local elections to be postponed due to the very many serious direct and indirect implications of the coronavirus .
We appreciate this is a difficult call to make and if you have any concerns or support , please do speak to your regional officer in the first instance .
It is also worth noting that the official advice for those feeling unwell has now changed and we must ensure we all respond accordingly to prevent the spread of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ symptoms of coronavirus infection , however mild , they must stay at home and not leave their house for 7 days from when symptoms started .
This action will help protect others at work and in their community whilst they are infectious .
If staff self-isolate they should work from home or speak to their manager to confirm they are unwell and unable to work ; • Stay at least 2 metres ( about 3 steps ) away from other people at home whenever possible and sleep alone , if that is possible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seconds , each time using soap and water .
Please do keep up to date on the NHS website and we will send further communications when necessary .

Labour has advised all local parties to cancel their meetings and campaigning activities, as the government decides to suspend the council and mayoral elections due to take place in May.
The party sent an email to all local party secretaries this afternoon, in which it advised constituency parties to “cancel all meetings” and “suspend campaigning” due to the coronavirus pandemic.
The government then announced that the local elections – including polls for mayors, councils and police and crime commissioners – will be postponed by up to 12 months.
The Electoral Commission had advised that the government cancel the elections this morning, and Labour backed the call in a letter to the electoral authority.
In the letter, Labour’s general secretary Jenny Formby said: “We share your concerns about the ability of local authorities to deliver the elections in advance and on the day, at the same time as continuing to manage vital services that will have increased pressure on them due to the coronavirus.
“We also have serious concerns about the health and wellbeing of our staff and members who would be campaigning in the run up to May 7th.”
The decision on the local elections follows that of Labour to cancel its special conference on April 4th, at which it was set to reveal the results of the leadership and deputy leadership elections.
Leadership and deputy hustings have been cancelled, including the BAME hustings arranged to take place tomorrow. Welsh Labour conference and the Scottish Labour Women’s conference have been postponed.
The move to suspend the local elections will require parliament to pass legislation. The government says it is following scientific advice. The peak of cases is expected to hit the UK in between ten to 14 weeks, and the elections would have taken place in just under eight weeks’ time.
Below is the full text of the letter sent by Formby to the Electoral Commission.
We were pleased to read your letter dated 12 March to Cabinet Ministers in which you raise concerns about the real risks to the successful delivery of the scheduled 7 May elections because of the spread of the coronavirus.
Of course we always want democratic processes to continue as much as is practical and safe, but we believe you are right to raise serious concerns.
The Labour Party takes our public health responsibilities seriously and, having discussed these concerns today, we have agreed to support your request to postpone the elections.
We share your concerns about the ability of local authorities to deliver the elections in advance and on the day, at the same time as continuing to manage vital services that will have increased pressure on them due to the coronavirus.
We also have serious concerns about the health and wellbeing of our staff and members who would be campaigning in the run up to 7 May. As such, we have today advised our Constituency Labour Parties to cancel all campaigning and meetings.
We agree that the direct and indirect effects of the coronavirus mean there is likely to be a significant numbers of registered electors who would not have the opportunity to vote, or feel inclined to vote – hampering the democratic process regardless.
As well as the public health considerations for the electorate, the primary focus for local council staff as we head towards the peak for the virus in the UK must be to ensure the continuation of critical public services like social care, home care and refuse collection. These frontline staff should not be diverted to administer local elections.
Local elections (and the General Election) in 2001 were postponed because of the foot and mouth outbreak. This is a far more serious situation affecting human health. So, as well as being led by the medical advice, we must also be guided by other official advice and therefore postpone these elections as you propose.
We will be copying our letter to you to the other political parties.
Yours sincerely,
Jennie Formby
Labour Party General Secretary
Below is the full text of the email sent to all local Labour parties.
Dear CLP Secretary,
You will have seen that in light of the spread of coronavirus, the Labour party has taken the decision to cancel the leadership elections special conference arranged for 4 April in order to safeguard our members and staff and to protect public health. Welsh Labour Conference and Scottish Labour Women’s Conference and the remaining leadership hustings have also been cancelled.
We are now advising that CLPs cancel all meetings and suspend campaigning.
We have today written to the Electoral Commission supporting its call for the local elections to be postponed due to the very many serious direct and indirect implications of the coronavirus.
We appreciate this is a difficult call to make and if you have any concerns or support, please do speak to your regional officer in the first instance.
It is also worth noting that the official advice for those feeling unwell has now changed and we must ensure we all respond accordingly to prevent the spread of the virus.
The key points are:
If anyone has symptoms of coronavirus infection, however mild, they must stay at home and not leave their house for 7 days from when symptoms started. This action will help protect others at work and in their community whilst they are infectious. If staff self-isolate they should work from home or speak to their manager to confirm they are unwell and unable to work;
Stay at least 2 metres (about 3 steps) away from other people at home whenever possible and sleep alone, if that is possible;
Wash hands regularly for 20 seconds, each time using soap and water.
Please do keep up to date on the NHS website and we will send further communications when necessary.
Regards,
Jennie Formby


labourlist--2020-03-13--WATCH: Labour calls on government to publish science behind Covid-19 strategy

Jonathan Ashworth has called on the government to publish the science behind its startegy to managing the coronavirus , or Covid-19 , outbreak .
Speaking to Sky News this afternoon , Labour ’ s Shadow Health Secretary said that the opposition understands that experts have advised that certain interventions have to be taken at particular times .
But he went on to say that the public does not understand why the government seems to be taking a different course of action to that of other European countries in response to the virus .
Ashworth said : “ They [ people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ countries around the world – including the Republic of Ireland , including France – seem to be taking more drastic action , seem to be taking some of those interventions more quickly than we are.
” Following a meeting of COBRA yesterday , the government ’ s approach moved from the ‘ contain ’ to ‘ delay ’ phase .
But the Prime Minister held back on more stringent action , such as closing schools or banning public gatherings .
Ashworth added : “ The government needs to offer people more clarity urgently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that modelling , publish that science.
” Other nearby countries have taken more urgent action ; Scotland has decided that it will cancel all indoor events and meetings with more than 500 attendees ; Ireland has closed all schools , universities and colleges .
In the press conference following the COBRA meeting yesterday , the government ’ s science officer suggested that the true number of cases of the virus in the UK is likely between 5,000 and 10,000 .

Jonathan Ashworth has called on the government to publish the science behind its startegy to managing the coronavirus, or Covid-19, outbreak.
Speaking to Sky News this afternoon, Labour’s Shadow Health Secretary said that the opposition understands that experts have advised that certain interventions have to be taken at particular times.
But he went on to say that the public does not understand why the government seems to be taking a different course of action to that of other European countries in response to the virus.
Ashworth said: “They [people] don’t understand why other countries around the world – including the Republic of Ireland, including France – seem to be taking more drastic action, seem to be taking some of those interventions more quickly than we are.”
Following a meeting of COBRA yesterday, the government’s approach moved from the ‘contain’ to ‘delay’ phase. But the Prime Minister held back on more stringent action, such as closing schools or banning public gatherings.
Ashworth added: “The government needs to offer people more clarity urgently. Which is why I say publish that modelling, publish that science.”
Shadow Health Secretary @JonAshworth calls on the Government to publish the science behind their approach to the #coronavirus outbreak. Read the latest here: https://t.co/PEhduf5ZxM pic.twitter.com/iZHz3Isvmw — Sky News (@SkyNews) March 13, 2020
Other nearby countries have taken more urgent action; Scotland has decided that it will cancel all indoor events and meetings with more than 500 attendees; Ireland has closed all schools, universities and colleges.
In the press conference following the COBRA meeting yesterday, the government’s science officer suggested that the true number of cases of the virus in the UK is likely between 5,000 and 10,000.