labourlist--2020-07-23--Momentum calls on Labour to publish Panorama libel case legal advice

Momentum ’ s national coordinating group ( NCG ) has issued a statement on the settlement of the Panorama libel case and the apology issued , calling on Labour to publish the legal advice received by the party .
In the statement issued this afternoon , the NCG said Labour must be “ honest and transparent ” with members and that they deserve to know “ whether or not these settlements were in line with the legal advice the party received ” .
It said that the apology and settlement of the case had taken place , “ despite reports @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said the party would have likely won in court because it had strong legal defences ” .
The governing body of Momentum also wrote that “ apologies or concessions made ” could undermine the ongoing inquiry being carried out by Martin Forde QC into the leaked report on Labour ’ s handling of antisemitism complaints .
The statement highlights that this report contains allegations of “ failures by the Labour right in dealing with complaints of antisemitism and islamophobia and argued that factionalism played a significant role in this ” .
It added @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the claims made in the Panorama programme… if a Panorama programme on the subject of antisemitism in the Labour Party were made today , it would be very different were it to reflect the contents of the leaked report.
” Labour issued a statement in court on Wednesday morning , in which it said it “ apologises unreservedly ” to the former Labour staffers and a journalist in the Panorama libel case and agreed to pay “ substantial damages ” .
Seven former Labour employees who appeared in the programme and the BBC @ @ @ @ @ @ @ figures within Labour had attacked their reputations and suggested they had personal motives to undermine the party .
When the documentary was aired last year , a party spokesperson stated that the programme was a “ malicious , selective briefing from disaffected , politically hostile former employees ” and complained to Ofcom .
The party statement issued on Wednesday said that these comments had “ contained defamatory and false allegations against the whistleblowers ” in the documentary – and that it “ unreservedly withdraws these allegations ” .
The settlement is believed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ £750,000 – with about £200,000 in damages agreed for the eight individuals .
Former leader Jeremy Corbyn has criticised the move to apologise and settle the case , calling it a “ political decision , not a legal one ” .
He also argued : “ Our legal advice was that the party had a strong defence.
” Below is the full text of the statement issued by Momentum today .
Labour has made apologies over last year ’ s Panorama programme , despite reports that the legal advice received by Labour said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ court because it had strong legal defences .
Labour must be honest and transparent with its members by publishing this legal advice .
Labour members deserve to know how much of their money has been spent in these settlements and whether or not these settlements were in line with the legal advice the Party received .
Any apologies or concessions made while the inquiry into the leaked report , led by Martin Forde QC , is ongoing , could run the risk of undermining that inquiry .
Members are still waiting for answers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ leaked report .
This includes allegations of racism , sexism , ableism and abuse towards Labour MPs and pro-Corbyn staff , and allegations about attempts to undermine Jeremy Corbyn ’ s leadership and work against a Labour victory in the 2017 General Election .
The leaked report also made allegations about failures by the Labour right in dealing with complaints of antisemitism and islamophobia and argued that factionalism played a significant role in this .
Many of these allegations countered the claims made in the Panorama programme and it is clear that , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of antisemitism in the Labour Party were made today , it would be very different were it to reflect the contents of the leaked report .
Today ’ s news is another example of why it is so important that we elect representatives to Labour ’ s National Executive Committee ( NEC ) who will be a strong voice for grassroots members and fight for justice over the leaked report .
We urge members to stay in the Party or rejoin if you have left or lapsed and vote for the Grassroots Voice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It is only by staying in the Party that we can prevent a repeat of the injustices exposed in the leaked report .
From advocating socialist policies that are hugely popular with the public , to tackling endemic racism and sexism in Party workplaces alleged in the leaked report and preventing a return to past purges and stitch ups by the Labour Right , these six candidates will fight for the future we need .

Momentum’s national coordinating group has issued a statement on the settlement of the Panorama libel case and the apology issued by Labour that calls on the party to publish the legal advice it received.
In the statement this afternoon, the NCG said Labour must be “honest and transparent” with members, who deserve to know “whether or not these settlements were in line with the legal advice the party received”.
It said that the apology and settlement of the case had taken place “despite reports that the legal advice received by Labour said the party would have likely won in court because it had strong legal defences”.
The governing body of Momentum also wrote that “apologies or concessions made” could undermine the ongoing inquiry being carried out by Martin Forde QC into the leaked report on Labour’s handling of antisemitism complaints.
The statement highlights that this report contains allegations of “failures by the Labour right in dealing with complaints of antisemitism and islamophobia and argued that factionalism played a significant role in this”.
It added: “Many of these allegations countered the claims made in the Panorama programme… if a Panorama programme on the subject of antisemitism in the Labour Party were made today, it would be very different were it to reflect the contents of the leaked report.”
Labour issued a statement in court on Wednesday morning, in which it said it “apologises unreservedly” to the former Labour staffers and a journalist in the Panorama libel case and agreed to pay “substantial damages”.
Seven former Labour employees who appeared in the programme and the BBC’s John Ware claimed that senior figures within Labour had attacked their reputations and suggested they had personal motives to undermine the party.
When the documentary was aired last year, a party spokesperson stated that the programme was a “malicious, selective briefing from disaffected, politically hostile former employees” and complained to Ofcom.
The party statement issued on Wednesday said that these comments had “contained defamatory and false allegations against the whistleblowers” in the documentary – and that it “unreservedly withdraws these allegations”.
The settlement is believed to have cost the party between £600,000 and £750,000 – with around £200,000 in damages agreed for the eight individuals.
Former leader Jeremy Corbyn has criticised the move to apologise and settle the case, calling it a “political decision, not a legal one”. He argued: “Our legal advice was that the party had a strong defence.”
Momentum founder and former chair Jon Lansman also commented on Labour’s statement yesterday. He said: “I tweeted something similar based on the party’s advice and assurances and also apologise to the former staffers.”
Below is the full text of the statement issued by Momentum’s NCG today.
Labour has made apologies over last year’s Panorama programme, despite reports that the legal advice received by Labour said the Party would have likely won in court because it had strong legal defences.
Labour must be honest and transparent with its members by publishing this legal advice. Labour members deserve to know how much of their money has been spent in these settlements and whether or not these settlements were in line with the legal advice the Party received.
Any apologies or concessions made while the inquiry into the leaked report, led by Martin Forde QC, is ongoing, could run the risk of undermining that inquiry.
Members are still waiting for answers and justice over the contents of the leaked report. This includes allegations of racism, sexism, ableism and abuse towards Labour MPs and pro-Corbyn staff, and allegations about attempts to undermine Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership and work against a Labour victory in the 2017 General Election.
The leaked report also made allegations about failures by the Labour right in dealing with complaints of antisemitism and islamophobia and argued that factionalism played a significant role in this. Many of these allegations countered the claims made in the Panorama programme and it is clear that, if a Panorama programme on the subject of antisemitism in the Labour Party were made today, it would be very different were it to reflect the contents of the leaked report.
Today’s news is another example of why it is so important that we elect representatives to Labour’s National Executive Committee (NEC) who will be a strong voice for grassroots members and fight for justice over the leaked report.
We urge members to stay in the Party or rejoin if you have left or lapsed and vote for the Grassroots Voice candidates for Labour’s NEC. It is only by staying in the Party that we can prevent a repeat of the injustices exposed in the leaked report.
From advocating socialist policies that are hugely popular with the public, to tackling endemic racism and sexism in Party workplaces alleged in the leaked report and preventing a return to past purges and stitch ups by the Labour Right, these six candidates will fight for the future we need.


labourlist--2020-07-23--Antisemitism row rumbles on as Labour figures react to the settlement

Labour settled the Panorama libel case yesterday , agreeing to pay “ substantial damages ” and apologising to seven former Labour staffers and BBC journalist John Ware .
Labour said it had defamed the individuals in the aftermath of the documentary , which looked into antisemitism in the party .
At the time , a Labour spokesperson had described the programme as a “ seriously inaccurate , politically one-sided polemic , which breached basic journalistic standards ” and complained to Ofcom .
But Labour ’ s lawyers yesterday said the statements issued following its airing had included “ invented quotes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and were “ defamatory ” .
The settlement is believed to have cost Labour around £600,000 , with about £180,000 in damages agreed for the eight individuals .
Plenty of reaction followed .
Jeremy Corbyn issued a statement in the afternoon , saying that “ our legal advice was that the party had a strong defence ” – and criticising the move as a “ political decision , not a legal one ” .
Left figures in the labour movement , such as Ian Lavery MP , expressed solidarity with the former Labour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Lisa Nandy MP and others welcomed the outcome of the case .
Longstanding Corbyn critic Margaret Hodge MP called the former leader ’ s intervention “ bizarre “ .
Meanwhile , Unite general secretary Len McCluskey tweeted that the move was a “ misuse of Labour Party funds to settle a case it was advised we would win in court ” .
Nandy told the BBC that McCluskey was “ completely wrong ” and said the party is “ taking steps today to get it right ” on antisemitism .
It ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ candidates had committed to settling the case during the leadership election , including Corbynite Rebecca Long-Bailey .
But since then we ’ ve seen the leaked report on the party ’ s handling of antisemitism complaints emerge .
The document includes allegations that disciplinary cases were mishandled in order to undermine Corbyn ’ s leadership , and McCluskey said yesterday that it “ tells a very different story about what happened ” .
This report is itself obviously controversial .
Mark Lewis – the lawyer who acted for Ware and the former staffers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Newsnight that he has been approached by 32 people who want to take legal action over the dossier .
This includes former general secretary Iain McNicol , who the lawyer reported is suing for “ being blamed for things that simply didn ’ t happen ” .
Lewis added that the document was “ incredibly edited , incredibly slanted , incredibly misleading ” .
But the problem is that claims made in the document relate to the issues raised in the documentary , and it named some of the Panorama whistleblowers .
Some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report as vindicating the comments made after the documentary was aired .
John McDonnell wrote in April that , if true , the allegations suggested “ staff not only failed to deal with cases of antisemitism effectively but also covered up their failure ” .
The inquiry into the leaked report , chaired by Martin Forde QC , has now been delayed and is expected to be completed at the end of the year .
Its call for evidence has just been extended by two weeks as well , with the deadline on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news , John McDonnell launched ‘ Claim the Future ’ in an online Zoom event .
Joined by guests including Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz , the former Shadow Chancellor urged attendees to join the campaign .
He told viewers “ there are some who are arguing that this is not the time to be promoting new ideas ” , but declared “ there is a positive role for many of us to play in instigating a constructive discussion about the society we want to create ” .
You can read his full @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s morning email for everything Labour , every weekday morning .

Labour settled the Panorama libel case yesterday, agreeing to pay “substantial damages” and apologising to seven former Labour staffers and BBC journalist John Ware. Labour said it had defamed the individuals in the aftermath of the documentary, which looked into antisemitism in the party. At the time, a Labour spokesperson had described the programme as a “seriously inaccurate, politically one-sided polemic, which breached basic journalistic standards” and complained to Ofcom. But Labour’s lawyers yesterday said the statements issued following its airing had included “invented quotes”, “flouted journalistic ethics” and were “defamatory”. The settlement is believed to have cost Labour around £600,000, with about £180,000 in damages agreed for the eight individuals.
Plenty of reaction followed. Jeremy Corbyn issued a statement in the afternoon, saying that “our legal advice was that the party had a strong defence” – and criticising the move as a “political decision, not a legal one”. Left figures in the labour movement, such as Ian Lavery MP, expressed solidarity with the former Labour leader – while the Jewish Labour Movement, Lisa Nandy MP and others welcomed the outcome of the case. Longstanding Corbyn critic Margaret Hodge MP called the former leader’s intervention “bizarre“. Meanwhile, Unite general secretary Len McCluskey tweeted that the move was a “misuse of Labour Party funds to settle a case it was advised we would win in court”. Nandy told the BBC that McCluskey was “completely wrong” and said the party is “taking steps today to get it right” on antisemitism.
It’s worth mentioning that all Labour leadership candidates had committed to settling the case during the leadership election, including Corbynite Rebecca Long-Bailey. But since then we’ve seen the leaked report on the party’s handling of antisemitism complaints emerge. The document includes allegations that disciplinary cases were mishandled in order to undermine Corbyn’s leadership, and McCluskey said yesterday that it “tells a very different story about what happened”. This report is itself obviously controversial. Mark Lewis – the lawyer who acted for Ware and the former staffers in the Panorama case – told BBC Newsnight that he has been approached by 32 people who want to take legal action over the dossier. This includes former general secretary Iain McNicol, who the lawyer reported is suing for “being blamed for things that simply didn’t happen”. Lewis added that the document was “incredibly edited, incredibly slanted, incredibly misleading”.
But the problem is that claims made in the document relate to the issues raised in the documentary, and it named some of the Panorama whistleblowers. Some within the party consequently see the leaked report as vindicating the comments made after the documentary was aired. John McDonnell wrote in April that, if true, the allegations suggested “staff not only failed to deal with cases of antisemitism effectively but also covered up their failure”. The inquiry into the leaked report, chaired by Martin Forde QC, has now been delayed and is expected to be completed at the end of the year. Its call for evidence has just been extended by two weeks as well, with the deadline on August 7th at 5pm.
In other news, John McDonnell launched ‘Claim the Future’ in an online Zoom event. Joined by guests including Nobel Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, the former Shadow Chancellor urged attendees to join the campaign. He told viewers “there are some who are arguing that this is not the time to be promoting new ideas”, but declared “there is a positive role for many of us to play in instigating a constructive discussion about the society we want to create”. You can read his full speech here. Sign up to LabourList’s morning email for everything Labour, every weekday morning.


labourlist--2020-07-23--Labour MP demands PM investigate gerrymandering by Tory council leader

Jon Cruddas MP has called on the Prime Minister to investigate allegations of gerrymandering against a Conservative council leader , “ both within the Tory Party and through the Ministry for Housing , Communities and Local Government ” .
In a letter to Boris Johnson today , the Labour MP highlighted “ shocking revelations ” about the actions of Havering Council leader Damien White , and said that the “ independence of the boundary change system has been undermined ” .
Cruddas referred to a 32-minute leaked recording of a meeting of Tory councillors , which captures White discussing how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ review process so that it would be “ politically advantageous ” for the Tories .
The Labour MP argued it “ shows the council leadership in detailed discussion , stating that they have met with civil servants to manipulate the boundary changes for political gain ” , and said it should “ prompt an immediate investigation ” .
Commenting on the allegations levelled against the Tory councillors , Cruddas said : “ The charges against Havering Conservative group and the council leader are very serious so I ’ ve gone straight to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the minister for local government as my next port of call but considering the current controversies surrounding the minister , I felt it inappropriate .
“ So today I have called on the Prime Minister to take immediate action .
The allegations of gerrymandering require a full investigation , both within the Conservative Party and by the ministry for local government .
“ As it stands , this situation appears to undermine the independence of the boundary change system , and has the potential to erode public confidence in the political process.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ heard telling Tory councillors , “ for these four walls ” , that chief executive Andrew Blake-Herbert had “ agreed for some reason to allow me to influence the proposals and , erm , I ’ ve been able to ” .
White also said : “ The [ chief executive ] has now agreed that we can have a governance committee meeting to discuss the four options , pick which one we like , make any recommendations or changes to it and that then goes to full council as an administration amendment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to say : “ By changing it and having governance committee filter , we can argue that there ’ s cross-party involvement in the boundary proposals we have brought forward.
” Cruddas ’ letter also highlights a moment when the Tory council leader identified a council officer as the cousin of a Conservative councillor , saying : “ He ’ s the chap who ’ s been able to govern the boundaries and whatnot ” .
The letter follows the council ’ s submission to the boundary commission in March , which is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ London boroughs to ensure that each councillor represents approximately the same amount of voters .
You can read the full text of the letter to the Prime Minister here .

Update, 6pm: Havering Council monitoring officer has launched an investigation, to be conducted by an officer from another borough, into the allegations of gerrymandering by the Tory council leader and Conservative group.
Commenting on this development, Jon Cruddas tweeted: “This must be an independent process and I will be making sure the person conducting the review has no ties to Havering or the Tories.”
Jon Cruddas has called on the Prime Minister to investigate allegations of gerrymandering against a Conservative council leader “both within the Tory Party and through the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government”.
In a letter to Boris Johnson today, the Labour MP highlighted “shocking revelations” about the actions of Havering Council leader Damien White, and said that the “independence of the boundary change system has been undermined”.
Cruddas referred to a 32-minute leaked recording of a meeting of Tory councillors, which captures White discussing how he had influenced the ongoing local boundary review process so that it would be “politically advantageous” for the Tories.
The Labour MP argued it “shows the council leadership in detailed discussion, stating that they have met with civil servants to manipulate the boundary changes for political gain”, and said it should “prompt an immediate investigation”.
Commenting on the allegations levelled against the Tory councillors, Cruddas said: “The charges against Havering Conservative group and the council leader are very serious so I’ve gone straight to the top.
“I would have written to the minister for local government as my next port of call but considering the current controversies surrounding the minister, I felt it inappropriate.
“So today I have called on the Prime Minister to take immediate action. The allegations of gerrymandering require a full investigation, both within the Conservative Party and by the ministry for local government.
“As it stands, this situation appears to undermine the independence of the boundary change system, and has the potential to erode public confidence in the political process.”
This morning I have written to @BorisJohnson calling for an immediate investigation into allegations of gerrymandering by the Leader of #Havering Council, and the #Tory Group. These charges are very serious and require action. pic.twitter.com/ctUnted3Hz — Jon Cruddas (@JonCruddas_1) July 23, 2020
In the recording, White is heard telling Tory councillors, “for these four walls”, that chief executive Andrew Blake-Herbert had “agreed for some reason to allow me to influence the proposals and, erm, I’ve been able to”.
White said: “The [chief executive] has now agreed that we can have a governance committee meeting to discuss the four options, pick which one we like, make any recommendations or changes to it and that then goes to full council as an administration amendment or a motion.”
He added: “By changing it and having governance committee filter, we can argue that there’s cross-party involvement in the boundary proposals we have brought forward.”
Cruddas’ letter also highlights a moment when the Tory council leader identified a council officer as the cousin of a Conservative councillor, saying: “He’s the chap who’s been able to govern the boundaries and whatnot”.
The letter follows the council’s submission to the boundary commission in March, which is conducting a programme of reviews of all London boroughs to ensure that each councillor represents approximately the same amount of voters.
You can read the full text of the letter to the Prime Minister here.


labourlist--2020-07-23--Former general secretary Iain McNicol to sue over leaked antisemitism report

Lawyer Mark Lewis has revealed that Iain McNicol is suing the Labour Party over the leaked report into the handling of antisemitism complaints by the party .
The legal representative , who acted for the former Labour staffers and journalist John Ware in the Panorama libel case settled on Wednesday , said last night that 32 people had approached him about taking legal action .
In an interview with BBC Newsnight , Lewis told viewers that the former general secretary of the party was one of those individuals , suing for being “ blamed for things that simply didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ There are 32 people who have instructed me to take action .
Their actions are in respect to data breaches misuse of private information , libels — It ’ s like an exam question for a libel lawyer to look through them and see how many claims you can find.
” “ Lord McNicol is one of the people who is taking action who has been named in the report .
There are many other people who are named in the report , they come under different categories : people who work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the party in in political positions.
” On the former general secretary , he said : “ McNicol is named in the report and is blamed for things that simply didn ’ t happen .
It ’ s a mischaracterisation of a report which has been taken on .
“ And what has been prepared as a report is a very factional basis , which is incredibly edited , incredibly slanted , incredibly misleading and of course the far left are quoting from that as though it ’ s some sort of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and distributed online in April this year , described alleged mishandling of disciplinary cases and attempts by members of staff to undermine Jeremy Corbyn .
Much of the dossier focuses on the poor relations between the leader ’ s office and Labour headquarters – including the governance and legal unit when McNicol served as general secretary and Corbyn was leader .
Following the release of this 851-page document , new leader Keir Starmer committed to an “ urgent independent investigation ” into the background , the content and the way in which the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the party .
The investigation has been delayed and is now expected to report at the end of the year .
A call for evidence has been published by the inquiry , with the deadline for contributions on August 7th at 5pm .

Lawyer Mark Lewis has revealed that Iain McNicol is suing the Labour Party over the leaked internal report into the handling of antisemitism complaints by the party.
The legal representative, who acted for the former Labour staffers and journalist John Ware in the Panorama libel case settled on Wednesday, revealed last night that 32 people had approached him about taking legal action.
In an interview with BBC Newsnight, Lewis told viewers that the former general secretary of the party was one of those individuals and that he intended to sue for being “blamed for things that simply didn’t happen”.
Lewis said: “There are 32 people who have instructed me to take action. Their actions are in respect to data breaches misuse of private information, libels — It’s like an exam question for a libel lawyer to look through them and see how many claims you can find.
“Lord McNicol is one of the people who is taking action who has been named in the report. There are many other people who are named in the report, they come under different categories: people who work for the party, people who were in the party in in political positions.”
On the former Labour general secretary, Lewis added: “McNicol is named in the report and is blamed for things that simply didn’t happen. It’s a mischaracterisation of a report which has been taken on.
“And what has been prepared as a report is a very factional basis, which is incredibly edited, incredibly slanted, incredibly misleading and of course the far left are quoting from that as though it’s some sort of gospel.”
“Lord McNichol is one of the people who are taking action.” Lawyer @MLewisLawyer who represented the claimants today says the former general secretary of the Labour Party is suing the party over a leaked report which claimed he acted against the leadership. pic.twitter.com/PZ4jSI8YGv — BBC Newsnight (@BBCNewsnight) July 22, 2020
The controversial report, leaked and distributed online in April this year, detailed alleged mishandling of disciplinary cases and attempts by members of staff to undermine Jeremy Corbyn.
Much of the dossier focuses on the poor relations between the leader’s office and Labour headquarters, including the governance and legal unit when McNicol served as general secretary and Corbyn was leader.
Following the release of this 851-page document, new leader Keir Starmer committed to an “urgent independent investigation” into the background, the content and the way in which the report was released, and the culture in the party.
The investigation has been delayed and is now expected to report at the end of the year. A call for evidence has been published by the inquiry, with the deadline for contributions on August 7th at 5pm.


labourlist--2020-07-23--“Build better but not back” – John McDonnell’s full speech

Below is the full text of the speech delivered by Labour MP John McDonnell at the launch event of ‘ Claim the Future ’ on Wednesday evening .
Let me welcome you all to this launch of our new project we ’ ve called “ Claim the Future ” .
Thanks for joining us .
I ’ ll try and briefly explain the background and purpose of this project before I introduce a panel of my friends to speak this evening .
And thanks to our speakers who are coming to us from New Zealand , India , New York @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a time like few others .
A traumatic period both for the many that have directly , too often tragically , suffered loss and harm from the Coronavirus outbreak .
But it ’ s also a period of potentially dramatic economic and political upheaval as people lose their jobs , sink into debt and the underlying principles of how our economies operate are being forcibly challenged .
When people are faced with uncertainty and insecurity like this , there is a natural tendency to want to cling to the past , to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was ‘ normal ’ .
That ’ s why the slogan ‘ Build Back Better ’ has had an attractive appeal .
And it ’ s also why it has been so readily co-opted by Conservatives like Johnson .
But it ’ s interesting that the crisis that we are going through has largely bucked this trend .
Polling is demonstrating that most people do not want to go back to the way we were .
They want to build better but not back .
It ’ s because the ‘ normal ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from good enough .
The pre-pandemic normal for most was the product of ten years of austerity .
A decade in which our essential public services , like the NHS and social care , were deprived of the resources they desperately needed .
And a decade of year on year of wages cut and frozen and work increasingly insecure , stressed and under pressure .
The grotesque neoliberal mismanagement of our economy left our public services so ill prepared to cope with the virus .
It left so many people incapable of avoiding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So it ’ s completely understandable that people do not want to return to the insecurity and the precariousness of that past normality .
Of course , the vast bulk of our attention is naturally focused on coping with , surviving and getting through the pandemic .
At the back of the collective mind though is that nagging thought that Coronavirus is not the only threat we face .
And for all the frightening scale of hurt and damage it is causing , Covid pales into relative insignificance besides the existential risk @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That ’ s why we can ’ t allow a return to normal .
We can ’ t let establishment political leaders and their corporate and media allies take us back .
Because they will put us all at risk again .
So , we must claim the future .
We have to ask and answer the questions about what lives we want to live , what communities we want to live in and what future there should be for our planet .
If we don ’ t others will .
And it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ corporate controllers that will answer these questions for us .
I heard that wonderful writer and campaigner , Arundhati Roy , describe the pandemic as a portal through which we can step into a new future .
That is what this project is all about .
It ’ s about releasing our collective imagination to consider what that new future could be , but more importantly it ’ s about networking that thinking with the action and activists working to secure the change we desire .
There are some who are arguing that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ promoting new ideas or policies about the way we manage our economy or organise our society .
It ’ s best to simply criticise the performance of the Tories here and the status quo elsewhere .
When asked “ if you don ’ t like what Johnson is doing , what would you do ?
” the response has been from some not to say or say very little , on the grounds that the election is a long way off .
I completely understand that .
There will be a time for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a positive role for many of us to play in instigating a constructive discussion about the society we want to create and some of the policy ideas possible to lay the foundations of that new society .
If there is at least one lesson I have urged people to take from the horrendous defeat Labour experienced in 2019 , it ’ s that ideas and policy programmes must be set in an overall narrative , a narrative of the vision of the society you aim to create .
And you need time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the role these policies will play within that overall narrative and to achieve the vision of that society .
I also have to say that at a time when so many are recognising the need for change , if progressives do not seize this opportunity , the question has to be if not now when will it ever be the right time .
I ’ ll take you through the work we have undertaken in preparation for this project and our ideas on the process from here .
I want to thank @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it has provided to enable me to bring together a small team who over the last couple of months have drafted a series of policy position papers on some of the most pressing economic issues facing our society .
They range from climate change to finance capital to , taxation , public services , public ownership and many others .
The team has brought together for each topic a range of expert policy researchers and progressive think tanks , and activist campaigns to peer review the papers and to throw in ideas for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to secure the policy .
It ’ s been quite an exhilarating listening project .
Just listening to the buzz of well thought through and grounded ideas and importantly to the incredibly creative and , so often , courageous campaigners in the various fields has just set me alight at times .
Our intention is to release the individual papers over the next couple of months for discussion and to convene online meetings to launch and explore their ideas and plan support for actions .
We will aim to put the various proposals @ @ @ @ @ @ @ early Autumn hopefully as an alternative economic strategy for discussion and campaigning .
The most important role is to link the development and promotion of new thinking with the campaigning and action on the ground .
Welcome to the concept of praxis .
This is a sizeable and challenging project to pull off .
And we might fall flat on our faces .
But the political climate is too serious not to try .
My underlying fear is a repeat of what happened after the Banking Crash in 2008 , when the Left @ @ @ @ @ @ @ filled .
The result was ten years of brutal austerity that we know didn ’ t just cause hardship but cost many , many lives .
A recession that we could be facing now is also often the breeding ground not just for the right but for the far right .
That ’ s why we need this project to work .
The first part of our listening project was to listen to the way people had learnt from the pandemic experience about the values they held and the values which they felt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
What came across was just how much we care for one another and how much we need one another .
Basic values of humanity and solidarity that should underpin how we live together .
People have described the scale of the challenges we face in every field if we are to build the economy and society we need .
The policy papers we will be releasing over the next three months will address many of these key issues .
But there are some immediate issues that need to be addressed urgently .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 75th anniversary of the Attlee government taking office .
In the ruins of the Second World War , with debt far higher than today , they didn ’ t offer a meal deal , they founded the NHS , created the welfare state , built council homes and nationalised one-third of industry .
They claimed the future , and so must we .
The time has come to complete the unfinished business of the Attlee government .
Thanks largely to the underfunding by successive Tory governments and the ownership of much of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of hedge funds , venture capitalists and backed by private equity sucking resources from the sector , our care services have been stretched to the absolute limit .
With another spike in the virus highly possible , it ’ s time now to act decisively and create the caring services we need .
We need the urgent nationalisation of care to establish the National Care Service alongside the NHS .
Only in this way will we be able to secure the standard of care we wish for our elderly and disabled and ensure @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and rewarded .
Other urgent issues have to be addressed .
The precarity facing workers has been exposed as the furlough ends and unemployment soars .
Even before the pandemic , the economy was stagnant and wages no higher than a decade ago .
That ’ s why we need an immediate minimum income guarantee .
But we also need to deal with the escalating mountain of personal debt .
We will be bringing forward radical proposals to tackle the debt crisis .
We will also support all those campaigners and experts who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , radical policymaking and resourcing to tackle climate change .
Just to conclude before I introduce my friends whom I have asked to speak this evening , let me say this .
This is a pivotal moment in history .
Over the last few years populist politics , led by charlatan politicians , backed by corporate wealth , took hold here and in the United States .
The pandemic has exposed that type of politics and those politicians for what they are – bombastic , dangerous incompetents .
People have paid for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lives and many more now with their jobs and livelihoods .
But the pandemic has also revealed how our current economic system also fails us .
It is putting us at risk of an even greater catastrophe of climate change .
Our project aims to help ensure that lessons are learnt from the pandemic that can be carried forward to enable us to tackle the fundamental threat of climate change .
That we contribute to creating an unstoppable climate of opinion .
We ’ ve been working with dozens of different activists and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to give confidence to others , to open up a political door that post election defeat timidity may be preventing some from walking through at the moment .
I hope that having listened to our speakers tonight you will join our network for action we are launching tonight to do this .
We can not go back , we must claim the future .

Below is the full text of the speech delivered by Labour MP John McDonnell at the launch event of ‘Claim the Future‘ on Wednesday evening.
Let me welcome you all to this launch of our new project we’ve called “Claim the Future”. Thanks for joining us. I’ll try and briefly explain the background and purpose of this project before I introduce a panel of my friends to speak this evening. And thanks to our speakers who are coming to us from New Zealand, India, New York, and London.
We are living in a time like few others. A traumatic period both for the many that have directly, too often tragically, suffered loss and harm from the Coronavirus outbreak. But it’s also a period of potentially dramatic economic and political upheaval as people lose their jobs, sink into debt and the underlying principles of how our economies operate are being forcibly challenged.
When people are faced with uncertainty and insecurity like this, there is a natural tendency to want to cling to the past, to wish for things to return to what was ‘normal’. That’s why the slogan ‘Build Back Better’ has had an attractive appeal. And it’s also why it has been so readily co-opted by Conservatives like Johnson. But it’s interesting that the crisis that we are going through has largely bucked this trend. Polling is demonstrating that most people do not want to go back to the way we were. They want to build better but not back. It’s because the ‘normal’ that existed for so many was far from good enough.
The pre-pandemic normal for most was the product of ten years of austerity. A decade in which our essential public services, like the NHS and social care, were deprived of the resources they desperately needed. And a decade of year on year of wages cut and frozen and work increasingly insecure, stressed and under pressure. The grotesque neoliberal mismanagement of our economy left our public services so ill prepared to cope with the virus. It left so many people incapable of avoiding immediate financial hardship when the pandemic struck. So it’s completely understandable that people do not want to return to the insecurity and the precariousness of that past normality.
Of course, the vast bulk of our attention is naturally focused on coping with, surviving and getting through the pandemic. At the back of the collective mind though is that nagging thought that Coronavirus is not the only threat we face. And for all the frightening scale of hurt and damage it is causing, Covid pales into relative insignificance besides the existential risk of climate catastrophe we now face. That’s why we can’t allow a return to normal. We can’t let establishment political leaders and their corporate and media allies take us back. Because they will put us all at risk again.
So, we must claim the future. We have to ask and answer the questions about what lives we want to live, what communities we want to live in and what future there should be for our planet. If we don’t others will. And it will be the establishment politicians and their corporate controllers that will answer these questions for us.
I heard that wonderful writer and campaigner, Arundhati Roy, describe the pandemic as a portal through which we can step into a new future. That is what this project is all about. It’s about releasing our collective imagination to consider what that new future could be, but more importantly it’s about networking that thinking with the action and activists working to secure the change we desire.
There are some who are arguing that this is not the time to be promoting new ideas or policies about the way we manage our economy or organise our society. It’s best to simply criticise the performance of the Tories here and the status quo elsewhere. When asked “if you don’t like what Johnson is doing, what would you do?” the response has been from some not to say or say very little, on the grounds that the election is a long way off. I completely understand that. There will be a time for constructing a manifesto later. But there is a positive role for many of us to play in instigating a constructive discussion about the society we want to create and some of the policy ideas possible to lay the foundations of that new society.
If there is at least one lesson I have urged people to take from the horrendous defeat Labour experienced in 2019, it’s that ideas and policy programmes must be set in an overall narrative, a narrative of the vision of the society you aim to create. And you need time to bed them in and convince people of the role these policies will play within that overall narrative and to achieve the vision of that society. I also have to say that at a time when so many are recognising the need for change, if progressives do not seize this opportunity, the question has to be if not now when will it ever be the right time.
I’ll take you through the work we have undertaken in preparation for this project and our ideas on the process from here. I want to thank the Rosa Luxemburg Foundation for the support it has provided to enable me to bring together a small team who over the last couple of months have drafted a series of policy position papers on some of the most pressing economic issues facing our society. They range from climate change to finance capital to, taxation, public services, public ownership and many others. The team has brought together for each topic a range of expert policy researchers and progressive think tanks, and activist campaigns to peer review the papers and to throw in ideas for both policy development and the campaigning needed to secure the policy.
It’s been quite an exhilarating listening project. Just listening to the buzz of well thought through and grounded ideas and importantly to the incredibly creative and, so often, courageous campaigners in the various fields has just set me alight at times. Our intention is to release the individual papers over the next couple of months for discussion and to convene online meetings to launch and explore their ideas and plan support for actions.
We will aim to put the various proposals from these individual papers together in the early Autumn hopefully as an alternative economic strategy for discussion and campaigning. The most important role is to link the development and promotion of new thinking with the campaigning and action on the ground. Welcome to the concept of praxis.
This is a sizeable and challenging project to pull off. And we might fall flat on our faces. But the political climate is too serious not to try. My underlying fear is a repeat of what happened after the Banking Crash in 2008, when the Left left a vacuum that the right readily filled. The result was ten years of brutal austerity that we know didn’t just cause hardship but cost many, many lives. A recession that we could be facing now is also often the breeding ground not just for the right but for the far right. That’s why we need this project to work.
The first part of our listening project was to listen to the way people had learnt from the pandemic experience about the values they held and the values which they felt should underly our society in the future. What came across was just how much we care for one another and how much we need one another. Basic values of humanity and solidarity that should underpin how we live together. People have described the scale of the challenges we face in every field if we are to build the economy and society we need. The policy papers we will be releasing over the next three months will address many of these key issues. But there are some immediate issues that need to be addressed urgently.
Next Sunday (26 July) marks the 75th anniversary of the Attlee government taking office. In the ruins of the Second World War, with debt far higher than today, they didn’t offer a meal deal, they founded the NHS, created the welfare state, built council homes and nationalised one-third of industry. They claimed the future, and so must we. The time has come to complete the unfinished business of the Attlee government. Thanks largely to the underfunding by successive Tory governments and the ownership of much of our care service being in the hands of hedge funds, venture capitalists and backed by private equity sucking resources from the sector, our care services have been stretched to the absolute limit. With another spike in the virus highly possible, it’s time now to act decisively and create the caring services we need. We need the urgent nationalisation of care to establish the National Care Service alongside the NHS. Only in this way will we be able to secure the standard of care we wish for our elderly and disabled and ensure that the care workforce is properly supported and rewarded.
Other urgent issues have to be addressed. The precarity facing workers has been exposed as the furlough ends and unemployment soars. Even before the pandemic, the economy was stagnant and wages no higher than a decade ago. That’s why we need an immediate minimum income guarantee. But we also need to deal with the escalating mountain of personal debt. We will be bringing forward radical proposals to tackle the debt crisis. We will also support all those campaigners and experts who are demonstrating the same scale of determination, radical policymaking and resourcing to tackle climate change.
Just to conclude before I introduce my friends whom I have asked to speak this evening, let me say this. This is a pivotal moment in history. Over the last few years populist politics, led by charlatan politicians, backed by corporate wealth, took hold here and in the United States. The pandemic has exposed that type of politics and those politicians for what they are – bombastic, dangerous incompetents. People have paid for the likes of Johnson and Trump with their lives and many more now with their jobs and livelihoods.
But the pandemic has also revealed how our current economic system also fails us. It is putting us at risk of an even greater catastrophe of climate change. Our project aims to help ensure that lessons are learnt from the pandemic that can be carried forward to enable us to tackle the fundamental threat of climate change. That we contribute to creating an unstoppable climate of opinion. We’ve been working with dozens of different activists and campaign groups to claim the future, to give confidence to others, to open up a political door that post election defeat timidity may be preventing some from walking through at the moment. I hope that having listened to our speakers tonight you will join our network for action we are launching tonight to do this. We cannot go back, we must claim the future.


labourlist--2020-07-23--Labour asks Ofcom to “urgently review” Russia Today license

Labour has asked the communications regulator Ofcom to “ urgently review ” the license of Russia Today in light of the “ damning revelations ” in the long-awaited report published by the intelligence and security committee .
In a letter to chief executive Melanie Dawes , the party wrote that the report published on Tuesday had exposed the role that the broadcaster plays in the “ much wider issue of Russian influence ” .
Labour said that the findings of the committee had reinforced a judgement against Russia Today in a court case in 2018 , which had found that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ caused “ actual and potential harm ” .
Labour ’ s Jo Stevens said : “ The long-awaited Russia report sets out in black and white issues that Ofcom already identified when it fined £200,000 for its biased reporting of the novichok attack in Salisbury at the hands of the Russian state .
“ This worrying report spells out the role that Russia Today plays in the spread of disinformation and attempts at broader political influence overseas , by Russia.
” The Shadow Culture Secretary added : “ I am writing to request @ @ @ @ @ @ @ licence to broadcast within the UK in the light of this report.
” The report from the committee stated that “ open source studies have shown serious distortions in the coverage provided by Russian state-owned international broadcasters such as Russia Today and Sputnik.
” Labour leader Keir Starmer called on Boris Johnson to “ stop the spread of Kremlin-backed disinformation ” during Wednesday ’ s Prime Minister ’ s Questions session , referring to Russia Today and the 2018 judgement .
Below is the full text of the letter sent to Ofcom .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the troubling revelations in the Russia report about the role of RT and Sputnik in spreading Kremlin-backed disinformation in the UK .
The report from the Intelligence and Security Committee sets out in black and white issues that Ofcom has already identified through the £200,000 fine administered in 2018 .
This was in response to the broadcaster ’ s failure to preserve due impartiality in seven news and current affairs programmes between 17 March and 26 April 2018 covering the Novichok attack in Salisbury at the hands of the Russian state in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Court challenge to Ofcom ’ s fine , Lord Justice Dingemans said in his ruling that biased reporting of the Novichok attack in Salisbury at the hands of the Russian state caused “ actual and potential harm ” .
That damning judgment has now been reinforced by the long-delayed ISC report that exposes the role RT plays in the much wider issue with of Russian influence .
I am writing to request that Ofcom urgently reviews RT ’ s licence in light of this report and to request a meeting with you as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about the broadcaster .

Labour has asked the communications regulator Ofcom to “urgently review” the license of Russia Today in light of the “damning revelations” in the long-awaited report published by the intelligence and security committee.
In a letter to chief executive Melanie Dawes, the party wrote that the report published on Tuesday had exposed the role that the broadcaster plays in the “much wider issue of Russian influence”.
Labour said the findings of the committee had reinforced a judgement against Russia Today in a court case in 2018, which had found that its reporting of the Salisbury incident had caused “actual and potential harm”.
Jo Stevens said: “The long-awaited Russia report sets out in black and white issues that Ofcom already identified when it fined £200,000 for its biased reporting of the novichok attack in Salisbury at the hands of the Russian state.
“This worrying report spells out the role that Russia Today plays in the spread of disinformation and attempts at broader political influence overseas, by Russia.”
The Shadow Culture Secretary added: “I am writing to request that Ofcom urgently reviews RT’s licence to broadcast within the UK in the light of this report.”
The report from the committee stated that “open source studies have shown serious distortions in the coverage provided by Russian state-owned international broadcasters such as Russia Today and Sputnik”.
Labour leader Keir Starmer called on Boris Johnson to “stop the spread of Kremlin-backed disinformation” during Wednesday’s Prime Minister’s Questions session, referring to Russia Today and the 2018 judgement.
Below is the full text of the letter sent to Ofcom.
Dear Dame Melanie Dawes,
I am writing to you in light of the troubling revelations in the Russia report about the role of RT and Sputnik in spreading Kremlin-backed disinformation in the UK.
The report from the Intelligence and Security Committee sets out in black and white issues that Ofcom has already identified through the £200,000 fine administered in 2018. This was in response to the broadcaster’s failure to preserve due impartiality in seven news and current affairs programmes between 17 March and 26 April 2018 covering the Novichok attack in Salisbury at the hands of the Russian state in 2018.
When RT lost its High Court challenge to Ofcom’s fine, Lord Justice Dingemans said in his ruling that biased reporting of the Novichok attack in Salisbury at the hands of the Russian state caused “actual and potential harm”.
That damning judgment has now been reinforced by the long-delayed ISC report that exposes the role RT plays in the much wider issue with of Russian influence.
I am writing to request that Ofcom urgently reviews RT’s licence in light of this report and to request a meeting with you as soon as possible to discuss my concerns about the broadcaster.
Yours sincerely,
Jo Stevens


labourlist--2020-07-23--This recovery is no green new deal

This recovery is no green new deal

With the words ‘ build back greener ’ , the government has signalled an intention to put sustainability at the heart of its Covid-19 recovery plans .
Unfortunately for the Prime Minister , saying and doing are two very different things .
As we look beyond Covid , the looming climate catastrophe is the greatest threat to our existence .
And as the Committee on Climate Change ( CCC ) recently warned , the UK is not doing enough to avert it .
Every death and economic misery sparked by the coronavirus pandemic is of the utmost tragedy .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offers opportunity for reset .
Now is the time to be bold , putting the climate central to economic thinking .
So far , the government has announced a £2bn green-homes grant scheme , a £1bn public sector decarbonisation scheme , and £350m to cut emissions in heavy industry – amongst other pledges .
Whilst welcome , it ’ s nowhere near enough .
A green recovery this is not .
We need a true green new deal that places sufficient investment in decarbonising home heating and transport , puts forward comprehensive , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , including hydrogen , and offers real investment in green jobs .
We need action now .
A green new deal is not new thinking .
Most of us know of it thanks to the tireless campaigning of US representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez .
In the UK the movement hit the mainstream last year , with Labour ’ s campaign for a green new deal .
But activity stretches back further .
Advocates in the USA have championed a deal since the 1970s , and in 2009 the UN department for economic and social @ @ @ @ @ @ @ new deal , to reduce emissions without sacrificing development .
So why now ?
Because now , we can .
First , we must sufficiently invest in decarbonising home heating and transport .
The heating of homes is the largest cause of carbon emissions in the UK residential sector – making up one fifth of emissions in 2019 .
Tackling this will be key to reaching net zero , and avoiding climate disaster .
In the House of Commons on Tuesday , minister Kwasi Kwarteng said the recently announced green homes grant will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ zero by 2050 , however , we need to be making 2,000 homes carbon neutral – a day .
It ’ s a similar story with transport , which accounted for 34 % of UK emissions in 2019 .
Here , again , the difference is stark .
The government hasn ’ t yet even published its transport decarbonisation plan .
Alongside this , real strategies and investment to boost renewable energy production are paramount .
In June , the UK ended a record-breaking 67 days , 22 hours and 55 minutes without @ @ @ @ @ @ @ energy usage has soared , showing what ’ s possible .
But moving to energy production from solar , wind , biomethane and hydrogen doesn ’ t just happen by magic .
Take hydrogen , an emerging energy source with great potential – this month the EU published its hydrogen strategy , with billions of euros of investment to boot .
We should be there too , exploiting this opportunity to enter nascent supply chains and build future exporting capacity .
Finally , we need mass creation of well-paid , good quality green @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the labour market , laying bare its lack of resilience .
If government support is withdrawn this autumn , and hopes of a workable vaccine dashed , we could see 20 % unemployment .
Many green economy jobs are shovel-ready .
By investing in green stimulus we can achieve two goals in one : sustainability and jobs .
We know what is at stake .
We can not feign ignorance .
Both Covid-19 and climate catastrophe menace to pilfer all we hold dear .
A true green new deal is what we need @

With the words ‘build back greener’, the government has signalled an intention to put sustainability at the heart of its Covid-19 recovery plans. Unfortunately for the Prime Minister, saying and doing are two very different things. As we look beyond Covid, the looming climate catastrophe is the greatest threat to our existence. And as the committee on climate change (CCC) recently warned, the UK is not doing enough to avert it.
Every death and economic misery sparked by the coronavirus pandemic is of the utmost tragedy. But the economic realignment we now face also offers opportunity for reset. Now is the time to be bold, putting the climate central to economic thinking. So far, the government has announced a £2bn green-homes grant scheme, a £1bn public sector decarbonisation scheme and £350m to cut emissions in heavy industry, amongst other pledges. Whilst welcome, it’s nowhere near enough. A green recovery this is not.
We need a true green new deal that places sufficient investment in decarbonising home heating and transport, puts forward comprehensive, credible strategies and investment in renewable energy, including hydrogen, and offers real investment in green jobs. We need action now.
A green new deal is not new thinking. Most of us know of it thanks to the tireless campaigning of US representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. In the UK the movement hit the mainstream last year, with Labour’s campaign for a green new deal. But activity stretches back further. Advocates in the USA have championed a deal since the 1970s, and in 2009 the UN department for economic and social affairs set out its own global green new deal, to reduce emissions without sacrificing development. Why now? Because now, we can.
First, we must sufficiently invest in decarbonising home heating and transport. The heating of homes is the largest cause of carbon emissions in the UK residential sector – making up one fifth of emissions in 2019. Tackling this will be key to reaching net zero, and avoiding climate disaster. In the House of Commons on Tuesday, minister Kwasi Kwarteng said the recently announced green homes grant will upgrade 600,000 homes. To reach net zero by 2050, however, we need to be making 2,000 homes carbon neutral – a day.
It’s a similar story with transport, which accounted for 34% of UK emissions in 2019. Here, again, the difference is stark. The government hasn’t yet even published its transport decarbonisation plan.
Alongside this, real strategies and investment to boost renewable energy production are paramount. In June, the UK ended a record-breaking 67 days, 22 hours and 55 minutes without using coal. During lockdown, renewable energy usage has soared, showing what’s possible. But moving to energy production from solar, wind, biomethane and hydrogen doesn’t just happen by magic. Take hydrogen, an emerging energy source with great potential – this month the EU published its hydrogen strategy, with billions of euros of investment to boot. We should be there too, exploiting this opportunity to enter nascent supply chains and build future exporting capacity.
Finally, we need mass creation of well-paid, good quality green jobs. Covid-19 has been disastrous for the labour market, laying bare its lack of resilience. If government support is withdrawn this autumn, and hopes of a workable vaccine dashed, we could see 20% unemployment. Many green economy jobs are shovel-ready. By investing in green stimulus we can achieve two goals in one: sustainability and jobs. We know what is at stake. We cannot feign ignorance. Both Covid-19 and climate catastrophe menace to pilfer all we hold dear. A true green new deal is what we need.


labourlist--2020-07-23--How my inclusive local party supports me as a transgender man

Being transgender is difficult , even on the left .
However , it is not all doom and gloom .
My Constituency Labour Party ( CLP ) – Bridgwater and West Somerset – is a perfect example of a positive , supportive and inclusive space for trans people in the Labour Party .
When I went to my first meeting back in November 2019 and smiles broke out when I mentioned that I ’ m transgender , I knew it was safe to be me in the local party .
Unfortunately , it isn ’ t as safe to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ polling showed that a majority of cisgender men do not want me competing in men ’ s sports teams , 41 % don ’ t want me using men ’ s changing rooms and 36 % don ’ t want me using men ’ s toilets .
In reality , I haven ’ t had any issues in any of these spaces .
But the polling data does have an impact on me .
I now don ’ t feel as safe as I used to in these spaces , and this is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m fearful that I could be verbally or physically attacked just for needing to use the toilet .
We ’ re all human , it ’ s normal to need a toilet when you are out in public .
On the other hand , the poll shows that Labour voters understand that I belong in these spaces , which makes me proud to be an openly transgender member of the Labour Party .
I ’ m passionate about taking a calm road to trans equality in the Labour Party , particularly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ far from calm and educative .
It ’ s not a secret that , because of my transition , I am estranged , my parents still don ’ t accept me for who I am and there hasn ’ t been any constructive dialogue between us since I came out to them nearly two years ago .
And as someone who understands that hostility just adds fuel to the fire , I know the trans community deserve better than a fight between anti-trans groups , “ legitimately concerned ” members and trans members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to all sides of the conversation and take opportunities to educate when someone is misinformed , because that way we gain friends rather than enemies in the upward , worldwide battle for trans equality .
As a local party we have achieved great things over the last eight months to advance trans rights .
Most significantly , my local branch passed a motion titled “ delivering a trans inclusive Labour Party ” .
In this motion we noted how anti-trans rhetoric is still given a platform in the party , called for an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ considered how we could improve trans representation at all levels of the party .
Last Tuesday , 14th of July , I organised an LGBT+ talk and Q & A session for my CLP , which was also attended by our friends from the neighbouring constituency Wells .
The talk featured Luke Pollard , Plymouth ’ s first out MP , who I decided to invite whilst planning the event .
The aim of this event was to build on the motion I explained above .
At the start , I explained why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ effort to support trans rights and I spoke about the work going on in Somerset to support LGBT+ young people that I benefitted from myself .
Luke spoke about some of his own experiences , highlighted some amazing work going on in his constituency that supports trans and non-binary people as well as the LGBT+ community as a whole .
He expressed very clearly that no one should be treated differently because of who they fall in love with or because of who they are .
We had a wide variety of questions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and inclusive way .
Topics ranged from pension rights to sexual health and mental health in the LGBT+ community .
We also spent a lot of time discussing how to have constructive conversations when tackling discrimination and misinformation within our movement and in the wider community .
The members who attended this talk found it inspiring and felt more aware of issues faced by the trans and wider LGBT+ community .
Because of this , our CLP will be hosting more events like this one on a variety of topics and I encourage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It is important to have these conversations in safe environments , so members have the opportunity to learn and ask questions .
There is an easy way you can be more inclusive ; if you are unsure of someone ’ s pronouns ( he/him/his , she/her/hers , they/them/theirs for example ) , just ask .
When you meet someone , introduce yourself with your name and pronouns and then ask them what their name and pronouns are .
This is a respectful way to not only ask someone how they wish to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also signals to transgender , non-binary and gender non-conforming people that you are an ally to our community .
By starting conversations and working together , we can make all spaces in the Labour Party safe and inclusive for transgender members .

Being transgender is difficult, even on the left. However, it is not all doom and gloom. My Constituency Labour Party (CLP), Bridgwater and West Somerset, is a perfect example of a positive, supportive and inclusive space for trans people in the Labour Party. When I went to my first meeting back in November 2019 and smiles broke out when I mentioned that I’m transgender, I knew it was safe to be me in the local party.
Unfortunately, it isn’t as safe to be myself in day-to-day life. Recent YouGov polling showed that a majority of cisgender men do not want me competing in men’s sports teams, 41% don’t want me using men’s changing rooms and 36% don’t want me using men’s toilets. In reality, I haven’t had any issues in any of these spaces. But the polling data does have an impact on me.
I now don’t feel as safe as I used to in these spaces, and this is purely due to misinformation out there. I’m fearful that I could be verbally or physically attacked just for needing to use the toilet. We’re all human, it’s normal to need a toilet when you are out in public. On the other hand, the poll shows that Labour voters understand that I belong in these spaces, which makes me proud to be an openly transgender member of the Labour Party.
I’m passionate about taking a calm road to trans equality in the Labour Party, particularly because my own coming out experience was far from calm and educative. It’s not a secret that, because of my transition, I am estranged, my parents still don’t accept me for who I am and there hasn’t been any constructive dialogue between us since I came out to them nearly two years ago.
As someone who understands that hostility only adds fuel to the fire, I know the trans community deserve better than a fight between anti-trans groups, “legitimately concerned” members and trans members. We must be mature and listen to all sides of the conversation and take opportunities to educate when someone is misinformed, because that way we gain friends rather than enemies in the upward, worldwide battle for trans equality.
As a local party, we have achieved great things over the last eight months to advance trans rights. Most significantly, my local branch passed a motion titled “delivering a trans inclusive Labour Party”. In this motion we noted how anti-trans rhetoric is still given a platform in the party, called for an educative approach to tackle anti-trans rhetoric and considered how we could improve trans representation at all levels of the party.
Last Tuesday, July 14th, I organised an LGBT+ talk and Q&A session for my CLP, which was also attended by our friends from the neighbouring constituency Wells. The talk featured Luke Pollard, Plymouth’s first out MP, who I decided to invite whilst planning the event. The aim of this event was to build on the motion I explained above. At the start, I explained why events like these are important in the effort to support trans rights and I spoke about the work going on in Somerset to support LGBT+ young people that I benefitted from myself. Luke spoke about some of his own experiences, highlighted some amazing work going on in his constituency that supports trans and non-binary people as well as the LGBT+ community as a whole. He expressed very clearly that nobody should be treated differently because of who they fall in love with or because of who they are.
We had a wide variety of questions, which Luke answered in a measured and inclusive way. Topics ranged from pension rights to sexual health and mental health in the LGBT+ community. We also spent a lot of time discussing how to have constructive conversations when tackling discrimination and misinformation within our movement and in the wider community. The members who attended this talk found it inspiring and felt more aware of issues faced by the trans and wider LGBT+ community. Because of this, our CLP will be hosting more events like this one on a variety of topics and I encourage other CLPs to consider doing the same. It is important to have these conversations in safe environments, so members have the opportunity to learn and ask questions.
There is an easy way you can be more inclusive. If you are unsure of someone’s pronouns (he/him/his, she/her/hers, they/them/theirs for example), just ask. When you meet someone, introduce yourself with your name and pronouns and then ask them what their name and pronouns are. This is a respectful way to not only ask someone how they wish to be addressed by others, but it also signals to transgender, non-binary and gender non-conforming people that you are an ally to our community. By starting conversations and working together, we can make all spaces in the Labour Party safe and inclusive for transgender members.


labourlist--2020-07-23--Labour sets out 7 tests to safeguard universities and students from Covid

Labour has urged the government to “ ensure universities and students are safeguarded from the economic impact of this crisis ” by meeting its “ seven key tests for higher education ” .
In a letter to the Education Secretary this afternoon , Labour ’ s Emma Hardy told the minister that a “ thriving higher education sector is vital to help our country build back better from the Covid-19 crisis ” .
The shadow further education and universities minister spoke to students today ahead of the launch of Labour ’ s ‘ 7 Key Higher Education Tests ’ campaign @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have been facing in light of the pandemic ” .
The party has said that the following seven tests are “ designed to create a comprehensive solution ” for students and universities in the higher education sector : 1 .
“ No university should be allowed to go bust and there must be equality of opportunity for all in every region ; 2 .
“ Reduce barriers to learning ; 3 .
“ Protect and enhance domestic and international research ; 4 .
“ Enhance a cooperative and coordinated higher education sector across @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ Prevent further financial hardship for current students ; 6 .
“ Provide comprehensive support for 2020 final year students ; and 7 .
“ Promote universities as civic institutions.
” Commenting on the university sector , Hardy said : “ No country has ever increased economic activity through reducing access to higher education .
This government can not allow any university to fail and it must ensure everyone in every region with the desire to learn has access to a university .
“ By passing these seven key tests the government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sector , to our young people , and to our regional economies .
Meeting these tests will help guarantee a fairer society and allow aspiration to flourish .
“ I have written to the Secretary of State today to ask him to show support for every person who aspires to attend university and to protect the equality of opportunity for everyone in every region as part of Labour ’ s ‘ 7 Key Higher Education Tests ’ campaign ’ .
” Labour has highlighted that many universities are facing significant difficulties in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ employment in 2020 face similar hardship .
However it said that the support from the government has “ been lacking ” .
The party described what it called “ shockwaves ” sent through the higher education sector as a result of Covid-19 , outlining potential losses of £6bn and 30,000 direct redundancies , plus a further 30,000 job losses in local economies .
Below is the full text of the letter sent to the Education Secretary .
A thriving higher education sector is vital to help our country build back better from the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for concern then , that your recent public comments have thrown doubt on your commitment to the sector and the benefits it brings to all parts of society and that the Higher Education Restructuring Regime plans begin by explicitly stating a willingness on behalf of yourself to see individual universities fail .
Higher education provides the highly trained people our country needs to succeed : nurses , doctors and health and social care workers for the NHS ; teachers ; researchers ; engineers ; linguists ; chemists ; artists ; musicians ; mathematicians @ @ @ @ @ @ @ your own additions to this far from exhaustive list .
No country has ever increased its prosperity by sending fewer people to university .
The Labour Party is setting seven tests for the government to meet that will ensure all our country ’ s universities remain secure and ready for the challenges ahead .
They will guarantee all those attending get the support they need to succeed and that a degree course is available to anyone with the aspirations to study one : whatever their background or circumstances and wherever they live .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to go bust and there must be equality of opportunity for all in every region .
The loss of any individual university will create dead zones for local access to higher education and no university should be allowed to go bust .
Everyone everywhere has the right to the education and training they need .
Many local economies rely on the contributions of their university and 30,000 associated jobs are under threat .
2 .
Reduce barriers to learning .
Widening Participation activities ground to a halt under Covid-19 , putting access for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ students have a consistently poorer experience of university .
Part-time student numbers have been dramatically declining .
These issues need urgently addressing .
3 .
Protect and enhance domestic and international research .
International student fees cross subsidise research to the tune of £4.2 billion .
Their numbers are set to take a big hit .
The government looks set to reject participation in Horizon Europe and the funding and international partnerships it brings with no proposals to make good the losses .
The UK is a research powerhouse , but that position @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Enhance a co-operative and co-ordinated Higher Education sector across the whole of the UK .
Government must take responsibility for the sector as a whole and ensure any future decisions take into consideration all stakeholders and the different circumstances across the entire UK .
Its use of Longitudinal Educational Outcomes ( LEO ) data focussing on post-graduate salaries discriminates against some regions and presents a skewed picture of the true worth of those universities to their communities .
5 .
Prevent further financial hardship for current students .
No student should get into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government has piled enough on their shoulders .
It should guarantee university hardship funds are sufficiently resourced and accessible to all who need them .
6 .
Provide comprehensive support for 2020 final year students .
The jobs market they enter will be severely depressed .
They can not be left to flounder .
Proposals from the sector include a system of six-month long paid internships at the national living wage which would allow graduates to gain invaluable experience .
So far the government has offered nothing .
7 .
Promote universities as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ community and development role to play in helping to build back better .
Many are already actively engaged in the task .
Government must insist every institution develop a clear strategy , with the active participation of local partners , aimed at meeting the needs and opportunities of their area .
The future prosperity and safety of our nation depends on the education and skills of its people .
True equality of opportunity is the cornerstone of a fair society .
I believe that meeting these tests will help guarantee that future and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forward to your reply .

Labour has urged the government to “ensure universities and students are safeguarded from the economic impact of this crisis” by meeting its newly released “seven key tests for higher education”.
In a letter to the Education Secretary this afternoon, Labour’s Emma Hardy told the minister that a “thriving higher education sector is vital to help our country build back better from the Covid-19 crisis”.
The shadow further education and universities minister spoke to students today ahead of the launch of Labour’s ‘7 Key Higher Education Tests’ campaign to “hear about the challenges they have been facing in light of the pandemic”.
The opposition party has said that its seven tests are “designed to create a comprehensive solution” for students and universities in the higher education sector. They are as follows:
“No university should be allowed to go bust and there must be equality of opportunity for all in every region; “Reduce barriers to learning; “Protect and enhance domestic and international research; “Enhance a cooperative and coordinated higher education sector across the whole of the UK; “Prevent further financial hardship for current students; “Provide comprehensive support for 2020 final year students; and “Promote universities as civic institutions.”
Commenting on the challenges currently faced by the university sector, Hardy said: “No country has ever increased economic activity through reducing access to higher education.
“This government cannot allow any university to fail and it must ensure everyone in every region with the desire to learn has access to a university.
“By passing these seven key tests the government will show commitment to our higher education sector, to our young people, and to our regional economies. Meeting these tests will help guarantee a fairer society and allow aspiration to flourish.
“I have written to the Secretary of State today to ask him to show support for every person who aspires to attend university and to protect the equality of opportunity for everyone in every region as part of Labour’s ‘7 Key Higher Education Tests’ campaign’.”
Labour has highlighted that many universities are facing significant difficulties in the pandemic, and that students looking for employment in 2020 face similar hardship. However it said that the support from the government has “been lacking”.
The party described what it called “shockwaves” sent through the higher education sector as a result of Covid-19, outlining potential losses of £6bn and 30,000 direct redundancies, plus a further 30,000 job losses in local economies.
Below is the full text of the letter sent to the Education Secretary.
Dear Secretary of State,
A thriving higher education sector is vital to help our country build back better from the Covid-19 crisis.
It is a matter for concern then, that your recent public comments have thrown doubt on your commitment to the sector and the benefits it brings to all parts of society and that the Higher Education Restructuring Regime plans begin by explicitly stating a willingness on behalf of yourself to see individual universities fail.
Higher education provides the highly trained people our country needs to succeed: nurses, doctors and health and social care workers for the NHS; teachers; researchers; engineers; linguists; chemists; artists; musicians; mathematicians; I am sure you could make your own additions to this far from exhaustive list. No country has ever increased its prosperity by sending fewer people to university.
The Labour Party is setting seven tests for the government to meet that will ensure all our country’s universities remain secure and ready for the challenges ahead. They will guarantee all those attending get the support they need to succeed and that a degree course is available to anyone with the aspirations to study one: whatever their background or circumstances and wherever they live.
1. No university should be allowed to go bust and there must be equality of opportunity for all in every region. The loss of any individual university will create dead zones for local access to higher education and no university should be allowed to go bust. Everyone everywhere has the right to the education and training they need. Many local economies rely on the contributions of their university and 30,000 associated jobs are under threat.
2. Reduce barriers to learning. Widening Participation activities ground to a halt under Covid-19, putting access for a whole cohort at risk. BAME students have a consistently poorer experience of university. Part-time student numbers have been dramatically declining. These issues need urgently addressing.
3. Protect and enhance domestic and international research. International student fees cross subsidise research to the tune of £4.2 billion. Their numbers are set to take a big hit. The government looks set to reject participation in Horizon Europe and the funding and international partnerships it brings with no proposals to make good the losses. The UK is a research powerhouse, but that position is now at risk.
4. Enhance a co-operative and co-ordinated Higher Education sector across the whole of the UK. Government must take responsibility for the sector as a whole and ensure any future decisions take into consideration all stakeholders and the different circumstances across the entire UK. Its use of Longitudinal Educational Outcomes (LEO) data focussing on post-graduate salaries discriminates against some regions and presents a skewed picture of the true worth of those universities to their communities.
5. Prevent further financial hardship for current students. No student should get into further debt because of Covid19. The government has piled enough on their shoulders. It should guarantee university hardship funds are sufficiently resourced and accessible to all who need them.
6. Provide comprehensive support for 2020 final year students. The jobs market they enter will be severely depressed. They cannot be left to flounder. Proposals from the sector include a system of six-month long paid internships at the national living wage which would allow graduates to gain invaluable experience. So far the government has offered nothing.
7. Promote universities as civic institutions. Universities have a vital community and development role to play in helping to build back better. Many are already actively engaged in the task. Government must insist every institution develop a clear strategy, with the active participation of local partners, aimed at meeting the needs and opportunities of their area.
The future prosperity and safety of our nation depends on the education and skills of its people. True equality of opportunity is the cornerstone of a fair society. I believe that meeting these tests will help guarantee that future and allow aspiration to flourish.
I look forward to your reply.
Yours sincerely,
Emma Hardy


labourlist--2020-07-23--Government has left “whole industries exposed” in Covid, says Starmer

Keir Starmer has accused the government of “ leaving thousands of jobs and even whole industries exposed ” , after new research by the party suggests that the Chancellor missed an opportunity to save jobs in his summer economic update .
In a speech at an autonomous robotic delivery company in Milton Keynes today , the Labour leader slammed the government for insisting on a “ one-size-fits-all ” approach to support in the coronavirus pandemic .
Labour ’ s analysis of industry data has indicated that , in the week after Rishi Sunak ’ s summer statement in early July @ @ @ @ @ @ @ when it was delivered .
Data published by Make UK found that 53 % of manufacturers reported redundancy plans in the period after the statement , representing an increase from 41.2 % at the end of last month .
In the speech in Milton Keynes today , the Labour leader said : “ The threat to manufacturing jobs is another example of the government poorly targeting support , leaving thousands of jobs and even whole industries exposed .
“ We want the government to get this right .
We are a week out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scheme –the government needs to urgently abandon its one-size-fits-all approach and target support where it most needed .
“ The UK is home to world-leading , innovative companies which will be crucial to helping our economy recover .
But hard-hit sectors like manufacturing need more targeted support to stem the tide of job losses and protect people ’ s livelihoods.
” The party has repeatedly urged the government to change course on its plans to wind down the furlough scheme from August .
Anneliese Dodds warned last week that not doing so would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unemployment ” .
Labour used the interdepartmental business register ( IDBR ) for its analysis .
IDBR is a comprehensive list of UK businesses and is used by government for statistical purposes .
It then combined this with data from Make UK .
Make UK represents business in engineering , manufacturing and technology-based sectors .
It has previously said that the furlough scheme must be extended for “ key strategic sectors ” if “ we are to mitigate the worst impact of potential job losses ” .

Keir Starmer has accused the government of “leaving thousands of jobs and even whole industries exposed”, after new research by the party suggests that the Chancellor missed an opportunity to save jobs in his summer economic update.
In a speech at an autonomous robotic delivery company in Milton Keynes today, the Labour leader slammed the government for insisting on a “one-size-fits-all” approach to support in the coronavirus pandemic.
Labour’s analysis of industry data has indicated that, in the week after Rishi Sunak’s summer statement in early July, 16,000 more manufacturers planned redundancies than when it was delivered.
Data published by Make UK found that 53% of manufacturers reported redundancy plans in the period after the statement, representing an increase from 41.2% at the end of last month.
In the speech in Milton Keynes today, the Labour leader said: “The threat to manufacturing jobs is another example of the government poorly targeting support, leaving thousands of jobs and even whole industries exposed.
“We want the government to get this right. We are a week out from the winding down of the furlough scheme –the government needs to urgently abandon its one-size-fits-all approach and target support where it most needed.
“The UK is home to world-leading, innovative companies which will be crucial to helping our economy recover. But hard-hit sectors like manufacturing need more targeted support to stem the tide of job losses and protect people’s livelihoods.”
The party has repeatedly urged the government to change course on its plans to wind down the furlough scheme from August. Anneliese Dodds warned last week that not doing so would result in an “extra wave of unemployment”.
Labour used the interdepartmental business register (IDBR) for its analysis. IDBR is a comprehensive list of UK businesses and is used by government for statistical purposes. It then combined this with data from Make UK.
Make UK represents business in engineering, manufacturing and technology-based sectors. It has previously said that the furlough scheme must be extended for “key strategic sectors” if “we are to mitigate the worst impact of potential job losses”.