labourlist--2020-12-01--Johnson suffers large Tory rebellion as England returns to tiered Covid rules

Boris Johnson has suffered a large Tory rebellion in the House of Commons as members of his party refused to vote in favour of the three-tier coronavirus system that will replace the national lockdown in England from tomorrow .
The proposals passed as expected despite the level of dissent from within the Conservative Party .
With Labour MPs whipped by the leadership to abstain on the vote , 291 MPs in total voted in favour and 78 against the new rules .
55 Tory MPs opposed the plans tonight , which makes for Johnson ’ s biggest rebellion since the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over the 10pm curfew , opposed by 44 Tories .
23 Labour MPs also voted against it .
15 Labour MPs also broke their party whip by voting against the proposals tonight , plus Jeremy Corbyn who has not had the whip restored .
Some opposed on the basis of wanting a ‘ zero Covid ’ strategy ; others due to lack of financial aid .
During the parliamentary debate ahead of the key vote on new Covid-19 regulations , lockdown-sceptic Tory MPs stressed that the restrictions would have a further negative impact @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health and more .
One of Johnson ’ s backbenchers said the “ stab at an impact assessment ” this week had “ all the hallmarks of an essay crisis ” .
The cost-benefit analysis released on Monday was criticised for containing little new or detailed information .
Tory rebels were not won over by the document , nor the promise of regular tier reviews , nor the fresh announcement of a one-off £1,000 payment to “ wet-led ” pubs that predominantly serve alcohol rather than food .
Labour said the last-minute payment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ struggling ” and fall “ well short of the emergency cash offered during the first national lockdown ” , hitting businesses in the North and Midlands particularly hard .
Johnson criticised the opposition party for “ heroically ” deciding to abstain on the vote , calling the move “ extraordinary ” .
He told MPs that the country needed to “ hold our nerve ” and wait until the vaccines are “ in our grasp ” in the coming months .
But Keir Starmer countered in his speech that the Prime Minister “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in place for long ” despite knowing that “ tough restrictions will be needed until a vaccine is rolled out – and that may be months away ” .
The Labour leader said : “ We recognise the need for continued restrictions .
It would not be in the national interest to vote against these restrictions today .
So we will allow the regulations to pass .
But this is another wasted opportunity .
“ The PM could have spent the last four weeks fixing track and trace , putting in place the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the economic package our great towns and cities need to protect jobs and people ’ s income , and restoring public confidence .
“ Instead , we see more short-termism .
A PM stuck between his backbenchers and the national interest .
And I fear that just won ’ t work.
” Starmer explained that Labour would abstain because the “ business and economic support just doesn ’ t stack up ” .
During the debate , Labour backbencher Chris Bryant warned Tory MPs : “ I bet you not a single area @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 1 before Christmas , simply because Tier 2 doesn ’ t work .
It doesn ’ t bring the numbers down.
” Labour frontbencher Toby Perkins said : “ The fact that the Prime Minister had to come here today armed with an assurance that the thing we ’ re voting on today is going to be changed in a couple of weeks should tell him that he ’ s got it wrong.
” Matt Hancock closed the debate with an emotional speech revealing that his step-grandfather died of Covid-19 last month .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ t live with Covid .
People can ’ t learn to live with Covid .
People die with Covid.
” Below is the full list of Labour rebels who voted against the regulations .

Boris Johnson has suffered a large Tory rebellion in the House of Commons as members of his party refused to vote in favour of the three-tier coronavirus system that will replace the national lockdown in England from tomorrow.
The proposals passed as expected despite the level of dissent from within the Conservative Party. With Labour MPs whipped by the leadership to abstain on the vote, 291 MPs in total voted in favour and 78 against the new rules.
54 Tory MPs opposed the plans tonight, which makes for Johnson’s biggest rebellion since the general election. The previous largest was over the 10pm curfew, opposed by 44 Tories. 23 Labour MPs also voted against it.
15 Labour MPs also broke their party whip by voting against the proposals tonight, plus Jeremy Corbyn who has not had the whip restored. Some opposed on the basis of wanting a ‘zero Covid’ strategy; others due to lack of financial aid.
During the parliamentary debate ahead of the key vote on new Covid-19 regulations, lockdown-sceptic Tory MPs stressed that the restrictions would have a further negative impact on the economy, education, mental health and more.
One of Johnson’s backbenchers said the “stab at an impact assessment” this week had “all the hallmarks of an essay crisis”. The cost-benefit analysis released on Monday was criticised for containing little new or detailed information.
Tory rebels were not won over by the document, nor the promise of regular tier reviews, nor the fresh announcement of a one-off £1,000 payment to “wet-led” pubs that predominantly serve alcohol rather than food.
Labour said the last-minute payment would “leave the vast majority seriously struggling” and fall “well short of the emergency cash offered during the first national lockdown”, hitting businesses in the North and Midlands particularly hard.
Johnson criticised the opposition party for “heroically” deciding to abstain on the vote, calling the move “extraordinary”. He told MPs that the country needed to “hold our nerve” and wait until the vaccines are “in our grasp” in the coming months.
But Keir Starmer countered in his speech that the Prime Minister “pretends that the restrictions might not be in place for long” despite knowing that “tough restrictions will be needed until a vaccine is rolled out – and that may be months away”.
The Labour leader said: “We recognise the need for continued restrictions. It would not be in the national interest to vote against these restrictions today. So we will allow the regulations to pass. But this is another wasted opportunity.
“The PM could have spent the last four weeks fixing track and trace, putting in place the support people need to isolate, building the economic package our great towns and cities need to protect jobs and people’s income, and restoring public confidence.
“Instead, we see more short-termism. A PM stuck between his backbenchers and the national interest. And I fear that just won’t work.” Starmer explained that Labour would abstain because the “business and economic support just doesn’t stack up”.
During the debate, Labour backbencher Chris Bryant warned Tory MPs: “I bet you not a single area will go from Tier 2 to Tier 1 before Christmas, simply because Tier 2 doesn’t work. It doesn’t bring the numbers down.”
Labour frontbencher Toby Perkins said: “The fact that the Prime Minister had to come here today armed with an assurance that the thing we’re voting on today is going to be changed in a couple of weeks should tell him that he’s got it wrong.”
Matt Hancock closed the debate with an emotional speech revealing that his step-grandfather died of Covid-19 last month. He told MPs: “People don’t live with Covid. People can’t learn to live with Covid. People die with Covid.”
Below is the full list of Labour rebels who voted against the regulations.
Apsana Begum
Richard Burgon
Mary Kelly Foy
Andrew Gwynne
Mike Hill
Kevan Jones
Emma Lewell-Buck
Ian Mearns
Grahame Morris
Kate Osborne
Bell Ribeiro-Addy
John Spellar
Graham Stringer
Zarah Sultana
Derek Twigg
Plus: Jeremy Corbyn


labourlist--2020-12-01--Five left NEC members urge leadership to speak out over deportation flight

The five local party representatives on Labour ’ s ruling body who were recently elected with the support of Momentum have urged Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner to speak out over a deportation flight set to take place tomorrow .
Nadia Jama , Mish Rahman , Yasmine Dar , Gemma Bolton and ex-MP Laura Pidcock – who all stood on the ‘ Grassroots Voice ’ slate in the most recent national executive committee elections – have written to the Labour leader and deputy leader .
In their letter today , the NEC members said they were “ alarmed ” that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the flight that is expected to see 50 people deported by the Home Office to Jamaica on December 2nd .
Those subject to the action have been described as “ dangerous foreign criminals ” by the government , which says “ convicted murderers and rapists ” are amongst them .
But there are concerns that some of those facing removal grew up in the UK .
A letter organised by Clive Lewis and signed by more than 60 MPs called on the government to cancel the deportation .
It was not signed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which is standard practice for such letters .
Raising concerns over a repeat of the Windrush scandal , the letter from MPs to Home Secretary Priti Patel stated : “ Some of the individuals affected arrived in this country as children .
Many now have children of their own .
Britain is their home.
” There has been no public announcement but The Guardian has reported that a deal was quietly agreed between the Home Office and Jamaica not to use the controversial flight to remove people who came to the UK @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lynch wrote to her opposite number Kevin Foster on Saturday to raise “ urgent points ” , including whether an assessment has been made that none of the migrants are eligible for the Windrush scheme .
Lynch also asked whether the findings of the recent Equality and Human Rights Commission report looking into the Home Office had been taken into account .
The body found that the government had broken equalities law via its ‘ hostile environment ’ policies .
But a number of activists have accused the Labour leadership of not being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the five NEC members telling Starmer and Rayner “ neither of you have intervened , opposed or made any public statement ” on the issue .
The Labour left representatives on the ruling body have asked the leader and deputy leader to “ make a decisive and compassionate intervention ” to ensure that “ communities who need us the most do not feel let down by us in their time of need ” .
Commenting on the deportation flight , Labour ’ s Shadow Home Secretary Nick Thomas-Symonds said : “ We know @ @ @ @ @ @ @ handling of the Windrush scandal .
“ We have raised these issues as a matter of urgency with the Home Office and will be holding the government to account on this .
The Home Office must not repeat the injustices of the Windrush scandal.
“ Below is the full text of the letter from five Labour NEC members .
We know that the frontbench don ’ t normally take part in ‘ round robin letters ’ but we are alarmed that there has been no comment from you both in response to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The “ hostile environment ” is alive and kicking despite the fact that according to the EHRC , the Home Office broke the law with its pursuit of the policy .
Some of the individuals on the plane arrived in this country as children and many now have their own .
Britain is their home .
The Windrush scandal is inhumane and unjust .
Both of you have previously condemned it and you were right to do so .
Now as leaders of the Labour Party you are obligated to speak out in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Black communities .
We must listen to the experiences of migrant communities , many of whom feel unwanted and unwelcome in this country despite spending their lives here , always fearing that one day they may be ‘ sent back ’ because of the colour of their skin , facing everyday inequality , direct racism , as well as institutionalised and structural racism .
We , the Labour Party , have to assure them that Britain is their home and the Labour Party will fight for their basic human rights .
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year to pay homage to the Black Lives Matter movement .
Given the trauma these deportations have caused Black communities , we are shocked that neither of you have intervened , opposed or made any public statement to ease the pain and to show solidarity in response to the Conservative government ’ s planned deportations .
As members of the national executive committee , and many of us coming from Black , Asian and ethnic communities , we request that you make a decisive and compassionate intervention in this matter , so that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not feel let down by us in their time of need .

The five local party representatives on Labour’s ruling body who were recently elected with the support of Momentum have urged Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner to speak out over a deportation flight set to take place tomorrow.
Nadia Jama, Mish Rahman, Yasmine Dar, Gemma Bolton and ex-MP Laura Pidcock – who all stood on the ‘Grassroots Voice’ slate in the most recent national executive committee elections – have written to the Labour leader and deputy leader.
In their letter today, the NEC members said they were “alarmed” that Starmer and Rayner have not directly commented on the flight that is expected to see 50 people deported by the Home Office to Jamaica on December 2nd.
Those subject to the action have been described as “dangerous foreign criminals” by the government, which says “convicted murderers and rapists” are amongst them. But there are concerns that some of those facing removal grew up in the UK.
A letter organised by Clive Lewis and signed by more than 60 MPs called on the government to cancel the deportation. It was not signed by Starmer or any shadow cabinet members, which is standard practice for such letters.
Raising concerns over a repeat of the Windrush scandal, the letter from MPs to Home Secretary Priti Patel stated: “Some of the individuals affected arrived in this country as children. Many now have children of their own. Britain is their home.”
There has been no public announcement but The Guardian has reported that a deal was quietly agreed between the Home Office and Jamaica not to use the controversial flight to remove people who came to the UK as children.
Shadow immigration minister Holly Lynch wrote to her opposite number Kevin Foster on Saturday to raise “urgent points”, including whether an assessment has been made that none of the migrants are eligible for the Windrush scheme.
Lynch also asked whether the findings of the recent Equality and Human Rights Commission report looking into the Home Office had been taken into account. The body found that the government had broken equalities law via its ‘hostile environment’ policies.
But a number of activists have accused the Labour leadership of not being outspoken enough on the flight, with the five NEC members telling Starmer and Rayner “neither of you have intervened, opposed or made any public statement” on the issue.
The Labour left representatives on the ruling body have asked the leader and deputy leader to “make a decisive and compassionate intervention” to ensure that “communities who need us the most do not feel let down by us in their time of need”.
Commenting on the deportation flight, Labour’s Shadow Home Secretary Nick Thomas-Symonds said: “We know the government has behaved unlawfully in the handling of the Windrush scandal.
“We have raised these issues as a matter of urgency with the Home Office and will be holding the government to account on this. The Home Office must not repeat the injustices of the Windrush scandal.“
Below is the full text of the letter from five Labour NEC members.
Dear Keir and Angela,
We know that the frontbench don’t normally take part in ‘round robin letters’ but we are alarmed that there has been no comment from you both in response to the deportation flight scheduled for 2nd December.
The “hostile environment” is alive and kicking despite the fact that according to the EHRC, the Home Office broke the law with its pursuit of the policy. Some of the individuals on the plane arrived in this country as children and many now have their own. Britain is their home.
The Windrush scandal is inhumane and unjust. Both of you have previously condemned it and you were right to do so. Now as leaders of the Labour Party you are obligated to speak out in condemnation of this injustice and stand up for Black communities.
We must listen to the experiences of migrant communities, many of whom feel unwanted and unwelcome in this country despite spending their lives here, always fearing that one day they may be ‘sent back’ because of the colour of their skin, facing everyday inequality, direct racism, as well as institutionalised and structural racism.
We, the Labour Party, have to assure them that Britain is their home and the Labour Party will fight for their basic human rights.
You both took the knee earlier in the year to pay homage to the Black Lives Matter movement. Given the trauma these deportations have caused Black communities, we are shocked that neither of you have intervened, opposed or made any public statement to ease the pain and to show solidarity in response to the Conservative government’s planned deportations.
As members of the national executive committee, and many of us coming from Black, Asian and ethnic communities, we request that you make a decisive and compassionate intervention in this matter, so that communities who need us the most do not feel let down by us in their time of need.
In solidarity
Nadia Jama
Mish Rahman
Yasmine Dar
Gemma Bolton
Laura Pidcock


labourlist--2020-12-01--On World AIDS Day, we must reaffirm our commitment to ending inequalities

Nations around the world unite today in remembering the millions of lives tragically cut short due to the HIV/AIDS epidemic .
It is also a day to step up efforts in the fight against HIV .
Right from the start of the epidemic , the rallying call for action on HIV has been led by some of the most marginalised groups in society .
Gay men , Black trans women , migrants and people of colour , to name just a few , demanded the world woke up to this crisis when many governments chose to look the other way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was the Labour Party that stood in solidarity with many of these campaigns , including the condemnation of the pernicious Section 28 legislation that banned the teaching of LGBT+ issues in schools – something we would later overturn in government .
We ’ ve made big progress in the fight against HIV in the UK since the dark days of the epidemic .
New cases of HIV have fallen by over a third in the last five years , with diagnoses among gay and bisexual men nearly halved .
The extraordinary advances in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people living with HIV can now expect a normal life expectancy and even more remarkably can ’ t pass on the virus .
But that same progress in reducing transmissions isn ’ t being felt across all groups .
Diagnoses among women – who account for a third of all people living with HIV – only fell by 4 % in 2019 , compared to 10 % across the general population .
Almost half of new HIV diagnoses among heterosexuals in the UK are among Black African men and women – despite making @ @ @ @ @ @ @ British population .
These communities are less likely to access the anti-HIV drug , PrEP , which finally became routinely available on the NHS after the government shamelessly dithered and delayed .
The Office for National Statistics published figures in 2019 showing the gap between rich and poor people in healthy life expectancy is widening in England .
Despite this clear warning signal , consecutive Tory governments have chosen instead to slash money available for local councils to deliver frontline services such as sexual health clinics .
Since 2014 , more than £700m @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
That ’ s why I welcome today ’ s publication of the national HIV Commission ’ s report to the government on how to end new HIV transmissions by 2030 .
The Commission makes clear that without rooting out structural and societal inequalities , we risk missing this potentially once-in-a-generation opportunity .
These structural and societal inequalities are compounded for people living with HIV by pernicious stigma and blatant discrimination .
Because it is not science that risks holding us back in the fight against HIV – it is some of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the rising inequalities that this government has presided over .
The report provides us with a roadmap on what we need to do when Labour is in government .
But until then , we will hold the government ’ s feet to the fire .
Here ’ s what the government can do right now .
All groups who can benefit from PrEP need to know about it so they can access it .
Local services need proper funding so they can engage with communities at risk of HIV and roll out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ need to have the resources so they can deliver quality relationships and sex education that includes up-to-date information about HIV .
We are the party of social justice and equalities , and we have to be ambitious to become the first country in the world to end new cases of HIV .
Let ’ s get to work .

Nations around the world unite today in remembering the millions of lives tragically cut short due to the HIV/AIDS epidemic. It is also a day to step up efforts in the fight against HIV.
Right from the start of the epidemic, the rallying call for action on HIV has been led by some of the most marginalised groups in society. Gay men, Black trans women, migrants and people of colour, to name just a few, demanded the world woke up to this crisis when many governments chose to look the other way.
I’m proud that it was the Labour Party that stood in solidarity with many of these campaigns, including the condemnation of the pernicious Section 28 legislation that banned the teaching of LGBT+ issues in schools – something we would later overturn in government.
We’ve made big progress in the fight against HIV in the UK since the dark days of the epidemic. New cases of HIV have fallen by over a third in the last five years, with diagnoses among gay and bisexual men nearly halved. The extraordinary advances in HIV treatment now mean the majority of people living with HIV can now expect a normal life expectancy and even more remarkably can’t pass on the virus.
But that same progress in reducing transmissions isn’t being felt across all groups. Diagnoses among women – who account for a third of all people living with HIV – only fell by 4% in 2019, compared to 10% across the general population. Almost half of new HIV diagnoses among heterosexuals in the UK are among Black African men and women – despite making up less than 2% of the British population. These communities are less likely to access the anti-HIV drug, PrEP, which finally became routinely available on the NHS after the government shamelessly dithered and delayed.
The Office for National Statistics published figures in 2019 showing the gap between rich and poor people in healthy life expectancy is widening in England. Despite this clear warning signal, consecutive Tory governments have chosen instead to slash money available for local councils to deliver frontline services such as sexual health clinics. Since 2014, more than £700m has been stripped from public health budgets.
That’s why I welcome today’s publication of the national HIV Commission’s report to the government on how to end new HIV transmissions by 2030. The Commission makes clear that without rooting out structural and societal inequalities, we risk missing this potentially once-in-a-generation opportunity. These structural and societal inequalities are compounded for people living with HIV by pernicious stigma and blatant discrimination.
Because it is not science that risks holding us back in the fight against HIV – it is some of the most marginalised groups being left behind due to the rising inequalities that this government has presided over. The report provides us with a roadmap on what we need to do when Labour is in government. But until then, we will hold the government’s feet to the fire. Here’s what the government can do right now.
All groups who can benefit from PrEP need to know about it so they can access it. Local services need proper funding so they can engage with communities at risk of HIV and roll out routine HIV testing. And all schools need to have the resources so they can deliver quality relationships and sex education that includes up-to-date information about HIV.
We are the party of social justice and equalities, and we have to be ambitious to become the first country in the world to end new cases of HIV. Let’s get to work.


labourlist--2020-12-01--Starmer on Covid: “The business and economic support just doesn’t stack up”

Below is the full text of Keir Starmer ’ s speech on the new Covid-19 restrictions in England , delivered in the House of Commons this afternoon ahead of a key vote .
Can I start by welcoming the fall in infection numbers , the number of people being admitted to hospital , and crucially that the R rate is now below 1 .
Before this lockdown , the infection rate was doubling every two weeks , the R-number was above 1 in every part of England , and the number of people in hospital was going up sharply across @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus had been allowed to get out of control .
And if anyone doubts a lockdown was necessary – I would point out : since 2nd November – when this lockdown started , 10,711 people have tragically died in England within 28 days of testing positive for Covid-19 .
In the last week , there were an average of 460 deaths per day .
Those are appalling numbers .
Every one a tragedy .
So we can argue about why this lockdown didn ’ t happen sooner .
When the infection rate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ several weeks ago .
But it ’ s clear that the lockdown was necessary and has helped to reduce infections .
I also want to welcome further progress on vaccines .
I have nothing but admiration for our scientists .
And for the amazing progress that ’ s been made .
This will go down as one of the great moments for science in this country .
I saw this for myself a couple of weeks ago at Oxford University .
A vaccine may now be in sight , and we must do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make sure that it ’ s rolled out quickly , fairly and safely .
But Mr Speaker , the questions before the House today are these .
How can we save as many lives and livelihoods as possible until we reach the light at the end of the tunnel ?
And are the measures the PM announced today going to : control the virus ; and provide the right support for the communities worst affected by these restrictions ?
Labour has supported the government in two national lockdowns .
And I recognise the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recognise that the tiers have been toughened – as it was obvious to everyone that the previous tiers were a one-way street .
But I ’ m far from convinced by what the PM said today .
In particular , the economic package is nowhere near sufficient to support the communities worst affected .
And who have been suffering now for many months .
I also fear that without the right health measures in place , in particular a working trace and isolate system , there are real risks that this plan is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I want to set out this out in more detail .
The first point I want to make is this : we ’ ve been here before .
On 10th June the PM first told of us his “ whack a mole ” strategy to control local infections .
We were told these would be so effective they would only last a few days or weeks .
Far from reality .
Leicester , for example , has had 154 days of restrictions .
By the time these regulations run out on 2nd @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So that didn ’ t work .
Then on 22 September – with infections rising in 19 of the 20 areas then under restrictions , the PM announced new restrictions including the rule of 6 , which the PM told the House would : “ curb the number of daily infections and reduce the reproduction rate to 1 ” .
That didn ’ t work .
Two weeks later , 12 October , with the precise opposite happening the PM introduced a three-tier system .
Again , we were assured this would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that : “ would deliver the reduction in the R rate , locally and regionally , that we need ” .
That didn ’ t work .
Fourth attempt : 19 days later : in a hurried press conference , the PM announced that the tiered system had failed , the virus was out of control and a national lockdown was now “ unavoidable ” .
The reason this all matters is that there is a pattern here : the PM has a record of over-promising , and under-delivering .
Short-term decisions are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reality of this virus .
So a new plan is conjured up a few weeks later , and with even bigger promises that never materialise .
After eight months of this , the PM should not be surprised that we – and many of the British people – are less than convinced this time around .
The second point I want to make is this : the public health risk of the PM ’ s approach is significant .
The prevalence of the virus remains high .
The R-rate is only just below @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at its most deadly during the cold winter months .
And that the NHS of course at that point will be under its greatest strain .
So if we are to keep R below 1 during the winter – and not waste the progress made in the last four weeks , we have to proceed with precision and caution .
But instead of levelling with the British public , the PM has spent the weekend telling his backbenchers that the plan is all about : “ loosening restrictions across the country ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ local areas have the prospect of dropping from one Tier to another .
In my view , that ’ s highly unlikely .
It ’ s obvious that the new Tier One may slow but won ’ t prevent a rise in infections .
And it ’ s far from certain that the new Tier Two can hold the rate of infection .
I hope it does – but it depends on other factors all falling into place at the same time .
And – although like everyone else we want the chance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – I ’ m not convinced that the government has a plan in place to prevent a spike in infections over the New Year .
I recognise this is difficult , and that any system would have risk .
But that brings me to my third point : the risk we face today is so much higher , because the PM has failed to fix the major problems with the now £22bn Track and Trace system .
Before the PM simply brushes this point aside – again – let me remind the House @ @ @ @ @ @ @ SAGE advised a circuit break back in September was because Track and Trace was only having “ a marginal impact on transmission ” .
So if we ’ re to control the virus , this really matters .
And the PM having his head in the sand isn ’ t helping .
I know the PM has made much of the advances in testing .
I recognise that and I hope it helps tackle this virus .
But as the Chief Scientific Officer said : “ testing is important , but of course @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well ” .
The PM knows only a fraction of people are able to self-isolate when asked to do so .
But he still hasn ’ t addressed the reasons for this .
Including the huge gaps in support : I know PM has announced a change for those notified by the app – a ridiculous omission in the first place .
But it doesn ’ t affect basic eligibility .
Only one in eight workers qualify for the one-off £500 self-isolation support .
Anyone not receiving that has to rely on statutory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of £13 a day .
That ’ s a huge problem .
People want to do the right thing .
But for many , there ’ s a real fear that self-isolation means a huge loss of income that they simply can ’ t afford .
And that ’ s not the end of the problems with track and trace .
On tracing , the latest figures show : 137,000 close contacts missed by the system in one week .
That is the highest weekly figure yet .
And it means that over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the system in the last month .
That ’ s not just a statistic , it means that last month alone , there were half a million people who should have been self-isolating but instead were moving around with their friends , their families and their communities .
That ’ s a huge gap in our defences .
I raise this every week .
Every week the PM pretends it ’ s getting better , but it never does .
And the PM now seems almost to have given up on it – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ testing can solve this on its own .
Again , blind optimism – not a plan .
My fourth point is about the level of economic support provided .
Have to say to the PM : It ’ s hard to overstate the level of anger about this – particularly in communities that have been in restrictions for months on end .
Yesterday I was on a virtual visit to the North West talking to local businesses .
Their emotions ranged from deep disappointment at the government , to raw anger that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ listening .
And don ’ t get the impact that months of endless restrictions have had on local communities and on people ’ s lives .
In March , the Chancellor vowed to do “ whatever it takes ” to support households and businesses .
But there ’ s now been six economic plans in nine months .
And the level of support around this latest package is still insufficient .
First , it doesn ’ t fairly reflect the difficulties faced by businesses across the country .
Three aspects to this : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Grant .
That gives a flat figure to a local area regardless of how long it ’ s been in restrictions .
So , Greater Manchester , which will be on its 40th day of severe restrictions when it enters Tier 3 tomorrow , has received the same one-off support as the Isle of Wight , which went into restrictions far later and will emerge tomorrow into Tier 1 .
That can ’ t be fair .
The second aspect is that this grant doesn ’ t take account of the number of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So our great cities are being asked to spread the same sum far more thinly .
That ’ s also that ’ s clearly unfair .
The third aspect : even allowing for today ’ s announcement on pubs – which I think is the definition of ‘ small beer .
Many businesses are now receiving less support than they did during the first wave .
That ’ s a huge strain for many businesses – particularly after so long under restrictions , and it makes no economic sense for the government @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wall .
The second major point on economic support is that millions of self-employed people remain unfairly excluded from government support schemes .
Again , there ’ s nothing in this latest package to address this .
I ’ ve raised this many times with the PM – every time he chooses to talk about those he is helping and ignore the millions he isn ’ t .
Reality : the government have had eight months to fix this and they ’ ve failed .
The third point about the economic package is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around furlough and rule out changing the scheme again in January .
The Chancellor ’ s made this this mistake before .
That uncertainty caused real economic damage .
He can ’ t make the same mistake again .
So , taken together , the business and economic support just doesn ’ t stack up .
But I also want to make a wider point on the economic damage this pandemic – and this government – have done to our economy .
Last week ’ s Autumn Statement laid bare the huge and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I know there are those who say that is a reason to end restrictions .
But the reality is – you can ’ t protect the economy if you lose control of the virus .
That just leads to more uncertainty .
More restrictions .
And more long-term damage to the economy .
And it ’ s this failure to get control of the virus , or to take a long-term approach to shielding our economy that ’ s left the UK with the worst recession in the G7 and the highest death @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reason for scepticism about the government ’ s approach is this : messaging and priorities .
The last 48 hours have been a summary of the mistakes the government has made in this crisis .
The PM is fatally split between appeasing his backbenchers and following the science .
It ’ s why he ends up pleasing nobody .
I think the PM knows that tough restrictions are now needed , but he pretends that the restrictions might not be in place for long .
And that it ’ s quite possible that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in two weeks ’ time .
But the reality is that tough restrictions will be needed until a vaccine is rolled out .
And that may be months away .
So the PM will doubtless be back in a couple of weeks with another “ plan ” .
But the PM doesn ’ t feel able to make that case today , or to provide the certainty and consistency we need .
So instead we ’ ve had 48 hours of concessions , letters and promises to his MPs – not clear and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s sadly symptomatic of the last eight months .
Mr Speaker , coronavirus remains a serious threat to the public ’ s health , to our economy and to our way of life .
We recognise the need for continued restrictions .
It would not be in the national interest to vote against these restrictions today .
So we will allow the regulations to pass .
But this is another wasted opportunity .
The PM could have spent the last four weeks fixing track and trace , putting in place the support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economic package our great towns and cities need to protect jobs and people ’ s income , and restoring public confidence .
Instead , we see more short-termism .
A PM stuck between his backbenchers and the national interest .
And I fear that just won ’ t work .

Below is the full text of Keir Starmer’s speech on the new Covid-19 restrictions in England, delivered in the House of Commons this afternoon ahead of a key vote.
Can I start by welcoming the fall in infection numbers, the number of people being admitted to hospital, and crucially that the R rate is now below 1. Before this lockdown, the infection rate was doubling every two weeks, the R-number was above 1 in every part of England, and the number of people in hospital was going up sharply across the country. In other words, the virus had been allowed to get out of control.
And if anyone doubts a lockdown was necessary – I would point out: since 2nd November – when this lockdown started, 10,711 people have tragically died in England within 28 days of testing positive for Covid-19. In the last week, there were an average of 460 deaths per day. Those are appalling numbers. Every one a tragedy.
So we can argue about why this lockdown didn’t happen sooner. When the infection rate was lower. As we argued for several weeks ago. But it’s clear that the lockdown was necessary and has helped to reduce infections.
I also want to welcome further progress on vaccines. I have nothing but admiration for our scientists. And for the amazing progress that’s been made. This will go down as one of the great moments for science in this country. I saw this for myself a couple of weeks ago at Oxford University.
A vaccine may now be in sight, and we must do everything we can to encourage take-up and make sure that it’s rolled out quickly, fairly and safely. But Mr Speaker, the questions before the House today are these. How can we save as many lives and livelihoods as possible until we reach the light at the end of the tunnel? And are the measures the PM announced today going to: control the virus; and provide the right support for the communities worst affected by these restrictions?
Labour has supported the government in two national lockdowns. And I recognise the need for continuing restrictions. I also recognise that the tiers have been toughened – as it was obvious to everyone that the previous tiers were a one-way street. But I’m far from convinced by what the PM said today.
In particular, the economic package is nowhere near sufficient to support the communities worst affected. And who have been suffering now for many months. I also fear that without the right health measures in place, in particular a working trace and isolate system, there are real risks that this plan is incapable of controlling the virus this winter.
I want to set out this out in more detail. The first point I want to make is this: we’ve been here before. On 10th June the PM first told of us his “whack a mole” strategy to control local infections. We were told these would be so effective they would only last a few days or weeks. Far from reality. Leicester, for example, has had 154 days of restrictions. By the time these regulations run out on 2nd Feb – it will be 217 days. So that didn’t work.
Then on 22 September – with infections rising in 19 of the 20 areas then under restrictions, the PM announced new restrictions including the rule of 6, which the PM told the House would: “curb the number of daily infections and reduce the reproduction rate to 1”. That didn’t work.
Two weeks later, 12 October, with the precise opposite happening the PM introduced a three-tier system. Again, we were assured this would work. The PM told the House that: “would deliver the reduction in the R rate, locally and regionally, that we need”. That didn’t work.
Fourth attempt: 19 days later: in a hurried press conference, the PM announced that the tiered system had failed, the virus was out of control and a national lockdown was now “unavoidable”.
The reason this all matters is that there is a pattern here: the PM has a record of over-promising, and under-delivering. Short-term decisions are taken that then bump into the harsh reality of this virus. So a new plan is conjured up a few weeks later, and with even bigger promises that never materialise. After eight months of this, the PM should not be surprised that we – and many of the British people – are less than convinced this time around.
The second point I want to make is this: the public health risk of the PM’s approach is significant. The prevalence of the virus remains high. The R-rate is only just below one. We know the virus is at its most deadly during the cold winter months. And that the NHS of course at that point will be under its greatest strain.
So if we are to keep R below 1 during the winter – and not waste the progress made in the last four weeks, we have to proceed with precision and caution. But instead of levelling with the British public, the PM has spent the weekend telling his backbenchers that the plan is all about: “loosening restrictions across the country” and fuelling a promise that within days, local areas have the prospect of dropping from one Tier to another. In my view, that’s highly unlikely.
It’s obvious that the new Tier One may slow but won’t prevent a rise in infections. And it’s far from certain that the new Tier Two can hold the rate of infection. I hope it does – but it depends on other factors all falling into place at the same time. And – although like everyone else we want the chance to see our loved ones at Christmas – I’m not convinced that the government has a plan in place to prevent a spike in infections over the New Year.
I recognise this is difficult, and that any system would have risk. But that brings me to my third point: the risk we face today is so much higher, because the PM has failed to fix the major problems with the now £22bn Track and Trace system.
Before the PM simply brushes this point aside – again – let me remind the House that one of the major reasons that SAGE advised a circuit break back in September was because Track and Trace was only having “a marginal impact on transmission”. So if we’re to control the virus, this really matters. And the PM having his head in the sand isn’t helping.
I know the PM has made much of the advances in testing. I recognise that and I hope it helps tackle this virus. But as the Chief Scientific Officer said: “testing is important, but of course it only matters if people isolate as well”.
The PM knows only a fraction of people are able to self-isolate when asked to do so. But he still hasn’t addressed the reasons for this. Including the huge gaps in support: I know PM has announced a change for those notified by the app – a ridiculous omission in the first place. But it doesn’t affect basic eligibility.
Only one in eight workers qualify for the one-off £500 self-isolation support. Anyone not receiving that has to rely on statutory sick pay, which is the equivalent of £13 a day. That’s a huge problem. People want to do the right thing. But for many, there’s a real fear that self-isolation means a huge loss of income that they simply can’t afford.
And that’s not the end of the problems with track and trace. On tracing, the latest figures show: 137,000 close contacts missed by the system in one week. That is the highest weekly figure yet. And it means that over 500,000 close contacts have been missed by the system in the last month.
That’s not just a statistic, it means that last month alone, there were half a million people who should have been self-isolating but instead were moving around with their friends, their families and their communities. That’s a huge gap in our defences. I raise this every week. Every week the PM pretends it’s getting better, but it never does. And the PM now seems almost to have given up on it – and to be hoping instead that mass testing can solve this on its own. Again, blind optimism – not a plan.
My fourth point is about the level of economic support provided. Have to say to the PM: It’s hard to overstate the level of anger about this – particularly in communities that have been in restrictions for months on end.
Yesterday I was on a virtual visit to the North West talking to local businesses. Their emotions ranged from deep disappointment at the government, to raw anger that the PM and Chancellor just aren’t listening. And don’t get the impact that months of endless restrictions have had on local communities and on people’s lives.
In March, the Chancellor vowed to do “whatever it takes” to support households and businesses. But there’s now been six economic plans in nine months. And the level of support around this latest package is still insufficient.
First, it doesn’t fairly reflect the difficulties faced by businesses across the country. Three aspects to this: Let me start with the Additional Restrictions Grant. That gives a flat figure to a local area regardless of how long it’s been in restrictions. So, Greater Manchester, which will be on its 40th day of severe restrictions when it enters Tier 3 tomorrow, has received the same one-off support as the Isle of Wight, which went into restrictions far later and will emerge tomorrow into Tier 1. That can’t be fair.
The second aspect is that this grant doesn’t take account of the number of business that need support in each area. So our great cities are being asked to spread the same sum far more thinly. That’s also that’s clearly unfair.
The third aspect: even allowing for today’s announcement on pubs – which I think is the definition of ‘small beer. Many businesses are now receiving less support than they did during the first wave. That’s a huge strain for many businesses – particularly after so long under restrictions, and it makes no economic sense for the government to allow them to go to the wall.
The second major point on economic support is that millions of self-employed people remain unfairly excluded from government support schemes. Again, there’s nothing in this latest package to address this.
I’ve raised this many times with the PM – every time he chooses to talk about those he is helping and ignore the millions he isn’t. Reality: the government have had eight months to fix this and they’ve failed.
The third point about the economic package is that the government must remove the uncertainty around furlough and rule out changing the scheme again in January. The Chancellor’s made this this mistake before. That uncertainty caused real economic damage. He can’t make the same mistake again.
So, taken together, the business and economic support just doesn’t stack up. But I also want to make a wider point on the economic damage this pandemic – and this government – have done to our economy. Last week’s Autumn Statement laid bare the huge and worsening economic cost of this crisis.
I know there are those who say that is a reason to end restrictions. But the reality is – you can’t protect the economy if you lose control of the virus. That just leads to more uncertainty. More restrictions. And more long-term damage to the economy. And it’s this failure to get control of the virus, or to take a long-term approach to shielding our economy that’s left the UK with the worst recession in the G7 and the highest death total in Europe.
Fifth and final reason for scepticism about the government’s approach is this: messaging and priorities. The last 48 hours have been a summary of the mistakes the government has made in this crisis. The PM is fatally split between appeasing his backbenchers and following the science. It’s why he ends up pleasing nobody.
I think the PM knows that tough restrictions are now needed, but he pretends that the restrictions might not be in place for long. And that it’s quite possible that everyone can be in a lower tier in two weeks’ time. But the reality is that tough restrictions will be needed until a vaccine is rolled out. And that may be months away.
So the PM will doubtless be back in a couple of weeks with another “plan”. But the PM doesn’t feel able to make that case today, or to provide the certainty and consistency we need. So instead we’ve had 48 hours of concessions, letters and promises to his MPs – not clear and reliable messaging to the public. It’s sadly symptomatic of the last eight months.
Mr Speaker, coronavirus remains a serious threat to the public’s health, to our economy and to our way of life. We recognise the need for continued restrictions. It would not be in the national interest to vote against these restrictions today. So we will allow the regulations to pass. But this is another wasted opportunity.
The PM could have spent the last four weeks fixing track and trace, putting in place the support people need to isolate, building the economic package our great towns and cities need to protect jobs and people’s income, and restoring public confidence. Instead, we see more short-termism. A PM stuck between his backbenchers and the national interest. And I fear that just won’t work.


labourlist--2020-12-01--Labour’s Covid rebels are not breaking the whip for the same reasons

Labour MPs are being instructed by the leadership to abstain on the House of Commons vote tonight that will see parliamentarians express their views on the new coronavirus restrictions being brought in by the Prime Minister .
Following the lockdown in England , the government is planning a return to the three-tier system .
It is expected that these fresh regulations will pass tonight , albeit with a sizeable Tory rebellion , and kick in tomorrow .
But a number of Labour MPs are unhappy with the whip to abstain .
They agree with Labour ’ s general objections to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increase in statutory sick pay , insufficient support for businesses affected , workers excluded entirely from aid .
Some believe the leadership could have pushed harder for concessions from the government on these key battlegrounds .
These are typically not the issues that are persuading MPs to defy the whip , however .
In many cases , the concerns pushing Labour MPs to consider voting against the rules tonight relate to the allocation of tiers .
This brings them in line with the protests of Conservative MPs .
Labour frontbencher Tan Dhesi , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Johnson this afternoon : “ Why does the Prime Minister hate Slough ?
” .
Slough has been singled out , separated from the rest of Berkshire , to be put in Tier 3 – a “ dot of red in a sea of orange ” .
Dhesi has pointed out that there are areas in neighbouring London and Essex with higher Covid transmission rates .
The PM replied : “ I love Slough , but I understand what he ’ s saying.
” Johnson has promised to “ look at how we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reality on the ground ” in future reviews of the tiers .
While Dhesi ’ s constituency is in the South East , many of the Labour MPs most outspoken against the new rules represent seats in the North .
Shadow cabinet member Cat Smith has highlighted reports that the economy of London was taken into consideration when placing the capital in Tier 2 , yet the economy in the North of England was not .
Her area , she says , has infection rates far lower than many London boroughs and places @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of ‘ levelling up ’ and regional inequality .
These opposition frontbenchers are thought to have been crucial in the decision to whip Labour MPs to abstain rather than vote in favour .
( The leadership had already ruled out voting against , as Labour supports restrictions in principle and does not want the lockdown to give way to no rules . )
A number of backbenchers , on the other hand , will find it difficult to defy the whip but not impossible .
Grahame Morris , for example , will vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government could have won his backing “ with a competent and comprehensive support package ” .
Andrew Gwynne also plans to vote against the new tiers tonight .
The MP for Denton and Reddish represents a Greater Manchester seat that has been living under tougher restrictions since July , which means his constituents have not been able to mix indoors for over four months .
Like mayor Andy Burnham , he is concerned about the disproportionate impact on the hospitality sector .
Gwynne says he “ will never understand the logic ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ centres but not families to “ sit responsibly at a table for a meal and a drink in a bar or restaurant ” .
Richard Burgon , a key figure on the Labour left , has announced that he will be voting against the government proposals on the basis that the approach “ risks a deadly third wave ” and he wants the lockdown extended .
The Leeds MP said : “ It would be better to use the next few weeks until Christmas to extend the lockdown , with proper levels of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not only save lives but make it more likely that we could avoid further lockdowns in the new year ” .
Bell Ribeiro-Addy similarly regards the new tier system to be “ inadequate ” , meaning not tough enough .
Emma Lewell-Buck has also revealed her intention to vote against the measures today , but for very different reasons .
The South Shields MP has urged the government to adopt an approach that will allow us to “ live with the virus in the safest way possible ” and “ not trash the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ John Spellar ’ s argument , in favour of risk management over risk avoidance , which is the opposite of the suggestions being put forward by Labour left MPs such as Burgon and Jon Trickett , who has written in LabourList that there should be “ uniform restrictions ” .
Derek Twigg will also vote against the restrictions based on the need to strike a “ balance ” .
Around 20 Labour MPs are expected to oppose the government measures tonight – the list of names may look a little like the 23 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ curfew in October – but they are not doing so on the same grounds .
Some want more economic support , while agreeing with the approach when it comes to the science , much like the leadership .
Many of these critics are focused on regional inequality .
Others , however , fundamentally oppose the government ’ s approach – whether from a lockdown-sceptic perspective or the opposite , in favour of a ‘ zero Covid ’ strategy .
While the Prime Minister is “ fatally split between appeasing his backbenchers and following @ @ @ @ @ @ @ put it today , the Labour leader faces a more complicated picture , with a number of Labour rebels who will not be breaking ranks for the same reasons .

Labour MPs are being instructed by the leadership to abstain on the House of Commons vote tonight that will see parliamentarians express their views on the new coronavirus restrictions being brought in by the Prime Minister. Following the lockdown in England, the government is planning a return to the three-tier system. It is expected that these fresh regulations will pass tonight, albeit with a sizeable Tory rebellion, and kick in tomorrow.
But a number of Labour MPs are unhappy with the whip to abstain. They agree with Labour’s general objections to the Tory approach to Covid-19: no increase in statutory sick pay, insufficient support for businesses affected, workers excluded entirely from aid. Some believe the leadership could have pushed harder for concessions from the government on these key battlegrounds. These are typically not the issues that are persuading MPs to defy the whip, however.
In many cases, the concerns pushing Labour MPs to consider voting against the rules tonight relate to the allocation of tiers. This brings them in line with the protests of Conservative MPs. Labour frontbencher Tan Dhesi, who represents Slough, simply asked Boris Johnson this afternoon: “Why does the Prime Minister hate Slough?”.
Slough has been singled out, separated from the rest of Berkshire, to be put in Tier 3 – a “dot of red in a sea of orange”. Dhesi has pointed out that there are areas in neighbouring London and Essex with higher Covid transmission rates. The PM replied: “I love Slough, but I understand what he’s saying.” Johnson has promised to “look at how we can reflect as closely as possible the reality on the ground” in future reviews of the tiers.
While Dhesi’s constituency is in the South East, many of the Labour MPs most outspoken against the new rules represent seats in the North. Shadow cabinet member Cat Smith has highlighted reports that the economy of London was taken into consideration when placing the capital in Tier 2, yet the economy in the North of England was not. Her area, she says, has infection rates far lower than many London boroughs and places like Cumbria. This is a question of ‘levelling up’ and regional inequality.
These opposition frontbenchers are thought to have been crucial in the decision to whip Labour MPs to abstain rather than vote in favour. (The leadership had already ruled out voting against, as Labour supports restrictions in principle and does not want the lockdown to give way to no rules.) A number of backbenchers, on the other hand, will find it difficult to defy the whip but not impossible. Grahame Morris, for example, will vote against the rules but has said that the government could have won his backing “with a competent and comprehensive support package”.
Andrew Gwynne also plans to vote against the new tiers tonight. The MP for Denton and Reddish represents a Greater Manchester seat that has been living under tougher restrictions since July, which means his constituents have not been able to mix indoors for over four months. Like mayor Andy Burnham, he is concerned about the disproportionate impact on the hospitality sector. Gwynne says he “will never understand the logic” of a system that allows busy shopping centres but not families to “sit responsibly at a table for a meal and a drink in a bar or restaurant”.
Richard Burgon, a key figure on the Labour left, has announced that he will be voting against the government proposals on the basis that the approach “risks a deadly third wave” and he wants the lockdown extended. The Leeds MP said: “It would be better to use the next few weeks until Christmas to extend the lockdown, with proper levels of financial support and sick pay… This would not only save lives but make it more likely that we could avoid further lockdowns in the new year”. Bell Ribeiro-Addy similarly regards the new tier system to be “inadequate”, meaning not tough enough.
Emma Lewell-Buck has also revealed her intention to vote against the measures today, but for very different reasons. The South Shields MP has urged the government to adopt an approach that will allow us to “live with the virus in the safest way possible” and “not trash the economy”. This sounds more like John Spellar’s argument, in favour of risk management over risk avoidance, which is the opposite of the suggestions being put forward by Labour left MPs such as Burgon and Jon Trickett, who has written in LabourList that there should be “uniform restrictions”. Derek Twigg will also vote against the restrictions based on the need to strike a “balance”.
Around 20 Labour MPs are expected to oppose the government measures tonight – the list of names may look a little like the 23 rebels who voted against the 10pm hospitality curfew in October – but they are not doing so on the same grounds. Some want more economic support, while agreeing with the approach when it comes to the science, much like the leadership. Many of these critics are focused on regional inequality. Others, however, fundamentally oppose the government’s approach – whether from a lockdown-sceptic perspective or the opposite, in favour of a ‘zero Covid’ strategy. While the Prime Minister is “fatally split between appeasing his backbenchers and following the science”, as Keir Starmer put it today, the Labour leader faces a more complicated picture, with a number of Labour rebels who will not be breaking ranks for the same reasons.


labourlist--2020-12-01--Powell calls deportation of criminals “grey area” but backs call to cancel flight

Lucy Powell has described the deportation of migrants with criminal records as a “ very grey area ” but backed calls from MPs and peers for the government to cancel the flight scheduled to deport up to 50 people this week .
Discussing the flight this morning on Times Radio , the shadow business minister told listeners that she did not disagree with the principle of deporting criminals but accused the government of taking a “ brutal ” approach .
Asked if she supports the call to stop the flight , she said : “ I do… On the face @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thinking well these are serious criminals , we need to deport them and send them back home .
And I don ’ t disagree with that in general terms .
“ But I think where we ’ ve got into real difficulties with this in the past… is that there is a very grey area about whether , especially when it comes to those from the kind of Windrush community and Windrush generation and their descendants , it ’ s a very grey area whether someone is in fact a British citizen or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ m afraid , just have a very brutal approach to this .
And that ’ s what led to the Windrush scandal in the first place.
” The comments from Powell come after a letter , coordinated by Labour backbencher Clive Lewis and signed by more than 60 MPs , called on the government to cancel the deportation .
It was not signed by Keir Starmer .
The letter reminded Priti Patel that the Tories have committed to “ righting the wrongs ” of Windrush and argued : “ Planning a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Home Office has so far failed to learn any lessons.
” Put to Powell this morning that only one of the deportees is thought to have a Windrush generation family member , and that these are “ just criminals ” , the shadow minister said : “ Well , as I say , it ’ s not as straightforward as that .
“ I ’ ve actually got a constituent due to be on that flight myself , and it isn ’ t that straightforward .
This is where we got into this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ve had other constituents being earmarked for deportation , too .
“ I think the issue is are they our criminals or are they somebody else ’ s criminals ?
And I think there is a grey area there , which the government I ’ m afraid gets wrong .
Of course , the easy thing to say is we ’ ll just ship them off… “ But if you ’ ve lived and worked , legally been allowed in this country for decades and decades and you then fall foul of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that somebody else ’ s and how do you deal with that ?
That ’ s the issue and that is a grey area .
“ And many of those on the plane – and we don ’ t know , we haven ’ t got all the details – you know , will be connected with the Windrush and that ’ s why the government in the past has had to stop some of these deportations… “ They need to be more transparent about it and give more confidence to people @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but unfortunately all that confidence is gone because of the Windrush scandal and the way they got that so terribly wrong.
” Labour MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy tabled an urgent question in parliament regarding the flight scheduled for Wednesday this week .
She told MPs : “ No-one opposing this flight condones any of the crimes that these individuals have been found guilty of .
“ It is the process of mass deportation that is fundamentally wrong , and it is notorious for bundling people out of the country without due process… “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is above the law , not even the government , and that no one is beneath adequate defence and proper legal representation , not even those born in other countries.
” The Streatham MP asked the minister whether the deportees had received adequate legal advice and representation , and whether any had been allowed to appeal the decision to remove them from the country .
She highlighted the recent Equality and Human Rights Commission report on Home Office policies , which found that the department had unlawfully ignored warnings that the hostile environment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Home Office has got it wrong again and again on immigration .
Will it therefore think again , halt this deportation flight and finally end the illegal hostile environment ?
” The minister rejected calls to cancel the flight .

Lucy Powell has described the deportation of migrants with criminal records as a “very grey area” but backed calls from MPs and peers for the government to cancel the flight scheduled to deport up to 50 people this week.
Discussing the flight this morning on Times Radio, the shadow business minister told listeners that she did not disagree with the principle of deporting criminals but accused the government of taking a “brutal” approach.
Asked if she supports the call to stop the flight, she said: “I do… On the face of it, lots of people are thinking well these are serious criminals, we need to deport them and send them back home. And I don’t disagree with that in general terms.
“But I think where we’ve got into real difficulties with this in the past… is that there is a very grey area about whether, especially when it comes to those from the kind of Windrush community and Windrush generation and their descendants, it’s a very grey area whether someone is in fact a British citizen or not…
“The government seem to, I’m afraid, just have a very brutal approach to this. And that’s what led to the Windrush scandal in the first place.”
LabourList understands that Powell wrote to the immigration minister and successfully campaigned for one of those scheduled to be on the flight not to be included in the deportation action.
The comments from Powell come after a letter, coordinated by Labour backbencher Clive Lewis and signed by more than 60 MPs, called on the government to cancel the deportation. It was not signed by Keir Starmer.
The letter reminded Priti Patel that the Tories have committed to “righting the wrongs” of Windrush and argued: “Planning a pre-Christmas mass deportation flight demonstrates that the Home Office has so far failed to learn any lessons.”
Put to Powell this morning that only one of the deportees is thought to have a Windrush generation family member, and that these are “just criminals”, the shadow minister said: “Well, as I say, it’s not as straightforward as that.
“I’ve actually got a constituent due to be on that flight myself, and it isn’t that straightforward. This is where we got into this hot water before. And I’ve had other constituents being earmarked for deportation, too.
“I think the issue is are they our criminals or are they somebody else’s criminals? And I think there is a grey area there, which the government I’m afraid gets wrong. Of course, the easy thing to say is we’ll just ship them off…
“But if you’ve lived and worked, legally been allowed in this country for decades and decades and you then fall foul of the law, is that our issue or is that somebody else’s and how do you deal with that? That’s the issue, and that is a grey area.
“And many of those on the plane – and we don’t know, we haven’t got all the details – you know, will be connected with the Windrush and that’s why the government in the past has had to stop some of these deportations…
“They need to be more transparent about it and give more confidence to people that they’ve got this right, but unfortunately all that confidence is gone because of the Windrush scandal and the way they got that so terribly wrong.”
Labour MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy tabled an urgent question in parliament regarding the flight scheduled for Wednesday this week. She told MPs: “No-one opposing this flight condones any of the crimes that these individuals have been found guilty of.
“It is the process of mass deportation that is fundamentally wrong, and it is notorious for bundling people out of the country without due process…
“I hope the minister agrees that no-one is above the law, not even the government, and that no one is beneath adequate defence and proper legal representation, not even those born in other countries.”
The Streatham MP asked the minister whether the deportees had received adequate legal advice and representation, and whether any had been allowed to appeal the decision to remove them from the country.
She highlighted the recent Equality and Human Rights Commission report on Home Office policies, which found that the department had unlawfully ignored warnings that the hostile environment was discriminatory.
Ribeiro-Addy added: “The Home Office has got it wrong again and again on immigration. Will it therefore think again, halt this deportation flight and finally end the illegal hostile environment?” The minister rejected calls to cancel the flight.


labourlist--2020-12-02--PMQs: First come, first served? Starmer drills down on detail of vaccine roll out

Keir Starmer schooled Boris Johnson on the proper way to abstain this afternoon .
After the Prime Minister chastised the Labour leader for abstaining in the vote on the new tier system , Starmer highlighted Johnson ducking the division on Heathrow expansion – which he had previously vowed to do all he could to stop – with a timely trip in 2018 .
“ When I abstain , ” he said .
“ I come to the House and explain .
When the Prime Minister abstains , he runs away to Afghanistan and gives the taxpayer a £20,000 bill.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the PM on what support the government will provide to those affected by the collapse of Arcadia and Debenhams , to which Johnson had no answer .
Nevertheless , the PM managed to land a blow at the end on Labour ’ s abstention on Tuesday evening : “ Captain Hindsight is rising rapidly up the ranks and has become General Indecision.
” But the real focus of the day was the vaccine , of course .
The hopeful news that the UK has become the first country in the world to approve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week .
The Labour leader stressed the issues on everyone ’ s mind : who gets it first ?
How will it be rolled out , and even with the vaccine , how do we combat fake , anti-vaxer disinformation to ensure adequate uptake ?
He highlighted that the number of people in the two top priority groups in the first phase of the rollout ( care home residents and their carers , those over 80 and frontline health and social care workers ) exceed the 400,000 vaccines available .
He referred to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the extremely low temperature needed for the vaccine mean it can not currently be administered to care homes .
The PM had no detailed answers for the leader of the opposition this afternoon .
He said the government is working on the “ logistical challenges ” ; mentioned the long- ( and still ) awaited online harms bill to combat disinformation ; and stressed that people should not “ get their hopes up too soon about the speed with which we ’ ll be able to roll out this vaccine ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for everyone , given the multitude of monumental cock ups over personal protective equipment , the app , the NHS test and trace system , employment and business support , restrictions and more since March .
Though detailed answers were not given , the Labour leader laid the groundwork for the questions that will surely dominate over the coming months .
The news today is good , possibly the best in nine months , but we are by no means through this crisis .
The UK is now armed with a vaccine .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ far , how much can we trust this government on its roll out ?

Keir Starmer schooled Boris Johnson on the proper way to abstain this afternoon. After the Prime Minister chastised the Labour leader for abstaining in the vote on the new tier system, Starmer highlighted Johnson ducking the division on Heathrow expansion – which he had previously vowed to do all he could to stop – with a timely trip in 2018. “When I abstain,” he said. “I come to the House and explain. When the Prime Minister abstains, he runs away to Afghanistan and gives the taxpayer a £20,000 bill.” Starmer also used PMQs today to press the PM on what support the government will provide to those affected by the collapse of Arcadia and Debenhams, to which Johnson had no answer. Nevertheless, the PM managed to land a blow at the end on Labour’s abstention on Tuesday evening: “Captain Hindsight is rising rapidly up the ranks and has become General Indecision.”
But the real focus of the day was the vaccine, of course. The hopeful news that the UK has become the first country in the world to approve the Pfizer/BioNTech Covid vaccine for use next week. The Labour leader stressed the issues on everyone’s mind: who gets it first? How will it be rolled out, and even with the vaccine, how do we combat fake, anti-vaxer disinformation to ensure adequate uptake? He highlighted that the number of people in the two top priority groups in the first phase of the rollout (care home residents and their carers, those over 80 and frontline health and social care workers) exceed the 400,000 vaccines available. He referred to concerns raised by the Welsh Labour government that the extremely low temperature needed for the vaccine mean it cannot currently be administered to care homes.
The PM had no detailed answers for the leader of the opposition this afternoon. He said the government is working on the “logistical challenges”; mentioned the long- (and still) awaited online harms bill to combat disinformation; and stressed that people should not “get their hopes up too soon about the speed with which we’ll be able to roll out this vaccine”. That shouldn’t be too hard for everyone, given the multitude of monumental cock ups over personal protective equipment, the app, the NHS test and trace system, employment and business support, restrictions and more since March. Though detailed answers were not given, the Labour leader laid the groundwork for the questions that will surely dominate over the coming months. The news today is good, possibly the best in nine months, but we are by no means through this crisis. The UK is now armed with a vaccine. But, based on its record so far, how much can we trust this government on its roll out?


labourlist--2020-12-02--Sam Tarry: Labour should consider policy of pausing Windrush deportations

Ilford South representative and opposition frontbencher Sam Tarry has called on the Labour Party to consider the policy of pausing deportations amid controversy over a flight to Jamaica that took off today .
Appearing on Politics Live today , Tarry was asked whether Labour should back pausing deportations until the facts are clearer .
He replied : “ I think Labour should be thinking about whether that is an appropriate policy , yes , I do think that .
“ I don ’ t think that is our current policy at the moment .
I think , though , that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experienced lawyer , and he would be looking at this and saying ‘ this is very troubling : of 50 people , only 13 ended up getting on that flight ’ .
“ Something is going seriously wrong .
Why were there people being pushed on to that flight who hadn ’ t yet had the time to put their legal appeals in place ?
That is a real breakdown of trust with communities.
” Tarry was one of more than 60 signatories of a letter organised by Clive Lewis that called on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Charter flights to Jamaica are particularly controversial due to the Windrush scandal .
Following legal representations , the number of people on the flight was brought down from 50 to 13 .
Some who were set to be removed reportedly had been victims of modern slavery and some had immediate Windrush relatives .
Tarry said : “ Labour is not saying that people shouldn ’ t face justice .
But to be clear , the problem is that why is it there are so many Black males from Jamaica or Jamaican-born that are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is what we need to be tackling here.
” Asked whether the flight should be made an exception , he replied : “ I think we need to look at each of those cases individually and make sure these aren ’ t people who have been a victim of the hostile environment .
Criminals should be punished , I don ’ t disagree with that.
” Five local party representatives on Labour ’ s ruling body who were recently elected with the support of Momentum urged Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner on Tuesday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ before it took place .
Commenting on the deportation flight this week , Labour ’ s Shadow Home Secretary Nick Thomas-Symonds told LabourList : “ We know the government has behaved unlawfully in the handling of the Windrush scandal .
“ We have raised these issues as a matter of urgency with the Home Office and will be holding the government to account on this .
The Home Office must not repeat the injustices of the Windrush scandal.
“ Tarry is parliamentary private secretary to Ed Miliband in Labour ’ s business , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is also a parliamentary lead on campaigns and organisation in deputy leader Angela Rayner ’ s team .

Ilford South representative and opposition frontbencher Sam Tarry has called on the Labour Party to consider the policy of pausing deportations amid controversy over a flight to Jamaica that took off today.
Appearing on Politics Live today, Tarry was asked whether Labour should back pausing deportations until the facts are clearer. He replied: “I think Labour should be thinking about whether that is an appropriate policy, yes, I do think that.
“I don’t think that is our current policy at the moment. I think, though, that Keir is a lawyer, a very experienced lawyer, and he would be looking at this and saying ‘this is very troubling: of 50 people, only 13 ended up getting on that flight’.
“Something is going seriously wrong. Why were there people being pushed on to that flight who hadn’t yet had the time to put their legal appeals in place? That is a real breakdown of trust with communities.”
Tarry was one of more than 60 signatories of a letter organised by Clive Lewis that called on the government to cancel the deportation. Charter flights to Jamaica are particularly controversial due to the Windrush scandal.
Following legal representations, the number of people on the flight was brought down from 50 to 13. Some who were set to be removed reportedly had been victims of modern slavery and some had immediate Windrush relatives.
Tarry said: “Labour is not saying that people shouldn’t face justice. But to be clear, the problem is that why is it there are so many Black males from Jamaica or Jamaican-born that are part of the criminal system? That is what we need to be tackling here.”
Asked whether the flight should be made an exception, he replied: “I think we need to look at each of those cases individually and make sure these aren’t people who have been a victim of the hostile environment. Criminals should be punished, I don’t disagree with that.”
Five local party representatives on Labour’s ruling body who were recently elected with the support of Momentum urged Keir Starmer and Angela Rayner on Tuesday to speak out over the deportation flight before it took place.
Commenting on the deportation flight this week, Labour’s Shadow Home Secretary Nick Thomas-Symonds told LabourList: “We know the government has behaved unlawfully in the handling of the Windrush scandal.
“We have raised these issues as a matter of urgency with the Home Office and will be holding the government to account on this. The Home Office must not repeat the injustices of the Windrush scandal.“
Tarry is parliamentary private secretary to Ed Miliband in Labour’s business, energy and industrial strategy team. He is also a parliamentary lead on campaigns and organisation in deputy leader Angela Rayner’s team.


labourlist--2020-12-02--Dodds urges government to “get a grip” on health response to protect retail

Anneliese Dodds has urged the government to “ get far more of a grip on the public health response ” to protect the retail sector during the pandemic – and warned a lack of confidence in the UK ’ s approach .
In an online speech to Bloomberg this morning , the Shadow Chancellor discussed the collapse of Arcadia and Debenhams and what the government should be doing to support those being made unemployed .
Dodds spoke of long-term trends contributing to the decline of the high street giants but described a general lack of confidence in the government ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problem in the UK ” .
During the Q & A session , she said : “ There has been that long-term trend of people increasingly shopping over the internet but of course that ’ s then compounded by what ’ s going on with the public health situation… “ We know from the International Monetary Fund and others there ’ s been a huge behavioural impact with people ’ s confidence being reduced and that ’ s been the special problem in the UK with people ’ s lack of confidence in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I would say the first thing that needs to be done to protect retail is to get far more of a grip on that public health response .
I think that ’ s absolutely essential.
” The Shadow Chancellor went on to call for a greater focus on adult retraining programmes to help those who have already lost their jobs , and urged the government to rule out employer contributions to the furlough scheme in January .
Dodds argued : “ We need to remove those factors that are continuing uncertainty for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that we still have the spectre of potentially a change to employer contributions to furlough in January .
“ I think that is a dreadful idea right now .
The Chancellor should just being saying right now he ’ s not going to be changing the employer contribution because sadly it looks like we won ’ t be out of the public health crisis in January at all.
” Dodds discussed the ‘ Kickstart ’ and ‘ Restart ’ schemes but emphasised that most of the support from government will not “ come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” , by which time many affected now will have been out of work for a year .
She stressed that the government should work with industries to make sure that when there is change , not only that prompted by the Covid crisis but also as a result of the climate emergency , it is “ planned change and not destructive change ” .
Dodds reiterated to attendees that now is not the time to consider repaying the debt burden for the Covid crisis and stressed that the government should be focused @ @ @ @ @ @ @ business .
She said : “ We saw for example a couple of weekends ago the Institute for Fiscal Studies making this point quite forcefully .
That actually some of the discussions around taxation changes that have taken place recently from within government… those were not helpful.
” The Shadow Chancellor added : “ The UK right now is unfortunately in a very precarious economic position .
I mentioned in my speech just yesterday , the OECD suggested we would be likely to see the slowest recovery in all of the G7 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ right now on trying to recover jobs , on trying to rebuild businesses , trying to keep people in work , trying to keep businesses going .
“ And eventually , obviously dependent on what happens with the interest rates , there will be those discussions… But the time for that is some way off right now.
” The Labour spokesperson on the economy has repeatedly criticised her Tory counterpart Rishi Sunak for “ running to keep up ” , emphasising the chaotic nature of government support provided throughout the Covid pandemic .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dodds stressed that while the Chancellor can “ change his mind at the last minute ” , businesses can not .
She criticised Sunak for causing avoidable redundancies by failing to let businesses plan .
Labour warned on Monday that the latest business grants schemes to be introduced by the government in the pandemic will “ level down ” the poorest areas and “ betrays some of the most deprived communities under the toughest restrictions ” .
The party highlighted that through the ‘ additional restrictions grant ’ , which makes a one-off @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the poorest areas will receive the same or less funding than the richest despite being set to go into higher tiers .

Anneliese Dodds has urged the government to “get far more of a grip on the public health response” to protect the retail sector during the pandemic – and warned a lack of confidence in the UK’s approach.
In an online speech to Bloomberg this morning, the Shadow Chancellor discussed the collapse of Arcadia and Debenhams and what the government should be doing to support those being made unemployed.
Dodds spoke of long-term trends contributing to the decline of the high street giants but described a general lack of confidence in the government’s health response as “the special problem in the UK”.
During the Q&A session, she said: “There has been that long-term trend of people increasingly shopping over the internet but of course that’s then compounded by what’s going on with the public health situation…
“We know from the International Monetary Fund and others there’s been a huge behavioural impact with people’s confidence being reduced and that’s been the special problem in the UK with people’s lack of confidence in the public health response.
“So I would say the first thing that needs to be done to protect retail is to get far more of a grip on that public health response. I think that’s absolutely essential.”
The Shadow Chancellor went on to call for a greater focus on adult retraining programmes to help those who have already lost their jobs, and urged the government to rule out employer contributions to the furlough scheme in January.
Dodds argued: “We need to remove those factors that are continuing uncertainty for the sector – you know, the fact that we still have the spectre of potentially a change to employer contributions to furlough in January.
“I think that is a dreadful idea right now. The Chancellor should just being saying right now he’s not going to be changing the employer contribution because sadly it looks like we won’t be out of the public health crisis in January at all.”
Dodds discussed the ‘Kickstart’ and ‘Restart’ schemes but emphasised that most of the support from government will not “come into play until well into next year”, by which time many affected now will have been out of work for a year.
She stressed that the government should work with industries to make sure that when there is change, not only that prompted by the Covid crisis but also as a result of the climate emergency, it is “planned change and not destructive change”.
Dodds reiterated to attendees that now is not the time to consider repaying the debt burden for the Covid crisis and stressed that the government should be focused on retaining and recovering jobs and protecting business.
She said: “We saw for example a couple of weekends ago the Institute for Fiscal Studies making this point quite forcefully. That actually some of the discussions around taxation changes that have taken place recently from within government… those were not helpful.”
The Shadow Chancellor added: “The UK right now is unfortunately in a very precarious economic position. I mentioned in my speech just yesterday, the OECD suggested we would be likely to see the slowest recovery in all of the G7.
“We do need to be focused right now on trying to recover jobs, on trying to rebuild businesses, trying to keep people in work, trying to keep businesses going.
“And eventually, obviously dependent on what happens with the interest rates, there will be those discussions… But the time for that is some way off right now.”
Labour’s Shadow Chancellor offered in her speech today to work in a “genuine partnership” with financial services towards a clean and jobs-rich recovery while pushing the sector to go “further, faster” on delivering a green economy.
Her speech was strongly criticised by campaign group Labour for a Green New Deal, which said it represented a “big step back in ambition” and indicated the party was in favour only of “piecemeal market mechanisms”.
The activists argue that Labour has recently embraced a net-zero 2050 target on pension scheme rather than a 2030 target and has abandoned a pledge to delist companies that fail to take robust action on climate change.
LabGND spokesperson Lauren Townsend said: “Instead of seeking partnership with a financial sector exploiting people and planet alike, Starmer’s Labour should be outlining the case for fundamental change in our economy.”