labourlist--2020-11-29--Sunday shows: Labour will “act in the public interest” on Covid rules

Shadow Foreign Secretary Lisa Nandy expressed concerns about new Covid restrictions and called for reassurances from the government but described Labour ’ s support in the Commons vote on Tuesday as “ not conditional ” and said the party would “ act in the public interest ” .
• On whether Labour will vote for new Covid rules on Tuesday : “ We very much share the view that there need to be public restrictions… We don ’ t share the view of those Tory backbenchers that you can just let this virus rip through the population with the damage @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ But we want clarity from the government on two things : first , is this sufficient to get control of the virus ?
We ’ re meeting the chief medical officer tomorrow afternoon to discuss that .
Second , will people be able to comply with this ?
We need proper support in place.
” • Will Labour support government without extra economic help ?
“ Our support is not conditional .
We will act in the public interest .
We need to know that these measures are tough enough to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pressed further : “ It ’ s not too late for the government to come forward with those assurances , and we ’ re not in favour of rejecting public health measures .
Just remember , this is a straight up or down vote , it ’ s these measures or no measures.
” • On shadow cabinet members being unhappy : “ I think everyone in the country is quite unhappy at the moment… People don ’ t feel these decisions are fair.
” • She added : “ The reason I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these measures is that we ’ re not convinced at the moment that they are either sufficient or workable .
It ’ s not too late for the government to convince us of that.
” • In response to Marr saying Labour will probably vote with the government on Tuesday : “ We ’ ve never voted against health restrictions , all the way through this virus.
” • On whether Labour would want another national lockdown in the new year if cases rises : “ No , what we want the government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they take this week are actually sufficient to get control of the virus.
” • On her experience of being told to self-isolate : “ I was given several different dates… I only got a phone call ten days in to ask if I was in need of any additional support .
This just isn ’ t working.
” • Asked whether she thinks Andy Burnham let down Manchester : “ No , I don ’ t .
I think Matt Hancock has a personal problem with Andy Burnham which at times I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and ] not helpful at all.
” Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab talked about the new Covid rules and Brexit .
• On the government offering concessions to MPs ahead of the Commons vote on Tuesday : “ Your horse-trading is another person ’ s accountability to parliament.
” • On whether the country faces a third wave in January : “ There ’ s a risk of that if we don ’ t get the balance right .
But so far the R level is coming down , that ’ s really important.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ third lockdown in the new year : “ We ’ re doing everything we can to avoid that.
” • On Brexit negotiations : “ We ’ re down to two basic issues , particularly fisheries.
” • On whether there will be a deal : “ I ’ m not in the guessing game… The mutual interest in a deal is very strong.
” First Minister of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon was challenged over her record on coronavirus deaths ( “ We have a lower prevalence of the virus at the moment than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attainment gap in education ( “ The gap is not widening ” ) and Alex Salmond ( Marr highlighted the different dates she has cited for when she knew about allegations ; Sturgeon said he was “ conflating two issues ” ) .
Shadow Transport Secretary Jim McMahon backed the regional , tiered approach for Covid restrictions , called on the government to scrap the peak and off-peak ticket system over Christmas to avoid creating “ artificial bottlenecks ” , and on Brexit said Labour “ want to see a deal that we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Labour supports “ in principle ” the tier system announced by the government last week : “ Yeah , the principle is right… Having an approach that is right for each region and subregion is the right one.
” • On whether the regions should be divided into smaller areas : “ Having a really clear set of rules that speaks to a geography people can understand is really important… Having that on a county basis is probably the right level.
” • On transport over Christmas and New Year and the transmission @ @ @ @ @ @ @ t think at the moment the government has taken into account that people want to see friends and family.
” • On what the government should do : “ Let ’ s take practical steps that would help take away some of the bottlenecks – so for instance the peak and off-peak ticket arrangement where you almost create an artificial bottleneck.
” • On scrapping peak fares : “ At the moment , there is no peak .
People aren ’ t using the railways as they would in normal times , so @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tickets in place that essentially create a bottleneck of demand ?
” • Asked how much it would cost to scrap peak tickets : “ You could argue that it wouldn ’ t cost any more because people who are buying off-peak tickets choose those tickets because they are the affordable tickets.
” • He added : “ It ’ s very unlikely that between Christmas and the New Year people would opt for a more expensive ticket… These aren ’ t business travellers .
These aren ’ t commuters .
These are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and family.
” • Asked whether Labour has costed the policy : “ It ’ s not for us to cost it , it ’ s for us to say to the government : have you thought ahead to think about the impact that travel over Christmas and New Years is going to have ?
” • Asked whether he would like Labour to support a Brexit deal negotiated by the government when it comes to parliament : “ We do want to see a deal , but of course until we see @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t confirm our support for it.
” • On Labour ’ s approach to considering support for the Brexit trade deal : “ We want to see a deal that we could support .
And what we say is that we would consider it a foundational agreement , which is something to build up from.
” Dominic Raab was challenged over areas with lower rates of infection than London being placed in a higher tier .
He argued decisions are made on “ five criteria ” but are also “ ultimately a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Secretary defended the Prime Minister ’ s claim that the tier system could end in nine weeks .
He said : “ I do think this feels like an exit strategy and I do think that with that comes some cautious grounds for hope.
” On MPs voting on the new tier system next week and a possible rebellion , Raab said : “ We ’ ve got a confident message that we need to explain and listen as well , the reality is we want to come out of national lockdown and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ negotiations , the Foreign Secretary told Sky News that “ we ’ re in a reasonable position – there ’ s a deal to be done ” , before adding : “ It feels like there ’ s progress towards greater respect for what the UK position was.
” Jim McMahon joined Gloria de Piero and Tom Newton Dunn on Times Radio .
He reiterated his call for a Covid travel plan and said it would be “ illogical ” for Labour to vote against the new Covid restrictions .
• Asked whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ What they [ franchises ] need to do is look ahead and see how many tickets are being booked , and if they see a spike… they do need to make sure they have mandatory seat reservations.
” • On peak ticketing : “ What we are still seeing is a smaller spike that takes place on the last off-peak ticket and the first off-peak ticket and so what we ’ re saying is over that Christmas period… take away that artificial bottleneck.
” • Asked whether he will vote with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week : “ The principle has always been that we will support the government in the national interest to take the decisions needed to keep us all safe.
” • He added : “ But we ’ re also very clear with them that they need to be open about the data , they need to make sure financial support is in place to help those areas.
” • Asked whether there is any possibility that Labour might vote against the new tier restrictions : “ No , not on the basis of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seen .
It would be illogical to vote against it , because essentially , there wouldn ’ t be any restrictions in place.
” • On Labour supporting a Brexit deal negotiated by Boris Johnson : “ It ’ s very difficult [ to say ] at this point because we haven ’ t seen the deal but what we ’ ve been very clear about is that no deal would cause untold harm to our economy.
” • Put to him that Labour voted against Theresa May ’ s deal : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s deal comes back .
It ’ s not whether Labour has a deal it can present .
It ’ s going to be a straight vote – either you vote for it or you vote against it or potentially you abstain.
” • On an upcoming Brexit vote : “ The choice is not this deal versus another deal… It ’ s going to be this deal or no deal , and it ’ s pretty clear from all the assessment and analysis that no deal would be so damaging that @ @ @ @ @ @

The Andrew Marr Show
Shadow Foreign Secretary Lisa Nandy expressed concerns about new Covid restrictions and called for reassurances from the government but described Labour’s support in the Commons vote on Tuesday as “not conditional” and said the party would “act in the public interest”.
On whether Labour will vote for new Covid rules on Tuesday: “We very much share the view that there need to be public restrictions… We don’t share the view of those Tory backbenchers that you can just let this virus rip through the population with the damage that would do.”
She added: “But we want clarity from the government on two things: first, is this sufficient to get control of the virus? We’re meeting the chief medical officer tomorrow afternoon to discuss that. Second, will people be able to comply with this? We need proper support in place.”
Will Labour support government without extra economic help? “Our support is not conditional. We will act in the public interest. We need to know that these measures are tough enough to get control of the virus.”
Pressed further: “It’s not too late for the government to come forward with those assurances, and we’re not in favour of rejecting public health measures. Just remember, this is a straight up or down vote, it’s these measures or no measures.”
On shadow cabinet members being unhappy: “I think everyone in the country is quite unhappy at the moment… People don’t feel these decisions are fair.”
She added: “The reason I’m not committing to vote for these measures is that we’re not convinced at the moment that they are either sufficient or workable. It’s not too late for the government to convince us of that.”
In response to Marr saying Labour will probably vote with the government on Tuesday: “We’ve never voted against health restrictions, all the way through this virus.”
On whether Labour would want another national lockdown in the new year if cases rises: “No, what we want the government to do is make sure the measures they take this week are actually sufficient to get control of the virus.”
On her experience of being told to self-isolate: “I was given several different dates… I only got a phone call ten days in to ask if I was in need of any additional support. This just isn’t working.”
Asked whether she thinks Andy Burnham let down Manchester: “No, I don’t. I think Matt Hancock has a personal problem with Andy Burnham which at times I’ve felt is quite bizarre [and] not helpful at all.”
Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab talked about the new Covid rules and Brexit.
On the government offering concessions to MPs ahead of the Commons vote on Tuesday: “Your horse-trading is another person’s accountability to parliament.”
On whether the country faces a third wave in January: “There’s a risk of that if we don’t get the balance right. But so far the R level is coming down, that’s really important.”
On the possibility of a third lockdown in the new year: “We’re doing everything we can to avoid that.”
On Brexit negotiations: “We’re down to two basic issues, particularly fisheries.”
On whether there will be a deal: “I’m not in the guessing game… The mutual interest in a deal is very strong.”
First Minister of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon was challenged over her record on coronavirus deaths (“We have a lower prevalence of the virus at the moment than the other nations”), the attainment gap in education (“The gap is not widening”) and Alex Salmond (Marr highlighted the different dates she has cited for when she knew about allegations; Sturgeon said he was “conflating two issues”).
#Marr asks Scotland’s First Minister Nicola Sturgeon if she would like Alex Salmond back in the SNPhttps://t.co/BDDCRLbvwA pic.twitter.com/yZLjHFqEIj — BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) November 29, 2020
Sophy Ridge on Sunday
Shadow Transport Secretary Jim McMahon backed the regional, tiered approach for Covid restrictions, called on the government to scrap the peak and off-peak ticket system over Christmas to avoid creating “artificial bottlenecks”, and on Brexit said Labour “want to see a deal that we could support”.
Asked whether Labour supports “in principle” the tier system announced by the government last week: “Yeah, the principle is right… Having an approach that is right for each region and subregion is the right one.”
On whether the regions should be divided into smaller areas: “Having a really clear set of rules that speaks to a geography people can understand is really important… Having that on a county basis is probably the right level.”
On transport over Christmas and New Year and the transmission of coronavirus: “We don’t think at the moment the government has taken into account that people want to see friends and family.”
On what the government should do: “Let’s take practical steps that would help take away some of the bottlenecks – so for instance the peak and off-peak ticket arrangement where you almost create an artificial bottleneck.”
On scrapping peak fares: “At the moment, there is no peak. People aren’t using the railways as they would in normal times, so why have we still got the peak tickets in place that essentially create a bottleneck of demand?”
Asked how much it would cost to scrap peak tickets: “You could argue that it wouldn’t cost any more because people who are buying off-peak tickets choose those tickets because they are the affordable tickets.”
He added: “It’s very unlikely that between Christmas and the New Year people would opt for a more expensive ticket… These aren’t business travellers. These aren’t commuters. These are people who are going to visit friends and family.”
Asked whether Labour has costed the policy: “It’s not for us to cost it, it’s for us to say to the government: have you thought ahead to think about the impact that travel over Christmas and New Years is going to have?”
Asked whether he would like Labour to support a Brexit deal negotiated by the government when it comes to parliament: “We do want to see a deal, but of course until we see the content of the deal we can’t confirm our support for it.”
On Labour’s approach to considering support for the Brexit trade deal: “We want to see a deal that we could support. And what we say is that we would consider it a foundational agreement, which is something to build up from.”
"We want to see a deal." Shadow Transport Secretary @JimfromOldham says Labour wants to see a Brexit deal they can support but adds there are still "big question marks about the Irish border and the peace process". #Ridge https://t.co/3pjw6RucJ2 pic.twitter.com/ePsE8PtGLY — Sophy Ridge on Sunday (@RidgeOnSunday) November 29, 2020
Dominic Raab was challenged over areas with lower rates of infection than London being placed in a higher tier. He argued decisions are made on “five criteria” but are also “ultimately a question of judgement”.
The Foreign Secretary defended the Prime Minister’s claim that the tier system could end in nine weeks. He said: “I do think this feels like an exit strategy and I do think that with that comes some cautious grounds for hope.”
On MPs voting on the new tier system next week and a possible rebellion, Raab said: “We’ve got a confident message that we need to explain and listen as well, the reality is we want to come out of national lockdown and stay out of it.”
On Brexit negotiations, the Foreign Secretary told Sky News that “we’re in a reasonable position – there’s a deal to be done”, before adding: “It feels like there’s progress towards greater respect for what the UK position was.”
Times Radio
Jim McMahon joined Gloria de Piero and Tom Newton Dunn on Times Radio. He reiterated his call for a Covid travel plan and said it would be “illogical” for Labour to vote against the new Covid restrictions.


labourlist--2020-11-29--Labour antisemitism must be confronted – with nuance, clarity and empathy

The recent publication of the Equality and Human Rights Commission investigation reconfirmed what many of us have been arguing for some time : that antisemitism is a real issue in the Labour Party , that requires serious confrontation .
Antisemitism in left-wing and radical movements is not new , dating back to at least the mid-19th century .
One of the oldest themes of antisemitism , the conflation of Jews with money and finance , was incorporated into some early critiques of capitalism .
Since the 2008 financial crash , conspiracy-based critiques of capitalism , which often demonise particular Jewish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This has happened most prominently on the far right , including via Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán ’ s promotion of conspiracy theories about George Soros , and Donald Trump ’ s campaign ads that overlaid footage of Jewish figures from the financial sector with narration about “ global special interest groups ” – but also on the left , including in sections of movements such as ‘ Occupy ’ .
Antisemitism on the left has also manifested in certain critiques of Israel and Zionism , which radically overstate Israel ’ s role @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or even controlling “ Zionist ” influence on world affairs .
The late Moishe Postone , a Marxist academic who wrote extensively about antisemitism on the left , called this form of “ anti-Zionism ” the “ anti-imperialism of fools ” : a version of anti-imperialism that makes “ Zionism ” central to , and synonymous with , world imperialism .
The presence of these ideas on the left significantly predates Jeremy Corbyn ’ s leadership of the Labour Party , and there is not one quick fix to uproot them .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been an opportunity to discuss these issues and turn the page on how antisemitism in the Labour Party is dealt with .
However , so far this necessary process has been obstructed by vicious infighting .
Jeremy ’ s statement on the day of the EHRC report was ill-advised .
But the decision to suspend him and remove the whip was , I believe , unjust and lacking due process .
When we should be coming together to tackle antisemitism and reach out to Jewish communities – who of course are not monolithic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and opinions – we again end up fighting each other instead .
Party members feel strongly and want to do something about the situation .
Many are putting motions to their Constituency Labour Party ( CLPs ) .
I support the right of party members to express concerns about due process and natural justice , and to express solidarity with Jeremy – and I believe a blanket ban is wrong for this reason .
Neither do I support the threat of suspending CLPs for hearing such motions .
However , it is also @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have legal duties with regard to the EHRC report .
It is important that , when we discuss the situation , we separate the issue of fairness for Jeremy from those of the general issues of the EHRC report and wider problem of antisemitism .
When this separation does not take place , I am concerned that many Jewish members feel unwelcome – and , yes , unsafe – as a result of the way that debates relating to antisemitism are often conducted and handled at CLP level .
We have a duty @ @ @ @ @ @ @ members and ensure they feel welcome and included in everything we do in our local parties .
After all , how democratic can a debate or discussion be said to be if many Jewish members do not feel able or safe to attend in the first place ?
Tackling antisemitism and implementing the EHRC recommendations must be at the forefront of our minds and form a bare minimum in terms of the basis for any further or related discussions .
The position of our ‘ side ’ of the party , or short-term @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come into it .
I appreciate that this balance between democracy , freedom of expression and inclusivity is a difficult one for us all to navigate , and that we might not always get it right .
I include myself in this .
In any case , contributions that are antisemitic or deny or downplay the existence of antisemitism in the party can never be acceptable and must always be challenged , and we should all take responsibility for this .
In particular , it is the responsibility of CLP chairs and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a safe space where all party members feel comfortable and welcome .
A transparent disciplinary and complaints process , that ensures due process for both “ complainant ” and “ accused ” , is essential for making the party a hospitable and accessible environment for all its members .
However , disciplinary measures are in themselves an insufficient way of tackling antisemitism on the left , given that it often comes not from a place of hatred or conscious hostility towards all Jewish people , but ignorance about common tropes that have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can be discriminatory or hurtful .
Confronting antisemitism in the party means mobilising a large cross-section of the membership in an effort of political education , and convincing members as yet unsure about the issues of a political common sense that rejects these tropes .
This requires the ability of members to discuss these issues in an atmosphere of mutual respect , and it is a great shame that the current atmosphere in the party doesn ’ t enable such conversations .
That ’ s why a timetable of training , education and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be communicated to CLPs as soon as possible .
Admirably , some local parties have taken it upon themselves , without national resources or support from party officials , to arrange training on antisemitism .
As one of the organisers of Sheffield Heeley CLP ’ s education series wrote on LabourList : “ In recent years , the party has waxed lyrical about ‘ political education ’ but actually done very little… Here , we have tried a more participatory and discursive approach .
It has , we believe , allowed us to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ antisemitism on the left and grapple with the complexities of the issue on their own terms .
While we would not claim to have all the answers , we are proud of what we have achieved and urge other comrades to follow suit.
” The national party should support other local parties in rolling out similar programmes .
Until the party makes a serious turn to consistent political education ( and not only on this issue ) , we will be unable to establish the robust , critical , rational political culture – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and bigotries of all types – and ensures that we are effective in arguing for the democratic , internationalist , socialist policies our party should advance .
It ’ s tempting in these emotive debates to pick a side and refuse to listen to one another , when what we need is nuance , clarity and empathy .
It ’ s not a contradiction to fully support the recommendations of the EHRC report , to believe Jeremy ’ s statement was ill-advised and to oppose the way he has been treated .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ thing can be true at the same time is difficult to navigate – particularly on social media platforms where there is a decided lack , and even deliberate removal of , any nuance .
I know I am not alone in my determination to move on from this period .
We have a Tory government mishandling the coronavirus crisis , an economic recession that is about to bite hard and a new round of brutal public spending cuts to fight .
I still believe that the left of the party , as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can come out of this dark episode stronger and more united , but only if we are willing to be crystal clear on the acceptance and implementation of the EHRC report in full and are determined to do the hard work to contribute to the party being a safe and welcoming place for all members .

The recent publication of the Equality and Human Rights Commission investigation reconfirmed what many of us have been arguing for some time: that antisemitism is a real issue in the Labour Party, that requires serious confrontation.
Antisemitism in left-wing and radical movements is not new, dating back to at least the mid-19th century. One of the oldest themes of antisemitism, the conflation of Jews with money and finance, was incorporated into some early critiques of capitalism. Since the 2008 financial crash, conspiracy-based critiques of capitalism, which often demonise particular Jewish figures, have had a resurgence.
This has happened most prominently on the far right, including via Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s promotion of conspiracy theories about George Soros, and Donald Trump’s campaign ads that overlaid footage of Jewish figures from the financial sector with narration about “global special interest groups” – but also on the left, including in sections of movements such as ‘Occupy’.
Antisemitism on the left has also manifested in certain critiques of Israel and Zionism, which radically overstate Israel’s role and power, and allege a powerful or even controlling “Zionist” influence on world affairs. The late Moishe Postone, a Marxist academic who wrote extensively about antisemitism on the left, called this form of “anti-Zionism” the “anti-imperialism of fools”: a version of anti-imperialism that makes “Zionism” central to, and synonymous with, world imperialism.
The presence of these ideas on the left significantly predates Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership of the Labour Party, and there is not one quick fix to uproot them. The publication of the EHRC report could have been an opportunity to discuss these issues and turn the page on how antisemitism in the Labour Party is dealt with. However, so far this necessary process has been obstructed by vicious infighting.
Jeremy’s statement on the day of the EHRC report was ill-advised. But the decision to suspend him and remove the whip was, I believe, unjust and lacking due process. When we should be coming together to tackle antisemitism and reach out to Jewish communities – who of course are not monolithic, and contain lots of different experiences and opinions – we again end up fighting each other instead.
Party members feel strongly and want to do something about the situation. Many are putting motions to their Constituency Labour Party (CLPs). I support the right of party members to express concerns about due process and natural justice, and to express solidarity with Jeremy – and I believe a blanket ban is wrong for this reason. Neither do I support the threat of suspending CLPs for hearing such motions.
However, it is also the case that officers of the party have legal duties with regard to the EHRC report. It is important that, when we discuss the situation, we separate the issue of fairness for Jeremy from those of the general issues of the EHRC report and wider problem of antisemitism.
When this separation does not take place, I am concerned that many Jewish members feel unwelcome – and, yes, unsafe – as a result of the way that debates relating to antisemitism are often conducted and handled at CLP level. We have a duty to protect the wellbeing of all Jewish members and ensure they feel welcome and included in everything we do in our local parties. After all, how democratic can a debate or discussion be said to be if many Jewish members do not feel able or safe to attend in the first place?
Tackling antisemitism and implementing the EHRC recommendations must be at the forefront of our minds and form a bare minimum in terms of the basis for any further or related discussions. The position of our ‘side’ of the party, or short-term accumulation of political capital, should not come into it.
I appreciate that this balance between democracy, freedom of expression and inclusivity is a difficult one for us all to navigate, and that we might not always get it right. I include myself in this. In any case, contributions that are antisemitic or deny or downplay the existence of antisemitism in the party can never be acceptable and must always be challenged, and we should all take responsibility for this. In particular, it is the responsibility of CLP chairs and other party agents to intervene and to ensure a safe space where all party members feel comfortable and welcome.
A transparent disciplinary and complaints process, that ensures due process for both “complainant” and “accused”, is essential for making the party a hospitable and accessible environment for all its members. However, disciplinary measures are in themselves an insufficient way of tackling antisemitism on the left, given that it often comes not from a place of hatred or conscious hostility towards all Jewish people, but ignorance about common tropes that have been used against Jews, and why they can be discriminatory or hurtful.
Confronting antisemitism in the party means mobilising a large cross-section of the membership in an effort of political education, and convincing members as yet unsure about the issues of a political common sense that rejects these tropes. This requires the ability of members to discuss these issues in an atmosphere of mutual respect, and it is a great shame that the current atmosphere in the party doesn’t enable such conversations. That’s why a timetable of training, education and any changes to disciplinary measures needs to be communicated to CLPs as soon as possible.
Admirably, some local parties have taken it upon themselves, without national resources or support from party officials, to arrange training on antisemitism. As one of the organisers of Sheffield Heeley CLP’s education series wrote on LabourList: “In recent years, the party has waxed lyrical about ‘political education’ but actually done very little… Here, we have tried a more participatory and discursive approach. It has, we believe, allowed us to cut through the often fraught arguments about antisemitism on the left and grapple with the complexities of the issue on their own terms. While we would not claim to have all the answers, we are proud of what we have achieved and urge other comrades to follow suit.”
The national party should support other local parties in rolling out similar programmes. Until the party makes a serious turn to consistent political education (and not only on this issue), we will be unable to establish the robust, critical, rational political culture – one that rejects antisemitism, conspiracy theories, and bigotries of all types – and ensures that we are effective in arguing for the democratic, internationalist, socialist policies our party should advance.
It’s tempting in these emotive debates to pick a side and refuse to listen to one another, when what we need is nuance, clarity and empathy. It’s not a contradiction to fully support the recommendations of the EHRC report, to believe Jeremy’s statement was ill-advised and to oppose the way he has been treated. Communicating the idea that more than one thing can be true at the same time is difficult to navigate – particularly on social media platforms where there is a decided lack, and even deliberate removal of, any nuance.
I know I am not alone in my determination to move on from this period. We have a Tory government mishandling the coronavirus crisis, an economic recession that is about to bite hard and a new round of brutal public spending cuts to fight. I still believe that the left of the party, as well as the party as a whole, can come out of this dark episode stronger and more united, but only if we are willing to be crystal clear on the acceptance and implementation of the EHRC report in full and are determined to do the hard work to contribute to the party being a safe and welcoming place for all members.


labourlist--2020-11-29--Labour could change rules to welcome back those who quit over antisemitism

Keir Starmer has suggested that the party should “ look again ” at the rule that would usually ban anyone who stood against official Labour candidates in the last general election from rejoining for five years .
Luciana Berger quit Labour in February 2019 citing antisemitism within the party and co-founded The Independent Group .
She later joined the Liberal Democrats and stood as their candidate in the 2019 election .
One Jewish Labour Movement conference attendee who supported Berger last year asked the current Labour leader this afternoon whether the party would consider welcoming back as members those who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that members who support any candidate standing against a Labour candidate can not be or remain a member .
Those who stand against Labour are normally ineligible for membership for five years .
Addressing the question , Starmer replied : “ I know this affects a number of people who left our party over the last few years and found themselves campaigning for other candidates , or even standing as candidates .
“ The usual rule as you know is that if you support another candidate at an election , that ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I think we need to look again at that where people left the party because of antisemitism .
“ This is not people who chose to leave the party to go and necessarily support another political party , it ’ s people who felt driven out of our party .
I think that ’ s a different set of circumstances and I think we need to look at how we address that .
“ I think there will be an number of people in that position and if those – perhaps yourself @ @ @ @ @ @ @ think the Labour Party might be a safe space for me again ’ then first of all that ’ s an amazing important thing from my point of view… “ We therefore need to find a way to make that happen .
That obviously depends on the rule et cetera… Every rule must have an exception for exceptional circumstances , and I ’ m very happy to have a debate with people about how we make that happen.
” The move could open the door to former MPs who quit the party in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s leadership .
Joan Ryan and Mike Gapes earlier in the day said they had not applied to rejoin the party .
“ I ’ m not going to apply to join unless I ’ m welcome , ” Mike Gapes , the former MP for Ilford South said .
Joan Ryan , the ex-MP for Enfield North , suggested that the question was still a “ premature ” one at the moment .
Starmer said : “ The test I ’ ve set myself… is that for me success will only be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safe in our party .
When those who ’ ve left feel it ’ s safe to return if that ’ s what they want to do.
” The leader talked more generally about the Equality and Human Rights Commission report , Jeremy Corbyn ’ s reaction to it and subsequent events in the party , saying : “ I ’ m deeply frustrated that we ’ re in this place.
” He told the conference : “ I felt that over the last six/seven months that we had slowly taken some steps @ @ @ @ @ @ @ better processes in place , we ’ d begun to have the engagement that we needed .
“ I wanted the publication of the EHRC report to be a defining moment where we could move on to the mend part of the exercise .
Obviously it is hugely shameful that the EHRC , set up by a Labour government , found the Labour Party to be in breach of equality law passed by a Labour government.
” Starmer added : “ My team and I spent a lot of time in the days @ @ @ @ @ @ @ report making sure that everybody understood the approach we would be taking so we could actually move on to that action plan… “ I can ’ t tell you how disappointed how I was with Jeremy Corbyn ’ s response .
Because the words he used , what he said coming from the former leader of the Labour Party in response to that report , were just about as bad as you could get.
” In conversation with Ruth Smeeth , the leader continued : “ Everything that has followed in the last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That has exacerbated the pain and the hurt .
And we ’ re in a position that I did not want to be in .
“ I genuinely thought that on the day of the Commission report we could take the next important step towards mending the situation with an action plan .
I still think we can .
We ’ ve had to be tough , we ’ ve had to be determined .
“ We ’ re very , very conscious of the atmosphere at some [ Constituency Labour Party ] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deal with that .
But we have to get on to the action plan.
” The EHRC plan is due by December 10th .
“ I don ’ t want us to be talking about Labour and antisemitism in months and years to come .
I do think we can get past this .
We had been making good progress.
” Corbyn ’ s response “ undermined me and what I was trying to achieve ” , he added .
Starmer was also asked about Brexit .
He ruled out the possibility that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against a Brexit deal if the government reaches one and puts it to the House of Commons for a vote .
The leader told JLM : “ We need a deal… We will then look at that deal… We will then make a decision on whether to vote for it or abstain.
” He added : “ I don ’ t think there ’ s a much of a case for voting against it when that would be effectively to vote for no deal .
”

Keir Starmer has suggested that the party should “look again” at the rule that would usually ban anyone who stood against official Labour candidates in the last general election from rejoining for five years.
Luciana Berger quit Labour in February 2019 citing antisemitism within the party and co-founded The Independent Group. She later joined the Liberal Democrats and stood as their candidate in the 2019 election.
One Jewish Labour Movement conference attendee who supported Berger last year asked the current Labour leader this afternoon whether the party would consider welcoming back as members those who campaigned for her.
Labour rules state that members who support any candidate standing against a Labour candidate cannot be or remain a member. Those who stand against Labour are normally ineligible for membership for five years.
Addressing the question, Starmer replied: “I know this affects a number of people who left our party over the last few years and found themselves campaigning for other candidates, or even standing as candidates.
“The usual rule as you know is that if you support another candidate at an election, that’s a five-year exclusion from the Labour Party. I think we need to look again at that where people left the party because of antisemitism.
“This is not people who chose to leave the party to go and necessarily support another political party, it’s people who felt driven out of our party. I think that’s a different set of circumstances and I think we need to look at how we address that.
“I think there will be an number of people in that position and if those – perhaps yourself – are beginning to say ‘I think the Labour Party might be a safe space for me again’ then first of all that’s an amazing important thing from my point of view…
“We therefore need to find a way to make that happen. That obviously depends on the rule et cetera… Every rule must have an exception for exceptional circumstances, and I’m very happy to have a debate with people about how we make that happen.”
The move could open the door to former MPs who quit the party in 2019 to rejoin Labour under Starmer’s leadership. Joan Ryan and Mike Gapes earlier in the day said they had not applied to rejoin the party.
“I’m not going to apply to join unless I’m welcome,” Mike Gapes, the former MP for Ilford South said. Joan Ryan, the ex-MP for Enfield North, suggested that the question was still a “premature” one at the moment.
Starmer said: “The test I’ve set myself… is that for me success will only be when everybody in our Jewish communities feels safe in our party. When those who’ve left feel it’s safe to return if that’s what they want to do.”
The leader talked more generally about the Equality and Human Rights Commission report, Jeremy Corbyn’s reaction to it and subsequent events in the party, saying: “I’m deeply frustrated that we’re in this place.”
He told the conference: “I felt that over the last six/seven months that we had slowly taken some steps in that direction. We had got better processes in place, we’d begun to have the engagement that we needed.
“I wanted the publication of the EHRC report to be a defining moment where we could move on to the mend part of the exercise. Obviously it is hugely shameful that the EHRC, set up by a Labour government, found the Labour Party to be in breach of equality law passed by a Labour government.”
Starmer added: “My team and I spent a lot of time in the days leading up to the launch of that report making sure that everybody understood the approach we would be taking so we could actually move on to that action plan…
“I can’t tell you how disappointed how I was with Jeremy Corbyn’s response. Because the words he used, what he said coming from the former leader of the Labour Party in response to that report, were just about as bad as you could get.”
In conversation with Ruth Smeeth, the leader continued: “Everything that has followed in the last few weeks follows from those words. That has exacerbated the pain and the hurt. And we’re in a position that I did not want to be in.
“I genuinely thought that on the day of the Commission report we could take the next important step towards mending the situation with an action plan. I still think we can. We’ve had to be tough, we’ve had to be determined.
“We’re very, very conscious of the atmosphere at some [Constituency Labour Party] meetings at the moment. Determined to deal with that. But we have to get on to the action plan.” The EHRC plan is due by December 10th.
“I don’t want us to be talking about Labour and antisemitism in months and years to come. I do think we can get past this. We had been making good progress.” Corbyn’s response “undermined me and what I was trying to achieve”, he added.
Starmer was also asked about Brexit. He ruled out the possibility that Labour MPs would be instructed to vote against a Brexit deal if the government reaches one and puts it to the House of Commons for a vote.
The leader told JLM: “We need a deal… We will then look at that deal… We will then make a decision on whether to vote for it or abstain.” He added: “I don’t think there’s a much of a case for voting against it when that would be effectively to vote for no deal.”


labourlist--2020-11-30--Serving alcohol banned in Wales as pubs and restaurants told to shut at 6pm

Labour ’ s Mark Drakeford has announced new coronavirus restrictions that will require all cafes , pubs , bars and restaurants in Wales to close their doors at 6pm and will ban them from selling alcohol at any time .
Addressing the public in a Covid briefing this afternoon , the Welsh First Minister said the new rules , which come into force on Friday , are “ based on what the UK SAGE group of experts tells us has worked best elsewhere ” .
Drakeford said : “ From 6pm on Friday , our national measures will be amended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ indoor entertainment attractions .
“ Pubs , bars , restaurants and cafes will have to close by 6pm and will not be allowed to serve alcohol .
After 6pm , they will only be able to provide takeaway services .
“ From the same date , indoor entertainment venues , including cinemas , bingo halls , bowling alleys , soft play centres , casinos , skating rinks and amusement arcades , must close .
“ Indoor visitor attractions , such as museums , galleries and heritage sites will also have to close .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ The devolved nation entered a two-week ‘ firebreak ’ lockdown in October , ahead of the lockdown implemented in England , with Drakeford warning at the time that “ there is a very real risk our NHS will be overwhelmed ” .
The lockdown in Wales ended on November 9th .
Pubs , restaurants and bars were allowed to reopen with a 10pm closing time following the lifting of the restrictions .
The new measures unveiled today will come into force on December 2nd .
The First Minister described the firebreak lockdown as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ today : “ Over the last seven days we have seen coronavirus beginning to rise again and we are beginning to see some of those advantages fade… “ We saw a very steep fall in cases after the 23rd October – that was a result of the firebreak period .
As you will see how , in the last few days , those figures have started to rise again .
“ Yesterday , 16 of the 22 local authorities in Wales recorded rises in the seven day rolling case rate .
The overall @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cases per 100,000 of the population and is rising .
Last week when I spoke , it was 116 and falling.
” On hospitality , he added : “ I am very grateful for everything the sector has done .
I know these new restrictions will be difficult as they come at the one of the busiest times of the year for the sector .
“ Unfortunately , we continue to face a virus which is moving incredibly quickly across Wales and will exploit every opportunity where we come together to spend time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Labour leader explained that the devolved government would “ provide the most generous package of financial assistance anywhere in the UK ” to those affected by the new rules .
The package will include £180m specifically for tourism , leisure and hospitality businesses , which is in addition to coronavirus business support schemes made available by the UK government .
The First Minister said the measures would be reviewed on December 17th , then every three weeks after that .
He also said his government will consider introducing travel restrictions when England lifts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement delivered by Drakeford today .
Prynhawn da .
On Friday I explained coronavirus was again accelerating across Wales , eroding the gains we had achieved together during the fire-break period .
Throughout the pandemic all the actions we have taken here in Wales have been designed to protect our NHS and to save lives .
That remains unchanged today .
The facts are stark .
Unless we respond now to the growing number of people infected with the virus the advice we have from our scientific and medical expertss is that by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with coronavirus in hospital in Wales could rise to 2,200 .
And our modelling suggests that unless we act between 1,000 and 1,7000 preventable deaths coukd take place over the winter period .
On Friday the all-Wales seven-day incidence rate was 187 cases per 100,000 people .
Today that has risen to almost 210 cases per 100,000 people .
We have also seen further rises among the under-25 age group in 17 of the 22 local authority areas in Wales .
More worryingly still cases of coronavirus are beginning to rise in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wales .
Coronavirus thrives on human contacts – in our homes or when we come together .
That is why , over the weekend , the cabinet met to consider the detail of a set of new , targeted restrictions in the hospitality and leisure sectors and a new financial package to support affected businesses .
The measures we are taking are based on what the UK Sage group tells us has worked best elsewhere .
That is why from 6pm on Friday new national measures will be introduced for hospitality and indoor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ restaurants and cafes will have to close by 6pm and will not be allowed to serve alcohol .
After 6pm they will only be able to provide takeaway services .
From the same date indoor entertainment venues , including cinemas , bingo halls , bowling alleys , soft play centres , casinos , skating rinks and amusement arcades , must close .
Indoor visitor attractions such as museums , galleries , and heritage sites will also have to close but outdoor visitor attractions will be able to remain open .
The rest of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – there will be no changes to extended households , how many people can meet in public indoor or outdoor places , or restrictions on other businesses .
The English lockdown will end on Wednesday this week .
In that context we are looking at travel restrictions in and out of Wales and will make a further announcement later this week .
We will formally review these restrictions by December 17 and then every three weeks .
The hospitality and visitor sectors have worked hard to comply with the many regulations to make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from the threat of coronavirus .
I am very grateful for everything the sector has done .
I know these new restrictions will be difficult as they come at the one of the busiest times of the year for the sector .
Unfortunately we continue to face a virus which is moving incredibly quickly across Wales and will exploit every opportunity when we spend time with one other .
To support businesses affected by these new restrictions into the New Year we will provide the most generous package of financial assistance anywhere in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of help specifically for tourism , leisure , and hospitality businesses .
This is in addition to the various support schemes available from the UK government .
There will also be a package element of £160m which will support up to 60,000 businesses on the non-domestic rating list across Wales .
Businesses , including those in retail , tourism , leisure and hospitality , and their supply chains , which are materially affected by the restrictions will receive payments of between £3,000 and £5,000 .
Discretionary grants of up to £2,000 will continue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the non-domestic rating list .
This fund will be delivered by local authorities .
I am very grateful for their ongoing support and help to deliver this part of the package .
The second element is a £180m fund targeted at hospitality , tourism , and leisure businesses .
It will provide grants of up to £100,000 for SMEs and £150,000 for larger businesses .
These grants will be linked to the number of people employed in those businesses and their operating costs .
Up to 10,000 businesses will be supported by this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first time we have introduced such a sector-specific fund and it will be delivered through Business Wales .
We will work with our partners to ensure that , where we can , we will make payments to affected businesses as quickly as possible before Christmas .
Further information on the detail of all of this will be provided on the Business Wales website shortly .
The weeks ahead will be difficult and demanding for all of us .
As we look further ahead , there are signs of how life will get better @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carried out a large and successful test of all the practical things that will need to be in place once a vaccine is given the go-ahead .
Now that go-ahead could be as early as this week and once it comes we will be ready for it .
Last week we saw the first mass testing programme start in Merthyr Tydfil .
More than 10,000 people have been tested in the first eight days .
The strong sense of community responsibility has been very evident in that terrific response .
I thank everyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to do so over the next seven days .
This week we will begin using the rapid-result lateral flow tests in some care homes to help reunite families who have been separated for many months .
And today we publish new advice about visiting in hospitals offering hope that , in the right circumstances , both parents can be more involved in their baby ’ s antenatal care .
So , even as we face real challenges in the here and now there are possibilities that if we continue to pull together and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ today then as far as coronavirus is concerned 2021 could be a better year for us all .
I ask again today for your help to make that a reality in our lives .
Together we will keep Wales safe .
Diolch yn fawr iawn i chi gyd .

Labour’s Mark Drakeford has announced new coronavirus restrictions that will require all cafes, pubs, bars and restaurants in Wales to close their doors at 6pm and will ban them from selling alcohol at any time.
Addressing the public in a Covid briefing this afternoon, the Welsh First Minister said the new rules, which come into force on Friday, are “based on what the UK SAGE group of experts tells us has worked best elsewhere”.
Drakeford said: “From 6pm on Friday, our national measures will be amended to introduce new restrictions for hospitality and indoor entertainment attractions.
“Pubs, bars, restaurants and cafes will have to close by 6pm and will not be allowed to serve alcohol. After 6pm, they will only be able to provide takeaway services.
“From the same date, indoor entertainment venues, including cinemas, bingo halls, bowling alleys, soft play centres, casinos, skating rinks and amusement arcades, must close.
“Indoor visitor attractions, such as museums, galleries and heritage sites will also have to close. Outdoor visitor attractions will remain open.”
The devolved nation entered a two-week ‘firebreak’ lockdown in October, ahead of the lockdown implemented in England, with Drakeford warning at the time that “there is a very real risk our NHS will be overwhelmed”.
The lockdown in Wales ended on November 9th. Pubs, restaurants and bars were allowed to reopen with a 10pm closing time following the lifting of the restrictions. The new measures unveiled today will come into force on December 2nd.
The First Minister described the firebreak lockdown as a “success”, but warned today: “Over the last seven days we have seen coronavirus beginning to rise again and we are beginning to see some of those advantages fade…
“We saw a very steep fall in cases after the 23rd October – that was a result of the firebreak period. As you will see how, in the last few days, those figures have started to rise again.
“Yesterday, 16 of the 22 local authorities in Wales recorded rises in the seven day rolling case rate. The overall case rate for Wales is now 187 cases per 100,000 of the population and is rising. Last week when I spoke, it was 116 and falling.”
On hospitality, he added: “I am very grateful for everything the sector has done. I know these new restrictions will be difficult as they come at the one of the busiest times of the year for the sector.
“Unfortunately, we continue to face a virus which is moving incredibly quickly across Wales and will exploit every opportunity where we come together to spend time with one other.”
But the Welsh Labour leader explained that the devolved government would “provide the most generous package of financial assistance anywhere in the UK” to those affected by the new rules.
The package will include £180m specifically for tourism, leisure and hospitality businesses, which is in addition to coronavirus business support schemes made available by the UK government.
The First Minister said the measures would be reviewed on December 17th, then every three weeks after that. He also said his government will consider introducing travel restrictions when England lifts its lockdown.
Below is the full statement delivered by Drakeford today.
Prynhawn da. On Friday I explained coronavirus was again accelerating across Wales, eroding the gains we had achieved together during the fire-break period. Throughout the pandemic all the actions we have taken here in Wales have been designed to protect our NHS and to save lives. That remains unchanged today.
The facts are stark. Unless we respond now to the growing number of people infected with the virus the advice we have from our scientific and medical expertss is that by January 12 the total number of people with coronavirus in hospital in Wales could rise to 2,200. And our modelling suggests that unless we act between 1,000 and 1,7000 preventable deaths coukd take place over the winter period.
On Friday the all-Wales seven-day incidence rate was 187 cases per 100,000 people. Today that has risen to almost 210 cases per 100,000 people. We have also seen further rises among the under-25 age group in 17 of the 22 local authority areas in Wales. More worryingly still cases of coronavirus are beginning to rise in the over-60 age group in most parts of Wales.
Coronavirus thrives on human contacts – in our homes or when we come together. That is why, over the weekend, the cabinet met to consider the detail of a set of new, targeted restrictions in the hospitality and leisure sectors and a new financial package to support affected businesses. The measures we are taking are based on what the UK Sage group tells us has worked best elsewhere.
That is why from 6pm on Friday new national measures will be introduced for hospitality and indoor entertainment attractions. Pubs, bars, restaurants and cafes will have to close by 6pm and will not be allowed to serve alcohol. After 6pm they will only be able to provide takeaway services.
From the same date indoor entertainment venues, including cinemas, bingo halls, bowling alleys, soft play centres, casinos, skating rinks and amusement arcades, must close. Indoor visitor attractions such as museums, galleries, and heritage sites will also have to close but outdoor visitor attractions will be able to remain open.
The rest of the national measures will remain the same – there will be no changes to extended households, how many people can meet in public indoor or outdoor places, or restrictions on other businesses. The English lockdown will end on Wednesday this week. In that context we are looking at travel restrictions in and out of Wales and will make a further announcement later this week.
We will formally review these restrictions by December 17 and then every three weeks. The hospitality and visitor sectors have worked hard to comply with the many regulations to make their businesses compliant and to protect customers from the threat of coronavirus.
I am very grateful for everything the sector has done. I know these new restrictions will be difficult as they come at the one of the busiest times of the year for the sector. Unfortunately we continue to face a virus which is moving incredibly quickly across Wales and will exploit every opportunity when we spend time with one other.
To support businesses affected by these new restrictions into the New Year we will provide the most generous package of financial assistance anywhere in the UK. This will include £180m of help specifically for tourism, leisure, and hospitality businesses. This is in addition to the various support schemes available from the UK government.
There will also be a package element of £160m which will support up to 60,000 businesses on the non-domestic rating list across Wales. Businesses, including those in retail, tourism, leisure and hospitality, and their supply chains, which are materially affected by the restrictions will receive payments of between £3,000 and £5,000. Discretionary grants of up to £2,000 will continue to be available for those not on the non-domestic rating list. This fund will be delivered by local authorities. I am very grateful for their ongoing support and help to deliver this part of the package.
The second element is a £180m fund targeted at hospitality, tourism, and leisure businesses. It will provide grants of up to £100,000 for SMEs and £150,000 for larger businesses. These grants will be linked to the number of people employed in those businesses and their operating costs. Up to 10,000 businesses will be supported by this new fund.
It’s the first time we have introduced such a sector-specific fund and it will be delivered through Business Wales. We will work with our partners to ensure that, where we can, we will make payments to affected businesses as quickly as possible before Christmas. Further information on the detail of all of this will be provided on the Business Wales website shortly.
The weeks ahead will be difficult and demanding for all of us. As we look further ahead, there are signs of how life will get better. Last week the NHS in Wales carried out a large and successful test of all the practical things that will need to be in place once a vaccine is given the go-ahead. Now that go-ahead could be as early as this week and once it comes we will be ready for it.
Last week we saw the first mass testing programme start in Merthyr Tydfil. More than 10,000 people have been tested in the first eight days. The strong sense of community responsibility has been very evident in that terrific response. I thank everyone who has come forward and encourage more to do so over the next seven days.
This week we will begin using the rapid-result lateral flow tests in some care homes to help reunite families who have been separated for many months. And today we publish new advice about visiting in hospitals offering hope that, in the right circumstances, both parents can be more involved in their baby’s antenatal care.
So, even as we face real challenges in the here and now there are possibilities that if we continue to pull together and make the difference we need to see today then as far as coronavirus is concerned 2021 could be a better year for us all. I ask again today for your help to make that a reality in our lives. Together we will keep Wales safe. Diolch yn fawr iawn i chi gyd.


labourlist--2020-11-30--Labour demands “credible” exams plan as 8m children face entering Tier 2 or 3

Labour has demanded that the government bring forward a “ credible plan ” for GCSE and A-Level exams taking place next year as data has shown that over 8.7 million children face entering Tier 2 or 3 Covid restrictions .
Responding to new figures published by the House of Commons library , Labour ’ s Kate Green has called for the Education Secretary to ensure that children who see disruption to their education are not disadvantaged in the 2021 exams .
The Shadow Education Secretary wrote to Gavin Williamson earlier this month , urging the minister to “ recognise the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ teachers ” .
The party has called on the Education Secretary to ensure : • Greater optionality in exam questions to ensure pupils are assessed on what they have been taught ; • Reserve papers are made available in all subjects so that self-isolating students do not lose out ; • A level playing field for every region of the country ; and • A credible plan B so pupils can get their grades even if exams are cancelled .
Commenting on the Tory record on education in the Covid crisis , Green @ @ @ @ @ @ @ failure to get a grip on this pandemic has meant thousands of pupils off school , missing out on essential learning.
” Her call for a plan follows data published by the Department for Education earlier this month , which showed increasing disruption to education in the second wave of the pandemic with more than 600,000 pupils missing school due to Covid .
The department has explained that non-attendance was “ mainly due to the continued increase in the number of pupils self-isolating ” , and has estimated that between 9 % and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attend school on November 19th .
The Shadow Education Secretary added : “ Instead of bringing forward a clear plan for next summer ’ s exams the government has dithered and delayed , creating huge stress for pupils , teachers and parents .
“ To ensure 2021 exams are truly fair to all pupils the government should adopt Labour ’ s plan for greater optionality , reserve papers , and regional adjustments to ensure no child misses out.
” Attendance in state-funded primary schools fell to 87 % on November 19th , down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 78 % of students were present in state-funded secondary schools on the same date , representing a fall from 83 % in the previous week .
The proportion of schools with 30 or more children self-isolating , due to potential contact with someone who had contracted Covid within the school , stood at between 25 % and 27 % .
This figure has increased for two consecutive weeks .
Labour has also highlighted that while students have been forced to self-isolate due to the virus , the government has cut its previously pledged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pupils by up to 80 % for some schools .
UNISON urged the government to “ rescue Christmas ” earlier this month by allowing schools to switch to an online format for their lessons to reduce the risk of families being required to self-isolate over the holiday period .
The union argued that schools , working with local authorities , should be allowed to provide a mix of in-classroom and home-based learning immediately to keep staff and students safe and minimise disruption to learning in the pandemic .

Labour has demanded that the government bring forward a “credible plan” for GCSE and A-Level exams taking place next year as data has shown that over 8.7 million children face entering Tier 2 or 3 Covid restrictions.
Responding to new figures published by the House of Commons library, Labour’s Kate Green has called for the Education Secretary to ensure that children who see disruption to their education are not disadvantaged in the 2021 exams.
The Shadow Education Secretary wrote to Gavin Williamson earlier this month, urging the minister to “recognise the scale of the challenge facing pupils and teachers”. The party has called on the Education Secretary to ensure:
Greater optionality in exam questions to ensure pupils are assessed on what they have been taught;
Reserve papers are made available in all subjects so that self-isolating students do not lose out;
A level playing field for every region of the country; and
A credible plan B so pupils can get their grades even if exams are cancelled.
Commenting on the Tory record on education in the Covid crisis, Green said: “The government’s failure to get a grip on this pandemic has meant thousands of pupils off school, missing out on essential learning.”
Her call for a plan follows data published by the Department for Education earlier this month, which showed increasing disruption to education in the second wave of the pandemic with more than 600,000 pupils missing school due to Covid.
The department has explained that non-attendance was “mainly due to the continued increase in the number of pupils self-isolating”, and has estimated that between 9% and 11% of all pupils did not attend school on November 19th.
The Shadow Education Secretary added: “Instead of bringing forward a clear plan for next summer’s exams the government has dithered and delayed, creating huge stress for pupils, teachers and parents.
“To ensure 2021 exams are truly fair to all pupils the government should adopt Labour’s plan for greater optionality, reserve papers, and regional adjustments to ensure no child misses out.”
Attendance in state-funded primary schools fell to 87% on November 19th, down from 90% the week before. 78% of students were present in state-funded secondary schools on the same date, representing a fall from 83% in the previous week.
The proportion of schools with 30 or more children self-isolating, due to potential contact with someone who had contracted Covid within the school, stood at between 25% and 27%. This figure has increased for two consecutive weeks.
Labour has also highlighted that while students have been forced to self-isolate due to the virus, the government has cut its previously pledged allocation of laptops and equipment to disadvantaged pupils by up to 80% for some schools.
UNISON urged the government to “rescue Christmas” earlier this month by allowing schools to switch to an online format for their lessons to reduce the risk of families being required to self-isolate over the holiday period.
The union argued that schools, working with local authorities, should be allowed to provide a mix of in-classroom and home-based learning immediately to keep staff and students safe and minimise disruption to learning in the pandemic.


labourlist--2020-11-30--JLM conference: Starmer’s frustration and Rayner’s warning to members

To what extent do local Labour parties need to be constricted in the wake of the Equality and Human Rights Commission report on antisemitism ?
This is the question many activists are now discussing .
The EHRC did not find the party to be institutionally antisemitic because this was not in its terms of reference – it did find a culture that “ at best did not do enough to prevent antisemitism and , at worst , could be seen to accept it ” .
General secretary David Evans has essentially said this culture needs to improve before local parties @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ flashpoints ” , such as Jeremy Corbyn ’ s whip , without making Jewish members feel unsafe .
Riverside Labour was subsequently told that a motion expressing no confidence in Evans himself was not allowed .
It is also in this context that the Friday evening meeting of Nottingham East Labour took place , which considered a motion calling for the whip to be restored and led to a Jewish member leaving after being confronted with denial of antisemitism .
Local MP Nadia Whittome , who opposed considering the motion in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ LabourList reflecting on party democracy and making Labour welcome to Jewish members .
The Socialist Campaign Group member says “ nuance , clarity and empathy ” are needed in this discussion on limits .
Making Labour safe was one focus of the Jewish Labour Movement ’ s one-day conference on Sunday .
In conversation with Ruth Smeeth , Keir Starmer spoke of events in recent weeks .
“ I ’ m deeply frustrated that we ’ re in this place , ” he said .
The leader described Corbyn ’ s EHRC response @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you could get ” and said it “ undermined me and what I was trying to achieve ” .
Starmer also suggested the party should “ look again ” at the rule that would usually ban anyone who stood against Labour candidates in the last election from rejoining for five years , to make exceptions where applicants had quit over antisemitism .
( Such exceptions are already in the gift of the national executive committee , but this is a nonetheless interesting comment as it sheds light on Starmer ’ s goals .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ worded statements of the day .
The deputy leader called on Labour members to “ get real ” about antisemitism in the party and warned that “ thousands and thousands ” could be suspended if they fail to do so .
She also made clear that there is “ no debating what the EHRC said ” and criticised Corbyn , saying : “ I don ’ t think Jeremy really quite gets how upsetting it is ” .
In response to her comments on suspending thousands of members , John McDonnell tweeted that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exactly what we don ’ t need ” .
This week , might we finally see a Brexit deal struck ?
Starmer has now ruled out voting against a deal , but the question of whether Labour votes in favour or abstains – if the government does indeed get a deal and put it to a Commons vote – is still to be answered .
There is also a key vote on the new Covid rules on Tuesday .
Labour had been keeping its cards close to its chest but yesterday Jim McMahon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ again , it is a question of whether Labour supports the government or abstains .
We will be following all of these developments and more , so stay tuned .
Sign up to LabourList ’ s morning email for everything Labour , every weekday morning .

To what extent do local Labour parties need to be constricted in the wake of the Equality and Human Rights Commission report on antisemitism? This is the question many activists are now discussing. The EHRC did not find the party to be institutionally antisemitic because this was not in its terms of reference – it did find a culture that “at best did not do enough to prevent antisemitism and, at worst, could be seen to accept it”. General secretary David Evans has essentially said this culture needs to improve before local parties can be trusted to conduct discussions around “flashpoints”, such as Jeremy Corbyn’s whip, without making Jewish members feel unsafe.
Riverside Labour was subsequently told that a motion expressing no confidence in Evans himself was not allowed. It is also in this context that the Friday evening meeting of Nottingham East Labour took place, which considered a motion calling for the whip to be restored and led to a Jewish member leaving after being confronted with denial of antisemitism. Local MP Nadia Whittome, who opposed considering the motion in the meeting, has written a piece for LabourList reflecting on party democracy and making Labour welcome to Jewish members. The Socialist Campaign Group member says “nuance, clarity and empathy” are needed in this discussion on limits.
Making Labour safe was one focus of the Jewish Labour Movement’s one-day conference on Sunday. In conversation with Ruth Smeeth, Keir Starmer spoke of events in recent weeks. “I’m deeply frustrated that we’re in this place,” he said. The leader described Corbyn’s EHRC response as “just about as bad as you could get” and said it “undermined me and what I was trying to achieve”. Starmer also suggested the party should “look again” at the rule that would usually ban anyone who stood against Labour candidates in the last election from rejoining for five years, to make exceptions where applicants had quit over antisemitism. (Such exceptions are already in the gift of the national executive committee, but this is a nonetheless interesting comment as it sheds light on Starmer’s goals.)
Angela Rayner delivered the most strongly worded statements of the day. The deputy leader called on Labour members to “get real” about antisemitism in the party and warned that “thousands and thousands” could be suspended if they fail to do so. She also made clear that there is “no debating what the EHRC said” and criticised Corbyn, saying: “I don’t think Jeremy really quite gets how upsetting it is”. In response to her comments on suspending thousands of members, John McDonnell tweeted that such “inflammatory, threatening language is exactly what we don’t need”.
This week, might we finally see a Brexit deal struck? Starmer has now ruled out voting against a deal, but the question of whether Labour votes in favour or abstains – if the government does indeed get a deal and put it to a Commons vote – is still to be answered. There is also a key vote on the new Covid rules on Tuesday. Labour had been keeping its cards close to its chest but yesterday Jim McMahon ruled out voting against the restrictions: again, it is a question of whether Labour supports the government or abstains. We will be following all of these developments and more, so stay tuned. Sign up to LabourList’s morning email for everything Labour, every weekday morning.


labourlist--2020-11-29--Rayner warns “thousands” of Labour members may be suspended from party

Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner has called on members to “ get real ” about antisemitism within the party and warned that “ thousands and thousands ” could be suspended if they fail to do so .
Addressing the Jewish Labour Movement one-day conference this morning , Rayner talked about a local Nottingham East Labour meeting on Friday that led to a Jewish member saying he felt forced to leave .
The local party considered and passed a motion calling for the Labour whip to be restored to Jeremy Corbyn – after general secretary David Evans had said such motions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
Local Labour MP Nadia Whittome issued a statement to “ put on record my stated objection to the motion this evening ” .
She described the “ atmosphere and tone ” of the meeting as “ wholly unacceptable ” .
Commenting on the events , Rayner said : “ We ’ re on it , by the way .
I want people to know that there as been suspensions and we ’ re on it and we are supporting Nadia , the MP there who spoke out and I completely commend @ @ @ @ @ @ @ members need to get real about this , our Labour members .
If they don ’ t think antisemitism is within the Labour Party and that there ’ s problems now , then there ’ s really no place for them in the Labour Party .
“ If they think making people feel unsafe or unwelcome in our meetings is a response to the EHRC report , then they need to be out of our party immediately .
People need to understand what our Jewish community have been through.
” The Equality and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ released in October found that there were “ unlawful acts of harassment and discrimination for which the Labour Party is responsible ” .
The deputy leader added : “ We should have a bit of humility… We should be listening and aware of how hurt and upset people are .
I feel really , really angry actually that there ’ s been scenes like that in our CLP meetings .
“ If I have to suspend thousands and thousands of members , we will do that .
Because we can not and we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , because an injury to one is an injury to all .
That ’ s what we say in our movement .
“ It ’ s about education as well .
It ’ s about having this approach where we don ’ t accept that people – you know , we have debates but there ’ s no debating what the EHRC said .
“ There ’ s no debating whether antisemitism exists in the Labour Party .
It does , and we ’ ve got to do everything we can to stamp @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s comments , Rayner said : “ What Jeremy said in response to the EHRC report was totally unacceptable .
Any attempts to minimise or downplay the extent of antisemitism are part of the problem .
This is the issue .
“ I knew this would happen .
It is a matter of public record now that I contacted Jeremy to try and get him not to say what he said , and to apologise and withdraw it afterwards .
Because I don ’ t think Jeremy really quite gets how upsetting it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is when he made those comments .
And I just want to say that I really do hope that Jeremy really does reflect now on what he said on the day that report was published and his response to that .
“ I truly hope he reflects .
I understand that he thinks he ’ s always tackled issues of antisemitism .
I understand he thinks he ’ s always tackled issues of racism .
But on this , he ’ s wrong .
He has to accept as a leader that we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accept that .
I ’ ve accepted my failure in that .
Then we ’ ve got to go and make sure that we do everything we possibly can to regain that trust and respect .
“ I don ’ t think Jeremy has done enough for that now , no , so at the very least I think he should apologise , absolutely.
” Corbyn was suspended in October after commenting that “ one antisemite is one too many ” but also claiming that “ the scale of the problem was… dramatically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” .
A panel of Labour national executive committee ( NEC ) members decided to readmit Corbyn to the party less than three weeks later , but Starmer the following day announced that the whip would continue to be withheld .
The former leader has been told by chief whip Nick Brown that the suspension of the whip is set to last for three months and this will be kept “ under review ” .
He has been asked to apologise and edit or delete his EHRC response post .

Labour deputy leader Angela Rayner has called on members to “get real” about antisemitism within the party and warned that “thousands and thousands” could be suspended if they fail to do so.
Addressing the Jewish Labour Movement one-day conference this morning, Rayner talked about a local Nottingham East Labour meeting on Friday that led to a Jewish member saying he felt forced to leave.
The local party considered and passed a motion calling for the Labour whip to be restored to Jeremy Corbyn – after general secretary David Evans had said such motions would be “ruled out of order”.
Local Labour MP Nadia Whittome issued a statement to “put on record my stated objection to the motion this evening”. She described the “atmosphere and tone” of the meeting as “wholly unacceptable”.
Commenting on the events, Rayner said: “We’re on it, by the way. I want people to know that there as been suspensions and we’re on it and we are supporting Nadia, the MP there who spoke out and I completely commend her for doing that.
“Our members need to get real about this, our Labour members. If they don’t think antisemitism is within the Labour Party and that there’s problems now, then there’s really no place for them in the Labour Party.
“If they think making people feel unsafe or unwelcome in our meetings is a response to the EHRC report, then they need to be out of our party immediately. People need to understand what our Jewish community have been through.”
The Equality and Human Rights Commission report on Labour antisemitism released in October found that there were “unlawful acts of harassment and discrimination for which the Labour Party is responsible”.
The deputy leader added: “We should have a bit of humility… We should be listening and aware of how hurt and upset people are. I feel really, really angry actually that there’s been scenes like that in our CLP meetings.
“If I have to suspend thousands and thousands of members, we will do that. Because we cannot and we will not accept an injury to one, because an injury to one is an injury to all. That’s what we say in our movement.
“It’s about education as well. It’s about having this approach where we don’t accept that people – you know, we have debates but there’s no debating what the EHRC said.
“There’s no debating whether antisemitism exists in the Labour Party. It does, and we’ve got to do everything we can to stamp it out.”
Turning to Corbyn’s comments, Rayner said: “What Jeremy said in response to the EHRC report was totally unacceptable. Any attempts to minimise or downplay the extent of antisemitism are part of the problem. This is the issue.
“I knew this would happen. It is a matter of public record now that I contacted Jeremy to try and get him not to say what he said, and to apologise and withdraw it afterwards. Because I don’t think Jeremy really quite gets how upsetting it is.
“How really upsetting it is when he made those comments. And I just want to say that I really do hope that Jeremy really does reflect now on what he said on the day that report was published and his response to that.
“I truly hope he reflects. I understand that he thinks he’s always tackled issues of antisemitism. I understand he thinks he’s always tackled issues of racism. But on this, he’s wrong. He has to accept as a leader that we failed.
“We all have to accept that. I’ve accepted my failure in that. Then we’ve got to go and make sure that we do everything we possibly can to regain that trust and respect.
“I don’t think Jeremy has done enough for that now, no, so at the very least I think he should apologise, absolutely.”
Corbyn was suspended in October after commenting that “one antisemite is one too many” but also claiming that “the scale of the problem was… dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents”.
A panel of Labour national executive committee (NEC) members decided to readmit Corbyn to the party less than three weeks later, but Starmer the following day announced that the whip would continue to be withheld.
The former leader has been told by chief whip Nick Brown that the suspension of the whip is set to last for three months and this will be kept “under review”. He has been asked to apologise and edit or delete his EHRC response post.


labourlist--2020-11-30--Labour: Tories must “back British business” with foreign acquisitions law

Labour has demanded that the government “ back British businesses and protect our country ’ s best interests ” by setting out clear rules and scenarios determining when powers to block foreign acquisitions should be used .
The party , which is supporting government legislation to protect UK companies from hostile actors , has called for ‘ national security ’ to be legally defined rather than leaving it at the “ discretion of the Business Secretary of the day ” .
Labour has tabled an amendment to the national security and investment bill putting forward its own definition , which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threats ” .
This would allow the UK government to block takeovers when they would : • Impact the UK ’ s international obligations , including in relation to climate change and human rights ; or • Facilitate activities such as terrorism , espionage , and organised crime .
Labour ’ s Chi Onwurah slammed the Conservatives ’ “ poor record on national security ” and highlighted the recent controversy over Huawei ’ s role in the UK ’ s 5G network , which she accused the government of “ waving through ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ UK ’ s most successful tech companies , was sold to US company Nvidia for £31bn earlier this year .
Earlier this month , Labour warned that the “ key national asset ” could now be shifted overseas resulting in job losses .
The shadow business minister added : “ Their history of making dodgy deals with mates also means it would be wrong to leave deciding what is and is not a threat to national security to the whim of ministers .
“ Labour is calling for clear rules that would set @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to back British businesses and protect our country ’ s best interests.
” The 2002 Enterprise Act allows the government to intervene in acquisitions on competition grounds , or on four other bases – financial stability , media plurality , national security or pandemic resilience – if the deal is sufficiently big .
Labour has highlighted powers available to other governments .
The French government can block takeovers deemed strategic and the US committee on foreign investment can block acquisitions that have implications for national interests .
Labour frontbencher Stephen Kinnock said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Conservative governments have been profoundly naïve and complacent about our national security and our strategic national assets , leaving our home-grown businesses at the mercy of hostile takeovers .
The shadow minister for Asia and the Pacific added : “ While this bill is a step in the right direction , it fails to recognise that national security is intrinsically linked to economic security .
“ This failure leaves the UK ’ s critical national infrastructure and supply chains open to threats , particularly from enterprises and investment vehicles that are backed by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ undermine the UK ’ s defences .
“ Labour ’ s amendments seek to fix these flaws , by defending our country ’ s sovereign capability and delivering a more resilient and secure Britain.
” The national security and investment bill passed its second reading earlier this month .
The legislation is currently being considered by a public bill committee and is expected to next come before MPs at report stage on December 15th .
Below is the full text of Labour ’ s proposed amendment to the bill .
To move the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to national security , the Secretary of State may have regard to factors including , but not restricted to : • Whether the trigger event risks enabling a hostile actor to gain control of a crucial supply chain , obtain access to sensitive sites , corrupt processes or systems , conduct espionage , exert inappropriate leverage or engage in any other action which may undermine national security ; • Whether the trigger event adversely impacts the UK ’ s capability and capacity to maintain economic security ; • The potential impact of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defence capabilities and interests ; • The potential impact of the trigger event on the transfer of sensitive data , technology or know-how outside of the UK ; • The characteristics of the acquirer , including its jurisdiction of incorporation and proximity to any state ; • The potential impact of the trigger event on the security of the UK ’ s critical national infrastructure ; • Whether the acquirer in respect of a trigger event has a history of compliance with UK and other applicable law ; • The potential impact of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s international interests and obligations , including with respect to the protection of human rights and climate risk ; and • The potential of the trigger event to involve or facilitate illicit activities , including terrorism , organised crime and money laundering .

Labour has demanded that the government “back British businesses and protect our country’s best interests” by setting out clear rules and scenarios determining when powers to block foreign acquisitions should be used.
The party, which is supporting government legislation to protect UK companies from hostile actors, has called for ‘national security’ to be legally defined rather than leaving it at the “discretion of the Business Secretary of the day”.
Labour has tabled an amendment to the national security and investment bill putting forward its own definition, which it says would better “reflect modern threats”. This would allow the UK government to block takeovers when they would:
Risk the transferral of sensitive data;
Enable hostile actors to gain control of a crucial supply chain;
Impact UK defence capabilities;
Impact the UK’s international obligations, including in relation to climate change and human rights; or
Facilitate activities such as terrorism, espionage, and organised crime.
Labour’s Chi Onwurah slammed the Conservatives’ “poor record on national security” and highlighted the recent controversy over Huawei’s role in the UK’s 5G network, which she accused the government of “waving through”.
ARM holdings, one of the UK’s most successful tech companies, was sold to US company Nvidia for £31bn earlier this year. Earlier this month, Labour warned that the “key national asset” could now be shifted overseas resulting in job losses.
The shadow business minister added: “Their history of making dodgy deals with mates also means it would be wrong to leave deciding what is and is not a threat to national security to the whim of ministers.
“Labour is calling for clear rules that would set out when foreign acquisitions should be blocked, to back British businesses and protect our country’s best interests.”
The 2002 Enterprise Act allows the government to intervene in acquisitions on competition grounds, or on four other bases – financial stability, media plurality, national security or pandemic resilience – if the deal is sufficiently big.
Labour has highlighted powers available to other governments. The French government can block takeovers deemed strategic and the US committee on foreign investment can block acquisitions that have implications for national interests.
Labour frontbencher Stephen Kinnock said: “For ten years, successive Conservative governments have been profoundly naïve and complacent about our national security and our strategic national assets, leaving our home-grown businesses at the mercy of hostile takeovers.
The shadow minister for Asia and the Pacific added: “While this bill is a step in the right direction, it fails to recognise that national security is intrinsically linked to economic security.
“This failure leaves the UK’s critical national infrastructure and supply chains open to threats, particularly from enterprises and investment vehicles that are backed by foreign authoritarian states who often seek to undermine the UK’s defences.
“Labour’s amendments seek to fix these flaws, by defending our country’s sovereign capability and delivering a more resilient and secure Britain.”
The national security and investment bill passed its second reading earlier this month. The legislation is currently being considered by a public bill committee and is expected to next come before MPs at report stage on December 15th.
Below is the full text of Labour’s proposed amendment to the bill.
To move the following clause –
When assessing a risk to national security, the Secretary of State may have regard to factors including, but not restricted to:


labourlist--2020-11-30--Covid business grants scheme will “level down” poorest areas, warns Labour

Labour has warned that one of the business grants schemes to be introduced by the government in the Covid pandemic will “ level down ” the poorest areas and “ betrays some of the most deprived communities under the toughest restrictions ” .
Analysis of the ‘ additional restrictions grant ’ , which makes a one-off £20-per-head payment to councils , alongside deprivation data has shown that some of the poorest areas in the country will receive the same or less than the richest .
Commenting on the data , shadow business minister Lucy Powell said : “ The Tories @ @ @ @ @ @ @ deprived communities under the toughest restrictions and does not recognise the additional pressures that many areas face .
“ It can ’ t be right that richer areas in Tier 1 or Tier 2 receive the same funding as those most in need of extra help.
” The analysis from Labour has revealed that several more deprived areas , facing more severe Covid restrictions under the tier system to come into force on Wednesday , will receive less funding than their more affluent counterparts .
The party has highlighted that the most deprived @ @ @ @ @ @ @ set to enter Tier 3 Covid measures , will receive less than the richer South Oxfordshire District Council , ranked 450th most deprived and set to enter in Tier 2 .
Similarly , Ashfield and Bassetlaw councils , ranked 111th and 182nd most deprived respectively , will get less money through the scheme than Elmbridge local authority in Surrey , which is ranked as the 460th – despite all being in Tier 3 .
Powell added : “ Rather than widen regional disparities , and level down the country , the Chancellor should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for those with additional needs because they have been in lockdown down for longer.
” Labour has argued that the formula being applied by the government to implement the additional restrictions grant is “ unfair ” and “ risks failing communities in those places the government has promised to level up ” .
The party has repeatedly criticised the Prime Minister over the failure of to act on his promise , made during both the 2019 general election campaign and in subsequent speeches , to “ level up ” poorer areas across the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for “ turning their back ” on the levelling-up pledge after data showed that three in four jobs in the automative industry , struggling in the pandemic , are in areas that the Conservatives vowed to protect .
Shadow Chancellor Anneliese Dodds criticised the government for “ always running to keep up ” after the Chancellor used his third economic update within a month to unveil more financial support for businesses in the second wave .
Following the U-turn on extending the furlough schemes , Dodds highlighted that while Rishi Sunak can “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” businesses can not , and slammed him for causing avoidable redundancies by failing to let businesses plan .
Labour highlighted earlier this month that while the Chancellor declared that he was introducing bigger business grants upon the announcement of a second national second lockdown , of up to £3,000 per month , most firms will receive much less .
The local restrictions support grant , launched by the Chancellor for the second lockdown , has provided the smallest rateable value businesses eligible for the relief with just half of the weekly cash @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the next largest group , those with a rateable value between £15,000 and £51,000 , were eligible to receive less than a third of the weekly amount they were granted during the first lockdown earlier in the year .

Labour has warned that one of the business grants schemes to be introduced by the government in the Covid pandemic will “level down” the poorest areas and “betrays some of the most deprived communities under the toughest restrictions”.
Analysis of the ‘additional restrictions grant’, which makes a one-off £20-per-head payment to councils, alongside deprivation data has shown that some of the poorest areas in the country will receive the same or less than the richest.
Commenting on the data, shadow business minister Lucy Powell said: “The Tories’ approach betrays some of the most deprived communities under the toughest restrictions and does not recognise the additional pressures that many areas face.
“It can’t be right that richer areas in Tier 1 or Tier 2 receive the same funding as those most in need of extra help.”
The analysis from Labour has revealed that several more deprived areas, facing more severe Covid restrictions under the tier system to come into force on Wednesday, will receive less funding than their more affluent counterparts.
The party has highlighted that the most deprived area in the country, Blackpool, set to enter Tier 3 Covid measures, will receive less than the richer South Oxfordshire District Council, ranked 450th most deprived and set to enter in Tier 2.
Similarly, Ashfield and Bassetlaw councils, ranked 111th and 182nd most deprived respectively, will get less money through the scheme than Elmbridge local authority in Surrey, which is ranked as the 460th – despite all being in Tier 3.
Powell added: “Rather than widen regional disparities, and level down the country, the Chancellor should review this fund and ensure it works for those with additional needs because they have been in lockdown down for longer.”
Labour has argued that the formula being applied by the government to implement the additional restrictions grant is “unfair” and “risks failing communities in those places the government has promised to level up”.
The party has repeatedly criticised the Prime Minister over the failure of to act on his promise, made during both the 2019 general election campaign and in subsequent speeches, to “level up” poorer areas across the country.
Labour recently condemned the Tories for “turning their back” on the levelling-up pledge after data showed that three in four jobs in the automative industry, struggling in the pandemic, are in areas that the Conservatives vowed to protect.
Shadow Chancellor Anneliese Dodds criticised the government for “always running to keep up” after the Chancellor used his third economic update within a month to unveil more financial support for businesses in the second wave.
Following the U-turn on extending the furlough schemes, Dodds highlighted that while Rishi Sunak can “change his mind at the last minute” businesses cannot, and slammed him for causing avoidable redundancies by failing to let businesses plan.
Labour highlighted earlier this month that while the Chancellor declared that he was introducing bigger business grants upon the announcement of a second national second lockdown, of up to £3,000 per month, most firms will receive much less.
The local restrictions support grant, launched by the Chancellor for the second lockdown, has provided the smallest rateable value businesses eligible for the relief with just half of the weekly cash amount they received in March.
Businesses in the next largest group, those with a rateable value between £15,000 and £51,000, were eligible to receive less than a third of the weekly amount they were granted during the first lockdown earlier in the year.