labourlist--2020-08-18--As payouts fall, the case for divestment from fossil fuels is stronger than ever

Following the drastically reduced dividend payments from BP ( down 50 % in the second quarter ) and Shell ( down 65 % since the start of the year ) , it is clear that local government pensions funds must divest from fossil fuels .
As pay outs decline rapidly and it becomes increasingly likely that these companies will never be able to use all their resources , there can be no more excuses .
If councils leave it too late to divest , it will be the taxpayer who must ultimately bail them out .
When the price of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ councils lost a combined £683m to their pension funds .
Today , local government pension funds are just as exposed to the collapse of fossil fuel prices .
The average council has around 7 % of their entire fund invested in such companies .
BP and Shell ’ s poor performance follows similar announcements by Total , who last month announced an $ 8bn write-down of its most carbon-intensive fossil fuel assets .
Regardless of the moral arguments for divestment , even from a purely financial point of view , now is the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sell their shares .
89 Labour-controlled district , metropolitan and unitary councils have declared a climate emergency .
Yet few included divestment in their motions , and only 13 councils led by any party have made full or partial divestment commitments .
Labour councils had taken the lead on this when Oxford City Council became the first UK local authority to introduce a fossil fuel divestment policy in 2014 and Waltham Forest being the first in the UK to divest .
But the pace of action by other Labour councils has not kept @ @ @ @ @ @ @ County pension fund committed to divest their £294m of fossil fuel shares , including Shell and BP .
The council cited their declaration of a climate emergency , the superior performance of renewable investments and the financial risk posed to fossil fuels by the Covid-19 crisis and the forthcoming energy transition as their reasons for doing so .
Labour councils that fail to act are increasingly behind the times .
Nest , Britain ’ s largest pension scheme by number of members , announced recently that it would toughen up its climate change @ @ @ @ @ @ @ its portfolio by 2050 .
Recently it appears that divestment has become appealing to groups who have not been eager to take such action over the last five years of the movement .
The financial arguments alone seem to be swaying some of those previously not interested , alongside those committed to the environment argument .
Yet there is still resistance in the majority of Labour councils and although the Labour Party , including leader Keir Starmer , is an enthusiastic supporter of Divest Parliament – and the main local government union UNISON @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support for councillors from the Labour Local Government Association .
Labour Councillor for Beeston & Holbeck and lead member for pensions for Leeds City Council Andrew Scopes , who has been engaged in a long-term struggle with other councillors on the West Yorkshire Pension fund , has said : “ It is time for local government pension schemes , such as mine , which is holding hundreds of millions of pounds worth of shares in Shell and BP that are worth less every day , to start the transition away from this kind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ authorities from the worst of the financial impact when the economic way to generate power is no longer by burning fossil fuels.
” Founder and executive chairman of the Carbon Tracker Initiative Mark Campanale said : “ Incumbent fossil fuel dependent energy companies are facing an existential crisis that challenges their future… Businesses that can ’ t change , or won ’ t change , risk being ‘ left behind ’ as their assets are financially ‘ stranded ’ .
When this happens , a rational response is for investors to sell the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extension of risk management .
Those reluctant to confront what is happening to the sector is similar to believing that canals would survive when faced with the rise of railways ; that DVDs would survive live-streaming ; or that the Olivetti type-writer would survive the arrival of the personal computer.
” All councils that have not already divested should be at least asking their pension fund committee : • None Do you see the dividend amount from BP and Shell increasing over time ?
• None Are you anticipating peak demand for oil @ @ @ @ @ @ @ None How much money have you lost , and will you lose in the future , by not divesting ?
Councils have seen budgets cut by almost 60 % in the last decade .
The current difficult financial situation will only get worse .
They could be using the money they have divested to reinvest in vital services .
42 % of all internal investment in the UK comes from pension funds .
Islington has invested over £150m from their pension scheme into social housing .
Lancashire Council ’ s pension fund invested @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; .
Councils in London and Manchester have invested in wind farms .
All these kinds of community wealth building investments offer much more stable returns than fossil fuels can offer .
The LGA and the Association of Labour Councillors urgently need to offer training and support in what is a very complex area , which even experienced councillors find hard to navigate .
Together Platform London , Friends of the Earth England , Wales and Northern Ireland and Friends of the Earth Scotland run the Divest Local Government Network .
They offer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want to push for change .
Get in touch if you would like advice or them to help support your campaign : [ email protected ] .

Following the drastically reduced dividend payments from BP (down 50% in the second quarter) and Shell (down 65% since the start of the year), it is clear that local government pensions funds must divest from fossil fuels. As pay outs decline rapidly and it becomes increasingly likely that these companies will never be able to use all their resources, there can be no more excuses. If councils leave it too late to divest, it will be the taxpayer who must ultimately bail them out.
When the price of coal collapsed in 2015, UK local councils lost a combined £683m to their pension funds. Today, local government pension funds are just as exposed to the collapse of fossil fuel prices. The average council has around 7% of their entire fund invested in such companies. BP and Shell’s poor performance follows similar announcements by Total, who last month announced an $8bn write-down of its most carbon-intensive fossil fuel assets. Regardless of the moral arguments for divestment, even from a purely financial point of view, now is the time that councils should be planning to sell their shares.
89 Labour-controlled district, metropolitan and unitary councils have declared a climate emergency. Yet few included divestment in their motions, and only 13 councils led by any party have made full or partial divestment commitments. Labour councils had taken the lead on this when Oxford City Council became the first UK local authority to introduce a fossil fuel divestment policy in 2014 and Waltham Forest being the first in the UK to divest.
But the pace of action by other Labour councils has not kept up. Last month the Conservative-led Shropshire County pension fund committed to divest their £294m of fossil fuel shares, including Shell and BP. The council cited their declaration of a climate emergency, the superior performance of renewable investments and the financial risk posed to fossil fuels by the Covid-19 crisis and the forthcoming energy transition as their reasons for doing so. Labour councils that fail to act are increasingly behind the times.
Nest, Britain’s largest pension scheme by number of members, announced recently that it would toughen up its climate change investing policy and aimed to fully decarbonise its portfolio by 2050. Recently it appears that divestment has become appealing to groups who have not been eager to take such action over the last five years of the movement. The financial arguments alone seem to be swaying some of those previously not interested, alongside those committed to the environment argument.
Yet there is still resistance in the majority of Labour councils and although the Labour Party, including leader Keir Starmer, is an enthusiastic supporter of Divest Parliament – and the main local government union UNISON supports divestment – there is no corresponding support for councillors from the Labour Local Government Association.
Labour Councillor for Beeston & Holbeck and lead member for pensions for Leeds City Council Andrew Scopes, who has been engaged in a long-term struggle with other councillors on the West Yorkshire Pension fund, has said: “It is time for local government pension schemes, such as mine, which is holding hundreds of millions of pounds worth of shares in Shell and BP that are worth less every day, to start the transition away from this kind of investment to protect members and local authorities from the worst of the financial impact when the economic way to generate power is no longer by burning fossil fuels.”
Founder and executive chairman of the Carbon Tracker Initiative Mark Campanale said: “Incumbent fossil fuel dependent energy companies are facing an existential crisis that challenges their future… Businesses that can’t change, or won’t change, risk being ‘left behind’ as their assets are financially ‘stranded’. When this happens, a rational response is for investors to sell the risk. Divestment is simply a logical extension of risk management. Those reluctant to confront what is happening to the sector is similar to believing that canals would survive when faced with the rise of railways; that DVDs would survive live-streaming; or that the Olivetti type-writer would survive the arrival of the personal computer.”
All councils that have not already divested should be at least asking their pension fund committee:
Do you see the dividend amount from BP and Shell increasing over time?
Are you anticipating peak demand for oil in your climate risk strategy?
How much money have you lost, and will you lose in the future, by not divesting?
Councils have seen budgets cut by almost 60% in the last decade. The current difficult financial situation will only get worse. They could be using the money they have divested to reinvest in vital services. 42% of all internal investment in the UK comes from pension funds. Islington has invested over £150m from their pension scheme into social housing. Lancashire Council’s pension fund invested £12m in Westmill solar co-op in 2013;. Councils in London and Manchester have invested in wind farms. All these kinds of community wealth building investments offer much more stable returns than fossil fuels can offer. The LGA and the Association of Labour Councillors urgently need to offer training and support in what is a very complex area, which even experienced councillors find hard to navigate.
Together Platform London, Friends of the Earth England, Wales and Northern Ireland and Friends of the Earth Scotland run the Divest Local Government Network. They offer support to councils and local campaigners that want to push for change. Get in touch if you would like advice or them to help support your campaign: [email protected].


labourlist--2020-08-18--Labour: M&S job losses tell “bigger story about the threat to our high streets”

Labour has declared that the job cuts announced by high street giant Marks & Spencer “ tell a much bigger story about the threat to our high streets ” in the coronavirus pandemic .
Responding to the announcement of a loss of 7,000 jobs over the next three months across M & S stores and management , Labour ’ s Lucy Powell today reiterated the party ’ s call for a £1.7bn fightback fund to protect hospitality and high streets .
Commenting on the implications of the job cuts , the shadow business minister said : “ These job losses @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they also tell a much bigger story about the threat to our high streets.
” She added : “ The scale of job losses was not inevitable but the incompetence of this government means we ’ re now seeing wave after wave of redundancies , and store closures .
“ Labour has called for a hospitality and high streets fightback fund to support businesses in distress and to save jobs now .
Ministers must change course.
” Trade union Usdaw has also called on the Chancellor to protect high street jobs .
National @ @ @ @ @ @ @ job loss announcement is yet another devastating blow for M & S staff and yet another bombshell for our high streets .
“ The government has a clear choice : do they want to see the high street go to the wall , or do they want to help save it ?
What the retail sector needs now is a tripartite approach of the government , unions and employers working together to develop a much needed retail recovery plan .
“ We have long called for an industrial strategy for retail to help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the coronavirus emergency .
Now the situation is much worse.
” Earlier this month , Anneliese Dodds condemned the government ’ s handling of the pandemic as data showed that the UK had entered a recession for the first time since the global financial crisis in 2008 .
The Shadow Chancellor said that although an economic downturn was inevitable , “ Johnson ’ s jobs crisis wasn ’ t ” and urged that the government “ scrap the one-size-fits-all withdrawal of wage support ” .
The Office for National Statistics reported that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ decline of any G7 nation in the second quarter , and represents a fall double that of the US economy which shrank by 10.6 % over the same period .
Labour has repeatedly demanded that the government change course on its approach to economic support in the crisis , and Dodds has called on the Chancellor to bring forward targeted support for the industries where it ’ s most needed .

Labour has declared that the job cuts announced by high street giant Marks & Spencer “tell a much bigger story about the threat to our high streets” in the coronavirus pandemic.
Responding to the announcement of a loss of 7,000 jobs over the next three months across M&S stores and management, Labour’s Lucy Powell today reiterated the party’s call for a £1.7bn fightback fund to protect hospitality and high streets.
Commenting on the implications of the job cuts, the shadow business minister said: “These job losses are devastating for the workers involved yet they also tell a much bigger story about the threat to our high streets.”
She added: “The scale of job losses was not inevitable but the incompetence of this government means we’re now seeing wave after wave of redundancies, and store closures.
“Labour has called for a hospitality and high streets fightback fund to support businesses in distress and to save jobs now. Ministers must change course.”
Trade union Usdaw has also called on the Chancellor to protect high street jobs. National officer Dave Gill said: “This job loss announcement is yet another devastating blow for M&S staff and yet another bombshell for our high streets.
“The government has a clear choice: do they want to see the high street go to the wall, or do they want to help save it? What the retail sector needs now is a tripartite approach of the government, unions and employers working together to develop a much needed retail recovery plan.
“We have long called for an industrial strategy for retail to help a sector that was already struggling before the coronavirus emergency. Now the situation is much worse.”
Earlier this month, Anneliese Dodds condemned the government’s handling of the pandemic as data showed that the UK had entered a recession for the first time since the global financial crisis in 2008.
The Shadow Chancellor said that although an economic downturn was inevitable, “Johnson’s jobs crisis wasn’t” and urged that the government “scrap the one-size-fits-all withdrawal of wage support”.
The Office for National Statistics reported that the country’s recession is the deepest decline of any G7 nation in the second quarter, and represents a fall double that of the US economy which shrank by 10.6% over the same period.
Labour has repeatedly demanded that the government change course on its approach to economic support in the crisis, and Dodds has called on the Chancellor to bring forward targeted support for the industries where it’s most needed.


labourlist--2020-08-18--We must learn the lessons of the medical emergency in BAME communities

I was pleased to join Liam Byrne MP and my co-chairs yesterday to launch our report into the West Midlands inquiry into Covid-19 fatalities in the BAME community .
This report is a culmination of two-and-a-half month ’ s work gathering evidence , collating data , researching , understanding and writing a report that would support our call for a public inquiry .
It details ten key observations from the testimony we heard and contains 35 recommendations variously targeted to ministers , MPs , the West Midlands metro mayor , the NHS and social care system and health and wellbeing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ feed into Labour ’ s national inquiry being led by Baroness Doreen Lawrence .
I want to thank my co-chairs : Khalid Mahmood MP , Taiwo Owetami MP and councillors Paulette Hamilton , Aftab Nawaz , Sandra Samuels OBE and Mohammed Yaseen – who have been inspirational in their passion for our community – and Liam Byrne MP for the leadership he has shown and his unrelenting calls for change to happen .
But perhaps the thing that will remain with me most is the harrowing evidence we heard from family members of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This report must not be ignored .
The change we demand must happen immediately .
We must the learn the lessons of the failure of leadership ; of longstanding and structural inequalities ; of inadequate resources for our health and care services ; of cuts that fall hardest on areas with the most BAME communities ; of a lack of BAME faces amongst key decision makers , of inadequate data collection and monitoring .
We must learn the lessons of what is an urgent medical emergency before it is repeated and more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know that BAME communities were the hardest hit .
We are becoming increasingly aware that there are a range of factors that led to this .
Chronic disease is higher amongst BAME people , they live in some of the most deprived areas with poorer housing conditions and environment leading to lowest life expectancy , they are less likely to use GP services and they are disproportionately represented amongst frontline key workers including NHS staff , carers , bus and taxi drivers .
Yet our understanding continues to be limited as we are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to support better understanding – e.g .
ethnicity is not collected on death certificates , as it has been in Scotland for over ten years .
We are also aware that our most diverse areas have suffered massively disproportionate cuts in public health funding .
The three most diverse areas in the West Midlands – Birmingham , Wolverhampton and Sandwell – have had cuts to public health budgets over the last five years of 9 % , 8 % and 15 % respectively , compared to an average of 5 % across England @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reflect the urgency for BAME people in our community .
Where is the focus on BAME people in the governments testing strategy ?
Why isn ’ t there a focus on BAME teachers , support staff and families as schools prepare to reopen in a couple of weeks ?
Where is the investment into research to help better understand the causes and solutions for our BAME residents ?
And this is the most unforgivable tragedy of all – the total failure of leadership by the government and , in the West Midlands , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wholly absent in the hour of need for our BAME communities .
The importance and challenge of understanding and dealing with inequalities is appearing in our public discourse almost on a daily basis – be it with Covid-19 , the disgraceful application of algorithms in our school exam systems over the last few days or with longstanding challenges across our public services .
With the virus likely to remain as a feature of life for some time to come , and the risks for our BAME communities still persisting , we must deal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Change must happen immediately , we can not wait .
We owe it to all the frontline workers who – despite knowing only some of the risks and often not having the personal protective equipment required – still turned up to care for others ; we owe it to the memory of the 35-year-old new mum who died after childbirth , never having the chance to hold her new-born son ; we owe it to the son who said goodbye to his dad via WhatsApp while a doctor sat stroking his dad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ as if he was his own ” .
It ’ s about time we started seeing all as our own .
You can read the report in full here .

I was pleased to join Liam Byrne MP and my co-chairs yesterday to launch our report into the West Midlands inquiry into Covid-19 fatalities in the BAME community. This report is a culmination of two-and-a-half months of work gathering evidence, collating data, researching, understanding and writing a report that would support our call for a public inquiry. It details ten key observations from the testimony we heard and contains 35 recommendations variously targeted to ministers, MPs, the West Midlands metro mayor, the NHS and social care system and health and wellbeing boards. And this work will further feed into Labour’s national inquiry being led by Baroness Doreen Lawrence.
I want to thank my co-chairs: Khalid Mahmood MP, Taiwo Owetami MP and councillors Paulette Hamilton, Aftab Nawaz, Sandra Samuels OBE and Mohammed Yaseen – who have been inspirational in their passion for our community – and Liam Byrne MP for the leadership he has shown and his unrelenting calls for change to happen. But perhaps the thing that will remain with me most is the harrowing evidence we heard from family members of those who lost their lives too soon.
This report must not be ignored. The change we demand must happen immediately. We must the learn the lessons of the failure of leadership; of longstanding and structural inequalities; of inadequate resources for our health and care services; of cuts that fall hardest on areas with the most BAME communities; of a lack of BAME faces amongst key decision makers, of inadequate data collection and monitoring. We must learn the lessons of what is an urgent medical emergency before it is repeated and more lives are needlessly lost.
We now know that BAME communities were the hardest hit. We are becoming increasingly aware that there are a range of factors that led to this. Chronic disease is higher amongst BAME people, they live in some of the most deprived areas with poorer housing conditions and environment leading to lowest life expectancy, they are less likely to use GP services and they are disproportionately represented amongst frontline key workers including NHS staff, carers, bus and taxi drivers.
Yet our understanding continues to be limited as we are still not collecting the data we need to support better understanding – e.g. ethnicity is not collected on death certificates, as it has been in Scotland for over ten years. We are also aware that our most diverse areas have suffered massively disproportionate cuts in public health funding. The three most diverse areas in the West Midlands – Birmingham, Wolverhampton and Sandwell – have had cuts to public health budgets over the last five years of 9%, 8% and 15% respectively, compared to an average of 5% across England.
Government guidance still doesn’t reflect the urgency for BAME people in our community. Where is the focus on BAME people in the governments testing strategy? Why isn’t there a focus on BAME teachers, support staff and families as schools prepare to reopen in a couple of weeks? Where is the investment into research to help better understand the causes and solutions for our BAME residents? And this is the most unforgivable tragedy of all – the total failure of leadership by the government and, in the West Midlands, our metro mayor who have all been wholly absent in the hour of need for our BAME communities.
The importance and challenge of understanding and dealing with inequalities is appearing in our public discourse almost on a daily basis – be it with Covid-19, the disgraceful application of algorithms in our school exam systems over the last few days or with longstanding challenges across our public services. With the virus likely to remain as a feature of life for some time to come, and the risks for our BAME communities still persisting, we must deal with these challenges before a second phase.
Change must happen immediately, we cannot wait. We owe it to all the frontline workers who – despite knowing only some of the risks and often not having the personal protective equipment required – still turned up to care for others; we owe it to the memory of the 35-year-old new mum who died after childbirth, never having the chance to hold her new-born son; we owe it to the son who said goodbye to his dad via WhatsApp while a doctor sat stroking his dad’s hand and holding him close “as if he was his own”. It’s about time we started seeing all as our own.
You can read the report in full here.


labourlist--2020-08-18--Labour pushes for answers after exams U-turn excludes BTEC students

Labour figures have urged the government to provide urgent clarification on outstanding questions following the U-turn on A-Level , AS and GCSE exam grades – including why BTEC students were excluded from the policy change .
In a letter to Gavin Williamson today , Labour ’ s Kate Green outlined a number of concerns remaining after the government decided to scrap its controversial algorithm for generating school grades in place of usual end-of-year exams .
She asked why BTEC students were left out of the U-turn , which will see the government accept teacher-predicted grades , when “ many of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are in the same position as their A-Level counterparts ” .
Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham , who has been considering legal action over the results , told BBC News : “ I am not going to let go of my threat of legal action until I hear from ministers that BTEC students have also been protected by this U-turn.
” Exams were cancelled this year due to the coronavirus pandemic and A-Level students across the country received results generated by Ofqual last week .
Nearly 40 % of pupils saw their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ U-turned on this policy on Monday afternoon and scrapped the system , announcing that it would be adopting teacher predictions as the final grade for students – but excluded BTEC and other vocational courses from this decision .
Commenting on the policy change , Green said : “ The UK government has finally listened to young people , their parents , their teachers , and the Labour Party , and changed their approach to exams .
“ This was a welcome and necessary change in policy , but we should never have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had months to get this right .
The delay and chaos accompanying means that students , families , and education providers have no answers to essential questions.
” The Shadow Education Secretary added : “ It is time for this government to get a grip and provide the clarity that we need to move forward.
” The system adopted by Ofqual was criticised for relying too much on the previous performance of schools and colleges in modelling results , meaning that young people who did well in historically poorer education settings were marked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ data released by Ofqual on the distribution of grades , those with a C or above were downgraded from teacher estimations by over 10 % among children from the most disadvantaged background .
Labour described this last week as a “ huge injustice ” and called on the government to waive fees for schools and colleges appealing results .
Ofqual published an appeals process on Saturday before withdrawing it only hours later .
Over the weekend , Gavin Williamson had repeatedly rejected criticism and insisted that there would be “ no U-turn , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it would lead to grade inflation and devalue the qualifications .
Labour leader Keir Starmer welcomed the “ screeching U-turn ” on exam results at the start of this week , describing the government ’ s decision to abandon the standardisation process as a “ victory for thousands of young people ” .
Below is the full text of the letter sent to the Education Secretary .
I am pleased your government this afternoon finally reversed its position on A-Level and GCSE results , and will now allow young people to receive the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hard work .
However , the confusion of the past few weeks , and delay in making these important decisions , mean there are now important outstanding issues on which students , parents and institutions need urgent clarity .
I note this evening that you have lifted the cap on university places that was imposed this year .
This is important so as to not disadvantage young people who have missed out on their first choice of university .
However it raises a number of questions : Will the cap be lifted only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to take their place at their chosen university this year or is it a wholesale lifting of the cap ?
What capacity is there in the system to accommodate higher numbers of students enrolling on courses ?
What happens to a student who has accepted an offer – whether that is through clearing or their insurance option – because their moderated grade was lower than CAG ?
Are they able to switch institutions ?
And what happens to any potential accommodation contracts they may have signed should they choose to switch ?
Lifting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have significant financial implications for some institutions – will your Department be offering them additional support ?
Can you confirm that no university will be allowed to fail financially as a result of these changes ?
What steps have you taken to ensure that universities are prioritising widening participation and that students from disadvantaged backgrounds are not missing out as a result of the events of the past few weeks ?
Why are BTEC students excluded from today ’ s change in policy when many of them will have applied to university and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A-Level counterparts ?
This is on top of the delays that many have faced in receiving their results .
What urgent support are you offering to these students ?
Can you also confirm when students and universities will see the grades that they have been awarded ?
Many students are still in limbo – what support will be offered to young people who have to defer their place for a year ?
Is it the government ’ s policy still to have an autumn exam series – is this an option for young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grades ?
What is the government doing to address the problem of home-schooled pupils not receiving GCSEs ?
Will you confirm that there will be an appeals process for students not happy with their centre assessed grade , and will these appeals still be free of charge as announced last week ?
I look forward to your urgent response on these matters .

Labour figures have urged the government to provide urgent clarification on outstanding questions following the U-turn on A-Level, AS and GCSE exam grades – including why BTEC students were excluded from the policy change.
In a letter to Gavin Williamson today, Labour’s Kate Green outlined a number of concerns remaining after the government decided to scrap its controversial algorithm for generating school grades in place of usual end-of-year exams.
She asked why BTEC students were left out of the U-turn, which will see the government accept teacher-predicted grades, when “many of them will have applied to university and are in the same position as their A-Level counterparts”.
Mayor of Greater Manchester Andy Burnham, who has been considering legal action over the results, told BBC News: “I am not going to let go of my threat of legal action until I hear from ministers that BTEC students have also been protected by this U-turn.”
Exams were cancelled this year due to the coronavirus pandemic and A-Level students across the country received results generated by Ofqual last week. Nearly 40% of pupils saw their teacher-predicted grade moderated down.
The government U-turned on this policy on Monday afternoon and scrapped the system, announcing that it would be adopting teacher predictions as the final grade for students – but excluded BTEC and other vocational courses from this decision.
Commenting on the policy change, Green said: “The UK government has finally listened to young people, their parents, their teachers, and the Labour Party, and changed their approach to exams.
“This was a welcome and necessary change in policy, but we should never have been in this position as the government has had months to get this right. The delay and chaos accompanying means that students, families, and education providers have no answers to essential questions.”
The Shadow Education Secretary added: “It is time for this government to get a grip and provide the clarity that we need to move forward.”
The system adopted by Ofqual was criticised for relying too much on the previous performance of schools and colleges in modelling results, meaning that young people who did well in historically poorer education settings were marked down.
According to analysis of the data released by Ofqual on the distribution of grades, those with a C or above were downgraded from teacher estimations by over 10% among children from the most disadvantaged background.
Labour described this last week as a “huge injustice” and called on the government to waive fees for schools and colleges appealing results. Ofqual published an appeals process on Saturday before withdrawing it only hours later.
Over the weekend, Gavin Williamson had repeatedly rejected criticism and insisted that there would be “no U-turn, no change”. He argued that it would lead to grade inflation and devalue the qualifications.
Labour leader Keir Starmer welcomed the “screeching U-turn” on exam results at the start of this week, describing the government’s decision to abandon the standardisation process as a “victory for thousands of young people”.
Below is the full text of the letter sent to the Education Secretary.
Dear Gavin,
I am pleased your government this afternoon finally reversed its position on A-Level and GCSE results, and will now allow young people to receive the Centre Assessed Grades they deserve for their hard work.
However, the confusion of the past few weeks, and delay in making these important decisions, mean there are now important outstanding issues on which students, parents and institutions need urgent clarity.
I note this evening that you have lifted the cap on university places that was imposed this year. This is important so as to not disadvantage young people who have missed out on their first choice of university. However it raises a number of questions:
Will the cap be lifted only to enable those students holding existing offers to take their place at their chosen university this year or is it a wholesale lifting of the cap?
What capacity is there in the system to accommodate higher numbers of students enrolling on courses?
What happens to a student who has accepted an offer – whether that is through clearing or their insurance option – because their moderated grade was lower than CAG? Are they able to switch institutions? And what happens to any potential accommodation contracts they may have signed should they choose to switch?
Lifting the cap on student numbers will potentially have significant financial implications for some institutions – will your Department be offering them additional support? Can you confirm that no university will be allowed to fail financially as a result of these changes?
What steps have you taken to ensure that universities are prioritising widening participation and that students from disadvantaged backgrounds are not missing out as a result of the events of the past few weeks?
Why are BTEC students excluded from today’s change in policy when many of them will have applied to university and are in the same position as their A-Level counterparts? This is on top of the delays that many have faced in receiving their results. What urgent support are you offering to these students?
Can you also confirm when students and universities will see the grades that they have been awarded?
Many students are still in limbo – what support will be offered to young people who have to defer their place for a year? Is it the government’s policy still to have an autumn exam series – is this an option for young people who still want to improve their grades? What is the government doing to address the problem of home-schooled pupils not receiving GCSEs?
Will you confirm that there will be an appeals process for students not happy with their centre assessed grade, and will these appeals still be free of charge as announced last week?
I look forward to your urgent response on these matters.
Yours sincerely,
Kate Green MP


labourlist--2020-08-18--Usdaw demands new law to protect retail staff from abuse

Shopworkers ’ union Usdaw has called for a new law to protect workers from abuse and urged the government to introduce a “ simple standalone offence that is widely recognised and understood by the public ” .
After a survey earlier this year found that incidents of abuse doubled during the pandemic , general secretary Paddy Lillis today said that measures proposed by the government would be “ more likely to succeed if backed up with new legislation ” .
The organisation has launched a petition that calls for a “ specific offence of abusing , threatening or assaulting a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that makes clear that “ abuse of retail workers is unacceptable ” .
Trade union leader Lillis said ministers should take note of the research carried out between March and April and urged the government to “ listen to the voices of shopworkers and legislate for stiffer penalties for those who assault workers ” .
Commenting today , Lillis said : “ We are appalled that violence , threats and abuse have doubled during this national emergency .
At a time when we should all be working together to get through this crisis @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people working to keep food on the shelves for their local communities are being abused and assaulted .
“ Further action is required and that is why we have launched this petition today .
Our message is clear , abuse is not part of the job .
Life on the frontline of retail is normally pretty tough for many shopworkers and has become much worse during the coronavirus emergency .
“ Shopworkers are on the frontline of feeding the country , providing an essential service in very difficult circumstances , working long hours @ @ @ @ @ @ @ customers and of course concerned they may become infected with Covid-19 .
“ The safety of our members is absolutely paramount , but they tell us that some of the shopping public are resisting safety measures in stores and can become abusive when asked to queue , maintain social distancing or reminded to wear a face mask .
Our message to the public is there is no excuse for abusing shopworkers , please treat our members with the respect they deserve .
“ In light of the unacceptable increase in abuse of shopworkers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to help protect staff .
I urge the government not to dismiss my petition , but listen to the voices of shopworkers and legislate for stiffer penalties for those who assault workers.
” The government published a response to a call for evidence on the issue of abuse towards retail staff late last month , but said that it “ believes that this issue is one that requires more urgent action than it does a change in the law ” .
Lillis added : “ They have talked about zero tolerance , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not backed up by strong actions .
The measures the government have agreed are worth trying and we hope that they can make a real difference .
“ However they would be much more likely to succeed if backed up with new legislation ; a simple standalone offence that is widely recognised and understood by the public , police , CPS , the judiciary and most importantly criminals .
“ Retail staff have a crucial role in our communities and that role must be valued and respected , they deserve the protection of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the union , which received responses from 4,928 shopworkers between March 14th and April 17th , showed that 62 % of those surveyed were verbally abused , 29 % were threatened and 4 % assaulted .
The union has explained that these figures are likely an underestimate because the analysis assumed the worker was only assaulted once and because the survey was conducted in mainly larger union organised workplaces , which tend to be safer .
The petition is live on the House of Commons website for the public to sign .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government will issue an official response ; with 100,000 signatures , the petition will be considered for debate .
Below is the full text of the petition .
Enact legislation to protect retail workers .
This legislation must create a specific offence of abusing , threatening or assaulting a retail worker .
The offence must carry a penalty that acts as a deterrent and makes clear that abuse of retail workers is unacceptable .
Throughout the coronavirus outbreak , retail workers have been spat at , threatened with infection of Coronavirus and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the outbreak , the average retail worker has been assaulted , threatened or abused every 6.5 days , more than double the rate of incidents compared to 2019 .
Key workers across retail have been undervalued for too long .
We need to recognise the valuable contribution of these workers and ensure they are safe whilst undertaking essential work .

Shopworkers’ union Usdaw has called for a new law to protect workers from abuse and urged the government to introduce a “simple standalone offence that is widely recognised and understood by the public”.
After a survey earlier this year found that incidents of abuse doubled during the pandemic, general secretary Paddy Lillis today said that measures proposed by the government would be “more likely to succeed if backed up with new legislation”.
The organisation has launched a petition that calls for a “specific offence of abusing, threatening or assaulting a retail worker” and for a penalty that makes clear that “abuse of retail workers is unacceptable”.
Trade union leader Lillis said ministers should take note of the research carried out between March and April and urged the government to “listen to the voices of shopworkers and legislate for stiffer penalties for those who assault workers”.
Commenting today, Lillis said: “We are appalled that violence, threats and abuse have doubled during this national emergency. At a time when we should all be working together to get through this crisis, it is a national disgrace that people working to keep food on the shelves for their local communities are being abused and assaulted.
“Further action is required and that is why we have launched this petition today. Our message is clear, abuse is not part of the job. Life on the frontline of retail is normally pretty tough for many shopworkers and has become much worse during the coronavirus emergency.
“Shopworkers are on the frontline of feeding the country, providing an essential service in very difficult circumstances, working long hours in busy stores, facing abuse from customers and of course concerned they may become infected with Covid-19.
“The safety of our members is absolutely paramount, but they tell us that some of the shopping public are resisting safety measures in stores and can become abusive when asked to queue, maintain social distancing or reminded to wear a face mask.
“Our message to the public is there is no excuse for abusing shopworkers: please treat our members with the respect they deserve.
“In light of the unacceptable increase in abuse of shopworkers, there needs to be urgent action to help protect staff. I urge the government not to dismiss my petition, but listen to the voices of shopworkers and legislate for stiffer penalties for those who assault workers.”
The government published a response to a call for evidence on the issue of abuse towards retail staff late last month, but said it “believes that this issue is one that requires more urgent action than it does a change in the law”.
Lillis added: “They have talked about zero tolerance, but that means very little if it is not backed up by strong actions. The measures the government have agreed are worth trying and we hope that they can make a real difference.
“However they would be much more likely to succeed if backed up with new legislation; a simple standalone offence that is widely recognised and understood by the public, police, CPS, the judiciary and most importantly criminals.
“Retail staff have a crucial role in our communities and that role must be valued and respected, they deserve the protection of the law.”
The research carried out by the union, which received responses from 4,928 shopworkers between March 14th and April 17th, showed that 62% of those surveyed were verbally abused, 29% were threatened and 4% assaulted.
The union has explained that these figures are likely an underestimate because the analysis assumed the worker was only assaulted once and because the survey was conducted in mainly larger union organised workplaces, which tend to be safer.
The petition is live on the House of Commons website for the public to sign. If the petition receives 10,000 signatures, the government will issue an official response; with 100,000 signatures, the petition will be considered for debate.
Below is the full text of the petition.
Enact legislation to protect retail workers. This legislation must create a specific offence of abusing, threatening or assaulting a retail worker. The offence must carry a penalty that acts as a deterrent and makes clear that abuse of retail workers is unacceptable.
Throughout the coronavirus outbreak, retail workers have been spat at, threatened with infection of Coronavirus and physically assaulted. Since the start of the outbreak, the average retail worker has been assaulted, threatened or abused every 6.5 days, more than double the rate of incidents compared to 2019.
Key workers across retail have been undervalued for too long. We need to recognise the valuable contribution of these workers and ensure they are safe whilst undertaking essential work.


labourlist--2020-08-18--Labour calls for extension of evictions ban as 250,000 face eviction

Labour has called on the government to extend the evictions ban and warned that nearly a quarter of a million people across the UK are at risk of being made homeless when the suspension lifts .
Referring to research carried out by the housing charity Shelter , which found that 174,000 renters have already been threatened with eviction , Labour ’ s Thangam Debbonaire wrote to Robert Jenrick today to urge him to “ rethink ” ending the ban .
In her letter to the minister , the Shadow Housing Secretary declared that “ after the incompetent handling of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now to avoid more chaos of its own making ” .
Thangam also asked the following questions : • “ What assessment has the government made of likely numbers of people facing homelessness if the ban is lifted ?
• “ What consideration have they given to public health , with possibly thousands of households becoming homeless as we go into winter ?
• “ Why has the government not taken steps to honour your 2019 manifesto pledge to end section 21 ?
• “ What steps is the government taking to prevent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Covid-19 , there were over 1.15 million households on council housing waiting lists , and the number of families in insecure private-rented accommodation increased by 7 % last year alone .
Shelter has estimated that 227,000 adult private renters have fallen into arrears since the start of the pandemic .
Under current law , when the ban lifts , anyone who has accrued arrears of eight weeks or more can be automatically evicted .
This does not include those who can be made homeless as part of a ‘ no fault ’ eviction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 21 of the Housing Act 1988 , landlords can ‘ seek possession ’ of their properties without a reason being given .
Boris Johnson and his predecessor Theresa May both pledged to end no-fault evictions , promising to bring forward a new ‘ renters ’ reform bill ’ .
But the Conservatives have failed to act on this pledge .
Earlier this week , former Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell demanded that the government extend the evictions ban by at least another year , and called for rent arrears to be cancelled to prevent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ homeless .
A cross-party group of MPs wrote to the government on Monday , also urging an extension , and warning that failure to do so would result in a “ new wave of homelessness ” .
It was signed by nine Labour MPs , one DUP MP and ten Lib Dems .
Below is the full text of the letter sent by Thangam Debbonaire today .
As you know , the ban on evictions is due to end on Sunday 23rd August .
In March , you promised : “ No renter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be forced out of their home , nor will any landlord face unmanageable debts.
” I am writing today asking you to set out the steps you have taken to prevent a self-made homelessness crisis at the worst possible moment , as the furlough scheme winds up and we face the risk of growing infections of coronavirus .
Labour has consistently argued that the ban should not be lifted until the government has introduced changes to our broken housing system that will protect tenants .
What assessment has the government made of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ban is lifted ?
What consideration have they given to public health , with possibly thousands of households becoming homeless as we go into winter ?
Why has the government not taken steps to honour your 2019 manifesto pledge to end section 21 ?
Labour has called for the government to urgently introduce legislation that will abolish section 21 ‘ no fault ’ evictions and reform Section eight to prevent automatic eviction for tenants whose incomes have been hit by Covid .
What steps is the government taking to prevent a rent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ private renters aged between 25 and 34 years had no savings in 2018-19 .
But the government has repeatedly ignored calls to address this through the social security system .
Renters are harder hit by the crisis , but government support has so far focused on landlords and home-owners .
Shelter estimates that nearly a quarter of a million people are at risk of eviction because of Covid economic impact .
Veering from crisis to crisis is no way to run a country .
After the incompetent handling of the exams fiasco , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more chaos of its own making .
The situation is urgent , but there is still time for you to rethink , and extend the ban .
I urge you to do so .
Thangam Debbonaire , MP for Bristol West Shadow Secretary of State for Housing

Labour has called on the government to extend the evictions ban and warned that nearly a quarter of a million people across the UK are at risk of being made homeless when the suspension lifts.
Citing research carried out by the housing charity Shelter, which found that 174,000 renters have already been threatened with eviction, Labour’s Thangam Debbonaire wrote to Robert Jenrick today to urge him to “rethink” ending the ban.
In her letter to the minister, the Shadow Housing Secretary declared that “after the incompetent handling of the exams fiasco, the government must act now to avoid more chaos of its own making”.
Debbonaire also asked the following questions:
“What assessment has the government made of likely numbers of people facing homelessness if the ban is lifted?
“What consideration have they given to public health, with possibly thousands of households becoming homeless as we go into winter?
“Why has the government not taken steps to honour your 2019 manifesto pledge to end section 21?
“What steps is the government taking to prevent a rent debt crisis?”
Before Covid-19, there were over 1.15 million households on council housing waiting lists, and the number of families in insecure private-rented accommodation increased by 7% last year alone.
Shelter has estimated that 227,000 adult private renters have fallen into arrears since the start of the pandemic. Under current law, when the ban lifts, anyone who has accrued arrears of eight weeks or more can be automatically evicted.
This does not include those who can be made homeless as part of a ‘no fault’ eviction after the suspension lifts. Under Section 21 of the Housing Act 1988, landlords can ‘seek possession’ of their properties without a reason being given.
Boris Johnson and his predecessor Theresa May both pledged to end no-fault evictions, promising to bring forward a new ‘renters’ reform bill’. But the Conservatives have failed to act on this pledge.
Earlier this week, former Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell demanded that the government extend the evictions ban by at least another year, and called for rent arrears to be cancelled to prevent a “torrent of people” becoming homeless.
A cross-party group of MPs wrote to the government on Monday, also urging an extension, and warning that failure to do so would result in a “new wave of homelessness”. It was signed by nine Labour MPs, one DUP MP and ten Lib Dems.
Below is the full text of the letter sent by Thangam Debbonaire today.
Dear Robert
Extending the evictions ban
As you know, the ban on evictions is due to end on Sunday 23rd August. In March, you promised: “No renter who has lost income due to coronavirus will be forced out of their home, nor will any landlord face unmanageable debts.” I am writing today asking you to set out the steps you have taken to prevent a self-made homelessness crisis at the worst possible moment, as the furlough scheme winds up and we face the risk of growing infections of coronavirus.
Labour has consistently argued that the ban should not be lifted until the government has introduced changes to our broken housing system that will protect tenants.
What assessment has the government made of likely numbers of people facing homelessness if the ban is lifted? What consideration have they given to public health, with possibly thousands of households becoming homeless as we go into winter?
Why has the government not taken steps to honour your 2019 manifesto pledge to end section 21? Labour has called for the government to urgently introduce legislation that will abolish section 21 ‘no fault’ evictions and reform Section eight to prevent automatic eviction for tenants whose incomes have been hit by Covid.
What steps is the government taking to prevent a rent debt crisis? More than half of private renters aged between 25 and 34 years had no savings in 2018-19. But the government has repeatedly ignored calls to address this through the social security system. Renters are harder hit by the crisis, but government support has so far focused on landlords and home-owners.
Shelter estimates that nearly a quarter of a million people are at risk of eviction because of Covid economic impact. Veering from crisis to crisis is no way to run a country. After the incompetent handling of the exams fiasco, the government must act now to avoid more chaos of its own making.
The situation is urgent, but there is still time for you to rethink, and extend the ban. I urge you to do so.
Yours sincerely,
Thangam Debbonaire, MP for Bristol West
Shadow Secretary of State for Housing


labourlist--2020-08-18--Gavin Williamson has no trust, no credibility and must resign

I listened to the Education Secretary on the Today programme this morning and , like many of you probably , got increasingly angry at each of his vacuous replies and the blatant shirking of his responsibilities following the exam results chaos .
After nearly 40 % of students in England saw their teacher-predicted grades downgraded last week , Gavin Williamson repeatedly defended the standardisation – and only U-turned yesterday to say that teacher estimations would be used .
This has caused huge disruption and upset for young people across the country .
I can not believe what he has put @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my response , as a teacher , to some of Williamson ’ s claims this morning .
Gavin Williamson : “ This is something that firstly none of us wanted to see and none of us expected to see.
” How can you not have expected this ?
It was an algorithm !
And the rules of that algorithm literally built in disadvantage for poorer kids .
What ’ s more , all of this had just happened in Scotland .
Gavin Williamson : “ Making sure that no young person is disadvantaged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were aiming to do and what Ofqual and the exam boards were aiming to do.
” So why did the exact opposite happen ?
A quarter of children from state schools had their marks downgraded compared to just 10 % of private school students .
And your changes have not been thought through .
Many kids have already accepted second choices elsewhere and are now locked out of their first choice .
Meanwhile , universities flooded with new eligible applicants are now at risk of being totally overcrowded with no promises of extra @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want when trying to implement social distancing measures !
Gavin Williamson : “ The real focus is on ensuring that all children get back to school in September and ensuring that when we go into the 2021 exam season we are in a position where every child is taking exams .
Because the best way of guaranteeing standards is making sure we have a strong and fair and robust exam system.
” You have just failed to endorse the credibility of the teacher grades you decided yesterday that we should accept !
That @ @ @ @ @ @ @ talking about credibility next year .
But this is not surprising , given that – only last week – you said that teacher assessments would “ devalue ” qualifications and make students “ lose out twice over ” .
Gavin Williamson : “ My focus is three-fold : make sure that students get the grades that they deserve , make sure that we get every child back into school for September and making sure that we are delivering on the Prime Minister ’ s agenda of levelling up.
” Talking about ‘ levelling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ insulting .
You are on this radio programme because you have done exactly the opposite .
Your government has brought unneccesary suffering to all young people in this cohort and hit the worst-off hardest .
You U-turned on free school meals ; you U-turned on primary school openings ; and you U-turned on every child ’ s GCSE and A-Level grades after that .
You have no trust , no credibility and you need to resign .

I listened to the Education Secretary on the Today programme this morning and, probably like many of you, got increasingly angry at each of his vacuous replies and the blatant shirking of his responsibilities following the exam results chaos.
After nearly 40% of students in England saw their teacher-predicted grades downgraded last week, Gavin Williamson repeatedly defended the standardisation – and only U-turned yesterday to say that teacher estimations would be used.
This has caused huge disruption and upset for young people across the country. I cannot believe what he has put students like mine through. Here is my response, as a teacher, to some of Williamson’s claims this morning.
Gavin Williamson: “This is something that firstly none of us wanted to see and none of us expected to see.”
How can you not have expected this? It was an algorithm! And the rules of that algorithm literally built in disadvantage for poorer kids. What’s more, all of this had just happened in Scotland.
Gavin Williamson: “Making sure that no young person is disadvantaged was at the heart of what we were aiming to do and what Ofqual and the exam boards were aiming to do.”
Why did the exact opposite happen? A quarter of children from state schools had their marks downgraded compared to just 10% of private school students.
And your changes have not been thought through. Many kids have already accepted second choices elsewhere and are now locked out of their first choice. Meanwhile, universities flooded with new eligible applicants are now at risk of being totally overcrowded with no promises of extra support or resources – hardly something you want when trying to implement social distancing measures!
Gavin Williamson: “The real focus is on ensuring that all children get back to school in September and ensuring that when we go into the 2021 exam season we are in a position where every child is taking exams. Because the best way of guaranteeing standards is making sure we have a strong and fair and robust exam system.”
You have just failed to endorse the credibility of the teacher grades you decided yesterday that we should accept! That’s why you are switching to talking about credibility next year.
But this is not surprising, given that – only last week – you said that teacher assessments would “devalue” qualifications and make students “lose out twice over”.
Gavin Williamson: “My focus is three-fold: make sure that students get the grades that they deserve, make sure that we get every child back into school for September and making sure that we are delivering on the Prime Minister’s agenda of levelling up.”
Talking about ‘levelling up’ right now is hypocritical and insulting. You are on this radio programme because you have done exactly the opposite. Your government has brought unnecessary suffering to all young people in this cohort and hit the worst-off hardest.
You U-turned on free school meals; you U-turned on primary school openings; and you U-turned on every child’s GCSE and A-Level grades after that. You have no trust, no credibility – and you need to resign.


labourlist--2020-08-18--A plan to overhaul the UK’s unjust drugs policy is just around the corner

Values of fairness , justice and equality should underpin Labour Party policy and the way we seek to govern .
For decades , the UK ’ s drug laws have gone against these ideals with the situation growing increasingly dire over the last ten years of Tory rule .
We are currently in the midst of an unprecedented drug-related deaths crisis , with 5,546 people in the UK dying in 2018 from causes related to drugs – the highest figure on record .
In the same year , 1,784 were killed on British roads .
Like road victims , each @ @ @ @ @ @ @ son , someone ’ s daughter or sibling – as shown by this campaign group , it really could be ‘ Anyone ’ s Child ’ who falls victim to the drug crisis .
Also like road fatalities , many of these deaths were preventable .
Rising inequality , the stigmatisation and criminalisation of problematic drug users , and savage cuts to treatment services have brought us to this point .
It is sadly no surprise that the areas worst hit , such as parts of Scotland and the North East of England @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the UK .
And our drug laws are not helping .
A recent study from the organisation Release revealed that black people are nine times more likely to be stopped and searched for drugs than their white counterparts , despite being statistically less likely to use substances .
Black people are also significantly overrepresented in prisons for drug charges – a direct result of our racist drug laws introduced 50 years ago .
And all the while , Conservative ministers have admitted using class-A substances during their Oxbridge years – a confession that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact that the maximum penalty for merely possessing class-A ’ s is five years imprisonment .
It really is one rule for them , and another rule for the rest of us – unfair , unjust and unequal .
The Labour Campaign for Drug Policy Reform ( LCDPR ) was founded by Jeff Smith MP and the now Shadow Secretary for Housing Thangam Debbonaire MP and launched at a packed room at the 2018 Labour conference .
Our purpose was to create a forum for members and supporters to debate and shape Labour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and campaign for change .
Since then , much has changed .
The party ’ s 2019 manifesto promised to “ establish a royal commission to develop a public health approach to substance misuse , focusing on harm reduction rather than criminalisation ” – and was a paradigm shift in the party ’ s approach , demonstrating a commitment to ending the long-lost war on drugs .
However , there is a better way to do this than a time-consuming royal commission .
The LCDPR has been working since the spring of 2019 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , to gather views and generate ideas as to how Labour should tackle the problems associated with drug consumption and drug markets .
To facilitate these events , 18 grassroots Labour members were deployed as ambassadors to the campaign , tasked with coordinating meetings and acting as local points of contact with their communities .
Over 700 people attended meetings hosted in Belfast , Bristol , Glasgow , Grimsby , Gorseinon , Liverpool , London , Newcastle , Portsmouth , Wolverhampton , York and at the 2019 Labour Party conference .
The findings @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by an expert working group comprising leaders in the fields of academia , addiction , healthcare , treatment , policing and policy .
Comprehensive , transformative recommendations – based on the key themes emerging from the public meetings – are currently being drafted with a public release due in the autumn .
Our co-Founder Jeff Smith said : “ For decades , this country ’ s drug laws have contributed to massive health inequalities , intensified racial discrimination and failed our communities .
Drugs policy is an important issue for Labour – and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I ’ ve been really encouraged by the conversations that have taken place since we started the campaign two years ago , with members and supporters engaging constructively , and prominent figures in Labour coming out and acknowledging that the war on drugs has failed and that we need a new approach .
The launch of our recommendations will be a landmark moment in the campaign , setting out what we think should be in the next manifesto .
I would encourage Labour supporters , members and parliamentarians to give them their full @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and supporters to be placed at the heart of decision making and for the party to implement evidence-based drug policies that reflect their experiences , values and concerns .
That is why we will be calling on the Labour frontbench to consider our recommendations , open a dialogue and engage with our campaign – and ultimately to adopt our recommendations as party policy .
We call on Labour members to embrace the societal benefits of drug policy reform , raise our recommendations at the Constituency Labour Party level and champion the cause .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ overhaul the UK ’ s unjust approach to drug policy is just around the corner – watch this space .
If you would like to learn more about drug policy reform , or would like to join our mailing list to be kept up-to-date with the release of our recommendations please email [ email protected ] .

Values of fairness, justice and equality should underpin Labour Party policy and the way we seek to govern. For decades, the UK’s drug laws have gone against these ideals with the situation growing increasingly dire over the last ten years of Tory rule. We are currently in the midst of an unprecedented drug-related deaths crisis, with 5,546 people in the UK dying in 2018 from causes related to drugs – the highest figure on record. In the same year, 1,784 were killed on British roads. Like road victims, each of these casualties is someone’s son, someone’s daughter or sibling – as shown by this campaign group, it really could be ‘Anyone’s Child’ who falls victim to the drug crisis. And like road fatalities, many of these deaths were preventable.
Rising inequality, the stigmatisation and criminalisation of problematic drug users, and savage cuts to treatment services have brought us to this point. It is sadly no surprise that the areas worst-hit, such as parts of Scotland and the North East of England, are some of the poorest in the UK. Our drug laws are not helping. A recent study from the organisation Release revealed that Black people are nine times more likely to be stopped and searched for drugs than their white counterparts, despite being statistically less likely to use substances. Black people are also significantly overrepresented in prisons for drug charges – a direct result of our racist drug laws introduced 50 years ago.
All the while, Conservative ministers have admitted using Class A substances during their Oxbridge years – a confession that has come with no punishment despite the maximum penalty for merely possessing Class As being five years imprisonment. It really is one rule for them, and another rule for the rest of us – unfair, unjust and unequal. The Labour Campaign for Drug Policy Reform (LCDPR) was founded by Jeff Smith MP and the now Shadow Secretary for Housing Thangam Debbonaire MP and launched at a packed room at the 2018 Labour conference. Our purpose was to create a forum for members and supporters to debate and shape Labour’s drug policy for the future and campaign for change.
Since then, much has changed. The party’s 2019 manifesto promised to “establish a royal commission to develop a public health approach to substance misuse, focusing on harm reduction rather than criminalisation”. It was a paradigm shift in the party’s approach, showing a commitment to ending the long-lost war on drugs. But there is a better way to do this than a time-consuming royal commission. The LCDPR has been working since the spring of 2019, through a series of public meetings, to gather views and generate ideas as to how Labour should tackle the problems associated with drug consumption and drug markets.
To facilitate these events, 18 grassroots Labour members were deployed as ambassadors to the campaign, tasked with coordinating meetings and acting as local points of contact with their communities. Over 700 people attended meetings hosted in Belfast, Bristol, Glasgow, Grimsby, Gorseinon, Liverpool, London, Newcastle, Portsmouth, Wolverhampton, York and at the 2019 Labour Party conference. The findings from this grassroots consultation has been synthesised by an expert working group comprising leaders in the fields of academia, addiction, healthcare, treatment, policing and policy. Comprehensive, transformative recommendations – based on the key themes emerging from the public meetings – are currently being drafted with a public release due in the autumn.
Our co-founder Jeff Smith said: “For decades, this country’s drug laws have contributed to massive health inequalities, intensified racial discrimination and failed our communities. Drugs policy is an important issue for Labour – and the people we seek to represent. I’ve been really encouraged by the conversations that have taken place since we started the campaign two years ago, with members and supporters engaging constructively, and prominent figures in Labour coming out and acknowledging that the war on drugs has failed and that we need a new approach. The launch of our recommendations will be a landmark moment in the campaign, setting out what we think should be in the next manifesto. I would encourage Labour supporters, members and parliamentarians to give them their full consideration.”
The LCDPR wants Labour members and supporters to be placed at the heart of decision making and for the party to implement evidence-based drug policies that reflect their experiences, values and concerns. That is why we will be calling on the Labour frontbench to consider our recommendations, open a dialogue and engage with our campaign – and ultimately to adopt our recommendations as party policy. We call on Labour members to embrace the societal benefits of drug policy reform, raise our recommendations at the Constituency Labour Party level and champion the cause. A comprehensive plan for how Labour should overhaul the UK’s unjust approach to drug policy is just around the corner – watch this space. If you would like to learn more about drug policy reform, or would like to join our mailing list to be kept up-to-date with the release of our recommendations please email [email protected].


labourlist--2020-08-18--Tory attacks on the BBC are mounting. Don’t fall for the Conservative con

This month sees television licence demands drop on the doorstep of several hundred thousand pensioner households in the UK – the direct result of the Tories ’ decision to foist the cost of over 75s ’ TV licences on the BBC as part of the last charter renewal .
It had been another great achievement of the last Labour government to exempt over 75 ’ s from paying the TV licence .
And what a lifeline it proved .
Figures from Age UK illustrate that contrary to the assertion that older people are well off , 29 % of over-75s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poverty line .
And 38 % of over-75s – that ’ s 2.1 million people – agreed that television was their main form of company .
So when in 2015 the Tory government forced the BBC to take on responsibility of the over-75s ’ licence fee as part of a charter renewal that also included a cut of £800m to the BBC ’ s budget , it was always going to be an impossible challenge .
Because carrying the overall cost of the universal licences would have topped £745m .
In practice , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Two , BBC Four , the BBC News channel , the BBC Scotland channel , Radio 5live , and a number of local radio stations .
But this is not just about cash .
It is part of a wider attack on the BBC and indeed the treasured institutions of the UK that the destructors in Downing Street have in their sights .
And the modus operandi is always the same , whether it is the BBC , the NHS , local government or local services such as fire and police : cut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ body when it can ’ t deliver the same level of service ; or attack it when – as in this case – it has to increase fees to maintain that service .
They undermine confidence in the public body and its ability to serve the public and so make it ripe for abolition , reform or privatisation .
And that ’ s exactly what ’ s going on here with the BBC .
Tory attacks on its credibility are mounting , aided and abetted by their friends in the right-wing press , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and viability .
Because in a media landscape where there is already too little independence – independent , that is , of the Tory Party – attacking the BBC ’ s and our other public service broadcasters ’ budgets is the only lever the government has to control the capacity to ask tough questions on behalf of the British people .
My heart sinks whenever I see Labour members sharing memes demonising the ‘ mainstream media ’ .
The BBC does not always get it right .
Too often its political coverage reflects @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impartiality has led it to give unnecessary air time to climate change deniers and others in the pursuit of balance and it struggles to grasp and report on political shifts at the grassroots .
But if you find yourself forensically analysing every tweet by Laura Kuenssberg for bias , never mind tweeting abuse at her , then it may be time to reassess your priorities .
We must never fall for the trap that says the BBC and other public service broadcasters are part of the problem .
Because the Tories ’ plan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ then the credibility of the BBC , commercialise it – which in turn takes huge sums away from other broadcasters – and leave a situation where only billionaires can afford to run TV channels .
A British version of Fox News , if you like .
The BBC is not perfect .
It is often its own worst enemy and rarely blows its own trumpet of success .
As a truly independent broadcaster , then , we must accept that it will criticise or attack Labour from time to time .
That is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with a genuinely free broadcast media .
And we should not want or expect anything else .
So don ’ t get conned by Tory attacks .
Don ’ t get seduced by memes on social media that trick you into doing the Tories ’ dirty work .
The BBC is more than the last politics report you saw , it makes a massive contribution to our nation ’ s cultural life , our creative industries and our cohesion as a society .
Because the only alternative to the BBC is not a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a British Fox TV .
Don ’ t fall for it .

This month sees television licence demands drop on the doorstep of several hundred thousand pensioner households in the UK – the direct result of the Tories’ decision to foist the cost of over-75s’ TV licences on the BBC as part of the last charter renewal. It had been another great achievement of the last Labour government to exempt over-75s from paying the TV licence. And what a lifeline it proved. Figures from Age UK illustrate that, contrary to the assertion that older people are well-off, 29% of over-75s live in poverty or just above the poverty line. And 38% of over-75s – that’s 2.1 million people – agreed that television was their main form of company.
When in 2015 the Tory government forced the BBC to take on responsibility of the over-75s’ licence fee as part of a charter renewal that also included a cut of £800m to the BBC’s budget, it was always going to be an impossible challenge. Carrying the overall cost of the universal licences would have topped £745m. In practice, this would have meant closures of BBC Two, BBC Four, the BBC News channel, the BBC Scotland channel, Radio 5 Live, and a number of local radio stations.
But this is not just about cash. It is part of a wider attack on the BBC, and indeed the treasured institutions of the UK that the destructors in Downing Street have in their sights. And the modus operandi is always the same, whether it is the BBC, the NHS, local government or local services such as fire and police: cut the funding, then attack that public body when it can’t deliver the same level of service; or attack it when – as in this case – it has to increase fees to maintain that service.
They undermine confidence in the public body and its ability to serve the public and so make it ripe for abolition, reform or privatisation. And that’s exactly what’s going on here with the BBC. Tory attacks on its credibility are mounting, aided and abetted by their friends in the right-wing press, ahead of an attack on its independence and viability. Because in a media landscape where there is already too little independence – independent, that is, of the Tory Party – attacking the BBC’s and our other public service broadcasters’ budgets is the only lever the government has to control the capacity to ask tough questions on behalf of the British people.
My heart sinks whenever I see Labour members sharing memes demonising the ‘mainstream media’. The BBC does not always get it right. Too often its political coverage reflects the status quo, its interpretation of impartiality has led it to give unnecessary air time to climate change deniers and others in the pursuit of balance, and it struggles to grasp and report on political shifts at the grassroots.
But if you find yourself forensically analysing every tweet by Laura Kuenssberg for bias, never mind tweeting abuse at her, then it may be time to reassess your priorities. We must never fall for the trap that says the BBC and other public service broadcasters are part of the problem. Because the Tory plan is clear: destroy the funding and then the credibility of the BBC, commercialise it – which in turn takes huge sums away from other broadcasters – and leave a situation where only billionaires can afford to run TV channels. A British version of Fox News, if you like.
The BBC is not perfect. It is often its own worst enemy and rarely blows its own trumpet of success. As a truly independent broadcaster, then, we must accept that it will criticise or attack Labour from time to time. That is the price of living in a democracy with a genuinely free broadcast media. And we should not want or expect anything else. So don’t get conned by Tory attacks. Don’t get seduced by memes on social media that trick you into doing the Tories’ dirty work. The BBC is more than the last politics report you saw, it makes a massive contribution to our nation’s cultural life, our creative industries and our cohesion as a society. Because the only alternative to the BBC is not a workers’ paradise broadcasting collective. It is a British Fox TV. Don’t fall for it.


labourlist--2020-08-18--Labour slams Public Health England decision as “desperate attempt to shift the blame”

Labour has condemned the government ’ s decision to scrap Public Health England as a “ desperate attempt to shift the blame after years of cutting public health budgets ” .
Shadow public health minister Alex Norris responded this afternoon to Matt Hancock ’ s confirmation that the public body will be closed down as part of a plan to create a new National Institute for Health Protection .
The Labour MP described the announcement as a distraction from the need for an effective test , track and trace programme and said that it “ gave no answers on what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public health ” under the remit of PHE .
Commenting on the statement , Norris said : “ The structural reorganisation that Matt Hancock has announced today is a desperate attempt to shift the blame after years of cutting public health budgets , when the real shift we need is towards an effective local test and trace system that delivers mass testing and case finding .
“ Matt Hancock himself was responsible for Public Health England and in setting PHE ’ s priorities last year – ministers didn ’ t even mention preparing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no answers on what will happen to other vital areas of public health like addiction , obesity and sexual health either .
“ We went into this pandemic with health inequalities widening and life expectancy going backwards for the poorest .
We have seen that Covid-19 has thrived on these inequalities , disproportionately impacting the poorest and Black , Asian and minority ethnic communities .
A strong public health sector is needed more than ever.
” Hancock told the public today that the new National Institute for Health Protection will be responsible for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ working against the threats of biological weapons and infectious diseases .
The government has said that the body will from this week subsume parts of PHE , the joint biosecurity centre and the NHS test and trace programme .
Hancock revealed that Baroness Dido Harding will temporarily head-up the organisation .
PHE has been blamed by ministers for the suspension of community Covid testing and tracing in March – but senior sources have reported that all decisions made then were in partnership with government advisers .
Shadow Health Secretary Jon Ashworth called the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ He tweeted ahead of Hancock ’ s appearance : “ A structural reorganisation mid-pandemic is time consuming , energy sapping ; it ’ s risky , indeed irresponsible ” .
He added : “ And what an insulting way to treat hardworking staff who heard about this from a paywalled Sunday newspaper leaving them with questions and worries about their jobs .
“ The shift we need is towards a local test and trace system delivering mass testing , that finds cases , uses local expertise to trace and supports people to isolate @ @ @ @

Labour has condemned the government’s decision to scrap Public Health England as a “desperate attempt to shift the blame after years of cutting public health budgets”.
Shadow public health minister Alex Norris responded this afternoon to Matt Hancock’s confirmation that the public body will be closed down as part of a plan to create a new National Institute for Health Protection.
The Labour MP described the announcement as a distraction from the need for an effective test, track and trace programme and said that it “gave no answers on what will happen to other vital areas of public health” under the remit of PHE.
Commenting on the statement, Norris said: “The structural reorganisation that Matt Hancock has announced today is a desperate attempt to shift the blame after years of cutting public health budgets, when the real shift we need is towards an effective local test and trace system that delivers mass testing and case finding.
“Matt Hancock himself was responsible for Public Health England and in setting PHE’s priorities last year – ministers didn’t even mention preparing for a pandemic. This announcement gave no answers on what will happen to other vital areas of public health like addiction, obesity and sexual health either.
“We went into this pandemic with health inequalities widening and life expectancy going backwards for the poorest. We have seen that Covid-19 has thrived on these inequalities, disproportionately impacting the poorest and Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities. A strong public health sector is needed more than ever.”
Hancock told the public today that the new National Institute for Health Protection will be responsible for dealing with pandemics, as well as working against the threats of biological weapons and infectious diseases.
The government has said that the body will from this week subsume parts of PHE, the joint biosecurity centre and the NHS test and trace programme. Hancock revealed that Baroness Dido Harding will temporarily head-up the organisation.
PHE has been blamed by ministers for the suspension of community Covid testing and tracing in March – but senior sources have reported that all decisions made then were in partnership with government advisers.
Shadow Health Secretary Jon Ashworth called the decision “desperate blame shifting”. He tweeted ahead of Hancock’s appearance: “A structural reorganisation mid-pandemic is time consuming, energy sapping; it’s risky, indeed irresponsible”.
He added: “And what an insulting way to treat hardworking staff who heard about this from a paywalled Sunday newspaper leaving them with questions and worries about their jobs.
“The shift we need is towards a local test and trace system delivering mass testing, that finds cases, uses local expertise to trace and supports people to isolate with security.”


labourlist--2020-08-19--Labour slams Tories for “making rail travel unaffordable”

Labour has warned that the Conservatives are “ making rail travel unaffordable ” as a 1.6 % increase in rail fares is announced for January next year adding around £100 to the cost of many annual season tickets .
Responding to an annual price rise across the majority of regulated tickets announced today , the party has highlighted that average fares have increased by 42 % since 2010 and have risen two and half times faster than wages .
Labour pointed out that some will be paying £3,350 more to travel to work than when the Tories came to power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of £3,355 – is for the Virgin Trains season ticket between Birmingham and London Euston .
Labour ’ s Jim McMahon said : “ Decisions taken by government ministers are making rail travel unaffordable and discouraging people back on to the network which will be vital for getting the rail sector on a stable footing.
” The largest percentage increase identified was between Thame Bridge Parkway near Walsall and Nuneaton , where the price of an annual season ticket in January 2020 will have risen by 61 % since 2010 .
The Shadow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that our fragmented , privatised railway drives up costs and leaves passengers paying more for less .
“ Labour has long argued that public ownership of the rail network will provide better value for the taxpayer and for passengers , the government must stop paying the profit of the private rail companies and bring the network in-house.
” Price increases come into force every January for regulated fares and the rise is linked to the previous July ’ s retail price index ( RPI ) measure of inflation – published by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ RPI is higher than the more commonly used consumer price index ( CPI ) .
RPI includes the costs of housing , including mortgage interest costs and council tax for example , while CPI does not .
The 1.6 % RPI figure for July published today compares to 1 % for the CPI measure of inflation for the same month , which rose from 0.6 % in June despite the ongoing economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic .

Labour has warned that the Conservatives are “making rail travel unaffordable” as a 1.6% increase in rail fares is announced for January next year adding around £100 to the cost of many annual season tickets.
Responding to an annual price rise across the majority of regulated tickets announced today, the party has highlighted that average fares have increased by 42% since 2010 and have risen two and half times faster than wages.
Labour pointed out that some will be paying £3,350 more to travel to work than when the Tories came to power, and that the highest increase – of £3,355 – is for the Virgin Trains season ticket between Birmingham and London Euston.
Labour’s Jim McMahon said: “Decisions taken by government ministers are making rail travel unaffordable and discouraging people back on to the network which will be vital for getting the rail sector on a stable footing.”
The largest percentage increase identified was between Thame Bridge Parkway near Walsall and Nuneaton, where the price of an annual season ticket in January 2020 will have risen by 61% since 2010.
The Shadow Transport Secretary added: “The truth is that our fragmented, privatised railway drives up costs and leaves passengers paying more for less.
“Labour has long argued that public ownership of the rail network will provide better value for the taxpayer and for passengers, the government must stop paying the profit of the private rail companies and bring the network in-house.”
Price increases come into force every January for regulated fares and the rise is linked to the previous July’s retail price index (RPI) measure of inflation – published by the Office for National Statistics today.
TSSA general secretary Manuel Cortes has said that the government should rule out the increase in 2021 due to the Covid crisis, and called on ministers to “come clean” and declare that they are taking railways back into public ownership.
Cortes said: “Since the pandemic hit our shores, our railways have kept key workers and vital supplies moving. There can be no doubt how vital our rail infrastructure is for the wellbeing of our nation and for our efforts to decarbonise our economy.
“With that in mind our industry needs a new start, which puts passengers not profits first. Let’s not forget that last month the ONS also reclassified train companies in England, Wales and Scotland as public bodies.
“This is the moment for government to come clean and tell us that not only will there be no increase in fares but that they are taking our railways back into public ownership.
“We simply must get more people to use our railways for leisure travel as there is very likely to be a drop in commuter numbers as we feel the bite of what is expected to be a very deep recession and also increased home working taking hold.
“This means putting in place a new affordable and more flexible fare structure which serves the needs of changing working patterns and which strongly promotes people using our railways for leisure purposes.”
The RPI is higher than the more commonly used consumer price index (CPI). RPI includes the costs of housing, including mortgage interest costs and council tax for example, while CPI does not.
The 1.6% RPI figure for July published today compares to 1% for the CPI measure of inflation for the same month, which rose from 0.6% in June despite the ongoing economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic.


labourlist--2020-08-19--Gordon Brown set to launch pro-jobs, pro-science campaign for Covid recovery

Former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown is set to launch a pro-jobs , pro-science campaign this week , with the aim of promoting science jobs and research as key to the UK ’ s Covid economic recovery plan .
Speaking at the Edinburgh International Book Festival on Friday , Brown will call on MPs , mayors , local authorities , trade unions and businesses to back staying in the EU ’ s Horizon programme for research and innovation .
Now with a new budget of €80.9bn agreed , the EU ’ s biggest ever initiative of its kind pioneers new @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Brown aims to highlight its role in maintaining and creating UK jobs .
Keeping the UK ’ s Horizon partnerships , which does not require EU membership , has been identified as a priority by institutions such as the Confederation of British Industry ( CBI ) , Universities UK and the Academy of Medical Sciences .
Stressing that the programme is especially important for the UK ’ s university towns and for generating inward investment to the nations and regions , Brown ’ s call to action comes after the UK officially entered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to join him and EU vice-president Frans Timmermans at the Edinburgh Book Festival online this Friday to discuss the Way Forward For Europe and the launch of his new pro-job , pro-science campaign to boost the UK ’ s Covid economic recovery plan .
Register here , then watch here .
Labour under Keir Starmer has criticised UK GDP falling by 20.4 % in the second quarter of 2020 – a larger drop than that of any other European country – and “ Johnson ’ s jobs crisis ” caused by a “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Edinburgh event , Brown commented : “ The Covid-related jobs crisis means maintaining and creating new jobs is the biggest economic challenge we face across the UK in the next few months .
“ The polling shows people across Britain understand the big economic issue is no longer about being for or against Europe anymore .
It ’ s about whether you are for full employment across our regions and nations .
“ The science and jobs benefit of Horizon membership to our universities and to high quality ancillary companies is vital to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
“ It ’ s why I will be calling on all mayors , local authorities and MPs , trades unions , businesses and others to enlist in the pro-jobs campaign and to support Britain staying in Horizon.
” A YouGov poll in July by found that 66 % of British voters were in favour of the UK staying as a member of the EU Horizon programme after the end of 2020 , with just 13 % saying they wanted to end the membership .
The former Prime Minister will be joining the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vice-president Frans Timmermans , who is currently leading the European Commission ’ s work on Europe ’ s Green New Deal .
Register for the Edinburgh International Book Festival here , then watch the event live on Friday at 8.30pm here .

Former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown is set to launch a pro-jobs, pro-science campaign this week, with the aim of promoting science jobs and research as key to the UK’s Covid economic recovery plan.
Speaking at the Edinburgh International Book Festival on Friday, Brown will call on MPs, mayors, local authorities, trade unions and businesses to back staying in the EU’s Horizon programme for research and innovation.
Now with a new budget of €80.9bn agreed, the EU’s biggest ever initiative of its kind pioneers new medical, environmental and hi-tech research. Brown aims to highlight its role in maintaining and creating UK jobs.
Keeping the UK’s Horizon partnerships, which does not require EU membership, has been identified as a priority by institutions such as the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), Universities UK and the Academy of Medical Sciences.
Stressing that the programme is especially important for the UK’s university towns and for generating inward investment to the nations and regions, Brown’s call to action comes after the UK officially entered recession.
Gordon Brown invites LabourList readers to join him and EU vice-president Frans Timmermans at the Edinburgh Book Festival online this Friday to discuss the Way Forward For Europe and the launch of his new pro-job, pro-science campaign to boost the UK’s Covid economic recovery plan. Register here, then watch here.
Labour under Keir Starmer has criticised UK GDP falling by 20.4% in the second quarter of 2020 – a larger drop than that of any other European country – and “Johnson’s jobs crisis” caused by a “one-size-fits-all” approach.
Ahead of the Edinburgh event, Brown commented: “The Covid-related jobs crisis means maintaining and creating new jobs is the biggest economic challenge we face across the UK in the next few months.
“The polling shows people across Britain understand the big economic issue is no longer about being for or against Europe anymore. It’s about whether you are for full employment across our regions and nations.
“The science and jobs benefit of Horizon membership to our universities and to high quality ancillary companies is vital to our four nation Covid economic recovery plan.
“It’s why I will be calling on all mayors, local authorities and MPs, trades unions, businesses and others to enlist in the pro-jobs campaign and to support Britain staying in Horizon.”
A YouGov poll in July by found that 66% of British voters were in favour of the UK staying as a member of the EU Horizon programme after the end of 2020, with just 13% saying they wanted to end the membership.
The former Prime Minister will be joining the virtual event on Friday along with EU vice-president Frans Timmermans, who is currently leading the European Commission’s work on Europe’s Green New Deal.
Register for the Edinburgh International Book Festival here, then watch the event live on Friday at 8.30pm here.