labourlist--2020-06-02--Labour demands date for publication of Covid-19 BAME review

Marsha de Cordova has called on the government to announce a date this week for the publication of the delayed review into the impact of Covid-19 on BAME communities .
The Shadow Secretary of State for Women and Equalities made the demand today following the failure of Public Health England to publish its findings by the end of May as originally promised .
De Cordova urged that the Health Secretary Matt Hancock “ announce a date this week for its publication ” and said that the “ review and action taken based on its findings could save lives ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ : “ The government has already delayed the report ’ s release from the end of May .
BAME communities across the country need reassurance that this issue is being taken seriously , and not being kicked into the long grass .
“ It is unacceptable to delay the release of a report into the unequal suffering of the BAME community on the basis of global events that relate to the suffering of black communities around the world.
” The GMB trade union has declared that any delay “ heightens distrust ” , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We can ’ t afford this at a time when stark evidence shows the pandemic disproportionately impacts BAME workers .
“ People are dying and ministers have been too slow to protect lives .
That ’ s why GMB has joined the call for an independent public inquiry on the government ’ s response to coronavirus and its impact on BAME lives.
” The government launched the investigation in April , following reports of disproportionate numbers of coronavirus-related deaths among BAME communities .
Labour launched its own review shortly afterwards .
Sky News @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was due to the report being in “ close proximity to the current situation in America ” and a “ bad combination ” if published amid protests over the killing of George Floyd in the US .
The Department of Health and Social Care has denied that the delay in the report ’ s release was linked to events in the US .
A spokesperson said : “ It is not true to say this has been delayed due to global events.
” Analysis of NHS data by University College London last month @ @ @ @ @ @ @ likely to die from coronavirus than the general UK population .
The research found that the risk of death for black African groups was 3.24 times higher ; Pakistani was 3.29 times higher ; Bangladeshi was 2.41 times higher ; black Caribbean was 2.21 times higher ; and Indian was 1.7 times higher .

Marsha de Cordova has called on the government to announce a date this week for the publication of the delayed review into the impact of Covid-19 on BAME communities.
The Shadow Secretary of State for Women and Equalities made the demand today following the failure of Public Health England to publish its findings by the end of May as originally promised.
De Cordova urged that the Health Secretary Matt Hancock “announce a date this week for its publication” and said that the “review and action taken based on its findings could save lives”.
Commenting on the investigation, she said: “The government has already delayed the report’s release from the end of May. BAME communities across the country need reassurance that this issue is being taken seriously, and not being kicked into the long grass.
“It is unacceptable to delay the release of a report into the unequal suffering of the BAME community on the basis of global events that relate to the suffering of black communities around the world.”
The GMB trade union has declared that any delay “heightens distrust”, with the national secretary saying: “We can’t afford this at a time when stark evidence shows the pandemic disproportionately impacts BAME workers.
“People are dying and ministers have been too slow to protect lives. That’s why GMB has joined the call for an independent public inquiry on the government’s response to coronavirus and its impact on BAME lives.”
The government launched the investigation in April, following reports of disproportionate numbers of coronavirus-related deaths among BAME communities. Labour launched its own review shortly afterwards.
Sky News reported on Monday evening that the delay was due to the report being in “close proximity to the current situation in America” and a “bad combination” if published amid protests over the killing of George Floyd in the US.
The Department of Health and Social Care has denied that the delay in the report’s release was linked to events in the US. A spokesperson said: “It is not true to say this has been delayed due to global events.”
Analysis of NHS data by University College London last month found that BAME people are significantly more likely to die from coronavirus than the general UK population.
The research found that the risk of death for black African groups was 3.24 times higher; Pakistani was 3.29 times higher; Bangladeshi was 2.41 times higher; black Caribbean was 2.21 times higher; and Indian was 1.7 times higher.


labourlist--2020-06-02--The “law and order” president threatens use of military against US citizens

President Trump gave a terrifying statement last night .
As he stood in the White House Rose Garden threatening military force against US citizens and describing protests against the killing of George Floyd as “ domestic acts of terror ” , riot police cleared crowds outside – before the curfew – by firing rubber bullets and tear gas at protesters .
We soon discovered why : the President had to walk across the street for a photo opportunity at a church , where he held up a Bible that read “ God is love ” .
In his speech , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dominate the streets ” and vowed to “ protect the rights of law-abiding Americans , including your second amendment rights ” .
( I think we can assume that this reminder of the right to bear arms wasn ’ t directed at Black Americans . )
He wasn ’ t shy about how this is shaping his electoral strategy either : declaring himself to be “ your president of law and order ” , comparisons can easily be drawn between 2020 and 1968 , when Nixon ran a ‘ law and order ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ followed the assassination of Martin Luther King .
Diane Abbott refers to the 1968 civil unrest in her new LabourList piece about George Floyd and the current US protests .
Her analysis of the situation extends to the UK : “ The British political class need not think that it could not happen here.
” Institutional racism in the UK is often downplayed on the basis , for example , that our police officers are usually unarmed .
We saw this put on BBC Newsnight to spoken-word artist George the Poet , who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in police custody here .
And as new Labour MP Abena Oppong-Asare has raised , the use of police powers during the Covid-19 crisis has disproportionately affected BAME communities .
According to Sky News , the report on the impact of coronavirus on BAME communities has yet again been delayed .
Why ?
Due to “ worries ” about “ current global events ” , apparently .
As Labour ’ s Marsha de Cordova said : “ If anything , recent events make the release of this report all the more urgent.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the US would delay the publication of such important findings in the UK , concerning the deaths of many thousands , is an insulting and sickening one .
As parliament returns from recess today , there is plenty of significant parliamentary activity to watch .
The government has decided to discriminate against vulnerable MPs and disenfranchise voters by scrapping the Covid-19 virtual Commons .
Despite the new online system working well , Jacob Rees-Mogg wants MPs to vote in person and form incredibly long , socially-distanced queues – as if the voting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Many are hoping for a government climbdown or a successful amendment .
And then , if MPs have enough time after all of that queueing , they are set to consider the new parliamentary constituencies bill .
Read Cat Smith ’ s LabourList piece to find out why Labour is opposed to the reforms .
Sign up to LabourList ’ s morning email for everything Labour , every weekday morning .

President Trump gave a terrifying statement last night. As he stood in the White House Rose Garden threatening military force against US citizens and describing protests against the killing of George Floyd as “domestic acts of terror”, riot police cleared crowds outside – before the curfew – by firing rubber bullets and tear gas at protesters. We soon discovered why: the President had to walk across the street for a photo opportunity at a church, where he held up a Bible that read “God is love”.
In his speech, Trump promised that law enforcement would “dominate the streets” and vowed to “protect the rights of law-abiding Americans, including your second amendment rights”. (I think we can assume that this reminder of the right to bear arms wasn’t directed at Black Americans.) He wasn’t shy about how this is shaping his electoral strategy either: declaring himself to be “your president of law and order”, comparisons can easily be drawn between 2020 and 1968, when Nixon ran a ‘law and order’ campaign on the back of riots that followed the assassination of Martin Luther King.
Diane Abbott refers to the 1968 civil unrest in her new LabourList piece about George Floyd and the current US protests. Her analysis of the situation extends to the UK: “The British political class need not think that it could not happen here.” Institutional racism in the UK is often downplayed on the basis, for example, that our police officers are usually unarmed. We saw this put on BBC Newsnight to spoken-word artist George the Poet, who in response cited some of the deaths in police custody here. And as new Labour MP Abena Oppong-Asare has raised, the use of police powers during the Covid-19 crisis has disproportionately affected BAME communities.
According to Sky News, the report on the impact of coronavirus on BAME communities has yet again been delayed. Why? Due to “worries” about “current global events”, apparently. As Labour’s Marsha de Cordova said: “If anything, recent events make the release of this report all the more urgent.” The idea that Black people seeking justice in the US would delay the publication of such important findings in the UK, concerning the deaths of many thousands, is an insulting and sickening one.
As parliament returns from recess today, there is plenty of significant parliamentary activity to watch. The government has decided to discriminate against vulnerable MPs and disenfranchise voters by scrapping the Covid-19 virtual Commons. Despite the new online system working well, Jacob Rees-Mogg wants MPs to vote in person and form incredibly long, socially-distanced queues – as if the voting lobbies weren’t already impractical enough. Many are hoping for a government climbdown or a successful amendment. And then, if MPs have enough time after all of that queueing, they are set to consider the new parliamentary constituencies bill. Read Cat Smith’s LabourList piece to find out why Labour is opposed to the reforms. Sign up to LabourList’s morning email for everything Labour, every weekday morning.


labourlist--2020-06-02--WATCH: Commons voting proposals are “survival of the fittest”, says Labour MP

Chris Bryant has warned that the government proposals for MPs voting in parliament are “ survival of the fittest , and that isn ’ t democracy ” .
In an interview with Sky News this morning , the Labour MP for Rhonnda declared that “ every MP should be able to participate in all the proceedings in parliament , especially at a time when the government needs proper scrutiny ” .
He added : “ The only way you can do that , when quite a significant number of MPs are either shielding themselves or have shielding responsibilities for family @ @ @ @ @ @ @ able to participate remotely.
” Concerns have been raised about the government ’ s proposal to scrap the virtual House of Commons and the disproportionate impact it would have on MPs who are vulnerable to coronavirus .
MPs will debate the changes in parliament this afternoon .
They will then form a socially-distanced , kilometre-long queue stretching throughout the parliamentary estate to vote .
It is expected that around 250 of the 400 MPs will not be able to take part in the vote because they are shielding , vulnerable due to being @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health condition , or are caring for others .
Labour has rejected the proposals put forward by the government as “ discriminatory ” , and tabled an amendment to the motion seeking to retain the provisions allowing MPs to participate remotely .

Chris Bryant has warned that the government proposals for MPs voting in parliament are “survival of the fittest, and that isn’t democracy”.
In an interview with Sky News this morning, the Labour MP for Rhonnda declared that “every MP should be able to participate in all the proceedings in parliament, especially at a time when the government needs proper scrutiny”.
He added: “The only way you can do that, when quite a significant number of MPs are either shielding themselves or have shielding responsibilities for family members, is for them to be able to participate remotely.”
"It's the survival of the fittest, and that isn't democracy."@RhonddaBryant says MPs should continue to be allowed to vote remotely, or those who are shielding themselves or family members will be "excluded".#KayBurley#COVID19 latest: https://t.co/4Vgc2VyCWU pic.twitter.com/24kvQLHESx — SkyNews (@SkyNews) June 2, 2020
Concerns have been raised about the government’s proposal to scrap the virtual House of Commons and the disproportionate impact it would have on MPs who are vulnerable to coronavirus.
MPs will debate the changes in parliament this afternoon. They will then form a socially-distanced, kilometre-long queue stretching throughout the parliamentary estate to vote.
It is expected that around 250 of the 400 MPs will not be able to take part in the vote because they are shielding, vulnerable due to being over 70, pregnant, have a health condition, or are caring for others.
Labour has rejected the proposals put forward by the government as “discriminatory”, and tabled an amendment to the motion seeking to retain the provisions allowing MPs to participate remotely.


labourlist--2020-06-02--The boundary reforms should be fair – and this Tory power-grab isn’t

After years of delay and indecision , the government has finally abandoned its plans to reduce the number of MPs to 600 .
A review of parliamentary boundaries is long overdue , with current seats drawn up on data from two decades ago .
Labour is keen to support a review to best reflect our country as it is now – but it must be done fairly and not just to advantage the Conservative Party .
Covid-19 has underscored the importance of strong scrutiny over the executive during a time of crisis , yet the Tories have not missed this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ power-grabs .
They are attempting to once again rig democracy in their favour by removing parliament ’ s ability to have a final vote on boundary proposals .
Instead , the approval of the boundary review will be in the hands of the government .
This is the same government that unlawfully prorogued parliament .
We can not assume that they won ’ t use the lack of parliamentary oversight to push through changes that give the Conservatives unfair advantages .
The last review based on 600 seats was stalled because it did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ MPs from all sides agreed that the change was dangerous and irresponsible .
Under the proposed new bill , the 600-seat review would have passed the Privy Council and become law with ease .
This loophole allows for a power-grab , with no parliamentary backstop to limit the dominance of the executive .
We also have concerns about the electoral register chosen as the basis for the boundary review .
The Tories have decided upon using the 1st December 2020 electoral register , which will be heavily affected by the Covid-19 crisis .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ stretched to deliver their vital services during this difficult time , their priority will not be updating the electoral register .
And elections act as a major driver of registration – but there are no elections scheduled for 2020 , with all local elections postponed to May 2021 .
Without elections to prepare for , the priority focus of any council will not be carrying out the annual canvass to update the register .
Councils have so much more to worry about as they provide frontline support for vulnerable and shielding people in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to a patchy and unrepresentative electoral register .
But the Tories know this .
And they know that when lots of people are registered to vote , they are less likely to do well in election .
The result will be constituencies that do not take account of huge swathes of unregistered voters .
For constituencies with big student populations , students may not have returned to their universities by December 2020 , meaning thousands of students from across the country will not be registered to vote .
Labour supports using the most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 2019 general election .
We also support increasing the flexibility when it comes to the size of constituencies .
Currently , all constituencies have to be within 5 % above or below of the national average electorate size .
In previous reviews , this quota would have created seats that are hugely oversized or include multi-authority constituencies that do not take account of local ties and communities .
Labour has long opposed the restrictive 5 % quota .
A wider variance will allow for greater flexibility and consideration of local ties and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been beset with dither and delay , with millions of pounds of tax-payers ’ money wasted on shelved reviews .
Given the current boundaries are 20 years old , the government must not waste this opportunity by choosing an incomplete and potentially unrepresentative register compiled during a global pandemic .
And the government can not use this bill to strengthen its own power at the expense of parliamentary scrutiny .
It is an insult to the House of Commons and sets a dangerous precedent for future legislation .

After years of delay and indecision, the government has finally abandoned its plans to reduce the number of MPs to 600. A review of parliamentary boundaries is long overdue, with current seats drawn up on data from two decades ago. Labour is keen to support a review to best reflect our country as it is now – but it must be done fairly and not just to advantage the Conservative Party.
Covid-19 has underscored the importance of strong scrutiny over the executive during a time of crisis, yet the Tories have not missed this opportunity to sneak through a few government power-grabs. They are attempting to once again rig democracy in their favour by removing parliament’s ability to have a final vote on boundary proposals. Instead, the approval of the boundary review will be in the hands of the government.
This is the same government that unlawfully prorogued parliament. We cannot assume that they won’t use the lack of parliamentary oversight to push through changes that give the Conservatives unfair advantages. The last review based on 600 seats was stalled because it did not command a majority in parliament. MPs from all sides agreed that the change was dangerous and irresponsible. Under the proposed new bill, the 600-seat review would have passed the Privy Council and become law with ease. This loophole allows for a power-grab, with no parliamentary backstop to limit the dominance of the executive.
We also have concerns about the electoral register chosen as the basis for the boundary review. The Tories have decided upon using the 1st December 2020 electoral register, which will be heavily affected by the Covid-19 crisis. As local councils continue to be financially stretched to deliver their vital services during this difficult time, their priority will not be updating the electoral register.
And elections act as a major driver of registration – but there are no elections scheduled for 2020, with all local elections postponed to May 2021. Without elections to prepare for, the priority focus of any council will not be carrying out the annual canvass to update the register. Councils have so much more to worry about as they provide frontline support for vulnerable and shielding people in our communities. This all adds up to a patchy and unrepresentative electoral register. But the Tories know this. And they know that when lots of people are registered to vote, they are less likely to do well in election.
The result will be constituencies that do not take account of huge swathes of unregistered voters. For constituencies with big student populations, students may not have returned to their universities by December 2020, meaning thousands of students from across the country will not be registered to vote. Labour supports using the most accurate and up-to-date election data collected at the 2019 general election.
We also support increasing the flexibility when it comes to the size of constituencies. Currently, all constituencies have to be within 5% above or below of the national average electorate size. In previous reviews, this quota would have created seats that are hugely oversized or include multi-authority constituencies that do not take account of local ties and communities. Labour has long opposed the restrictive 5% quota. A wider variance will allow for greater flexibility and consideration of local ties and identities.
The process thus far has been beset with dither and delay, with millions of pounds of tax-payers’ money wasted on shelved reviews. Given the current boundaries are 20 years old, the government must not waste this opportunity by choosing an incomplete and potentially unrepresentative register compiled during a global pandemic. And the government cannot use this bill to strengthen its own power at the expense of parliamentary scrutiny. It is an insult to the House of Commons and sets a dangerous precedent for future legislation.


labourlist--2020-06-02--British politicians must act decisively to fight institutional racism here in the UK

America is currently engulfed in the worst civil unrest since the assassination of Martin Luther King in 1968 .
A Brooklyn resident called Fatima , who came out to demonstrate in New York with her husband and toddler , on Sunday said : “ I ’ m tired of posting social media – I got a black husband , a black son .
I ’ m tired of them killing us .
This is the civil rights movement and it ’ s 2020.
” As always , what has triggered these scenes has been a backdrop of institutional racism and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the state against a black man .
In this case , he was called George Floyd .
And the images in our media are tragic but fundamentally familiar .
Just 30 years ago , Los Angeles erupted in riots because of the savage beating of a black man called Rodney King which was captured on camera .
Some time afterwards , Rodney King asked sadly : “ Can ’ t we all just get along ?
” .
A lot has happened since then , including the election of America ’ s first @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America seemed to delude itself that putting a black man in the White House would somehow transform race relations in America .
But the roots of racism in America are far too deep .
So periodically black men in America continue to die at the hands of the state and periodically anguished communities take to the street in protest .
In recent years , we have seen : the death of the black boy Trayvon Martin at the hands of George Zimmerman in 2012 ; Michael Brown killed by the police in Ferguson @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the police in New York in 2013 whose last words were almost the same as George Floyd ’ s “ I can ’ t breathe ” ; and most recently a young black jogger Ahmaud Arbery was killed in cold blood by two white vigilantes .
The ‘ Black Lives Matter ’ campaign has done its best .
But it seems that for some people in America black lives continue not to matter .
The media often comments on people taking to the streets , in protest at these deaths , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the murderous policemen are “ bad apples in the barrel ” .
But the deaths of black people in America at the hands of the police and the protests that follow represent some fundamental realities of the relationship of the American state to black people .
When Obama became President , his wife Michelle remarked that slaves originally built the White House .
In the same way , the legacy of slavery has shaped race relations in the America up until to the present day .
And in some ways in 2020 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have ever been and institutional racism just as bad .
For one thing , this is all taking place against the backdrop of the coronavirus pandemic , which has taken the lives of black Americans in a wholly disproportionate way .
But there is also Donald Trump installed as President of the United States .
Sadly , the election of Trump was in many ways a backlash against the progress that America appeared to have made by electing Obama .
Trump ’ s slogan “ Make America Great Again ” was a transparent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ person could not hope to be elected President .
And Trump in office has been relentless in appealing to white nationalists .
Faced with the current civil unrest , Trump has made no effort to understand what has motivated people to come out and demonstrate .
Instead , he calls the protestors anarchists , claims the protests have been orchestrated and makes threats of violent retaliation .
Trump ’ s attitude is remarkable .
Any other American President , Democrat or Republican , would have made promises – however tokenistic – to listen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump just seems to want to inflame things further .
The British political class need not think that it could not happen here .
All the elements that have generated a wave of civil unrest in America are present in the UK : the terrible coronavirus death toll amongst black people ; a history of a disproportionate use of force against black people by the state ; institutional racism generally ; and a national leader who shows no understanding or empathy about issues of race .
We should remember that it was the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aftermath of a police raid on her house , that triggered the 1985 Tottenham riots .
Faced with the threat of the coronavirus pandemic , British politicians did not content themselves with wringing their hands and making token protestations of concern .
They had to act firmly and decisively .
Fighting institutional racism seriously will require similar levels of seriousness from British politicians of all political parties .

America is currently engulfed in the worst civil unrest since the assassination of Martin Luther King in 1968. A Brooklyn resident called Fatima, who came out to demonstrate in New York with her husband and toddler, on Sunday said: “I’m tired of posting social media – I got a black husband, a black son. I’m tired of them killing us. This is the civil rights movement and it’s 2020.”
As always, what has triggered these scenes has been a backdrop of institutional racism and then a particular act of violence by the state against a black man. In this case, he was called George Floyd. And the images in our media are tragic but fundamentally familiar. Just 30 years ago, Los Angeles erupted in riots because of the savage beating of a black man called Rodney King which was captured on camera. Some time afterwards, Rodney King asked sadly: “Can’t we all just get along?”.
A lot has happened since then, including the election of America’s first black President, Barack Obama. White America seemed to delude itself that putting a black man in the White House would somehow transform race relations in America. But the roots of racism in America are far too deep. So periodically black men in America continue to die at the hands of the state and periodically anguished communities take to the street in protest.
In recent years, we have seen: the death of the black boy Trayvon Martin at the hands of George Zimmerman in 2012; Michael Brown killed by the police in Ferguson Missouri in 2013; Eric Garner killed by the police in New York in 2013 whose last words were almost the same as George Floyd’s “I can’t breathe”; and most recently a young black jogger Ahmaud Arbery was killed in cold blood by two white vigilantes. The ‘Black Lives Matter’ campaign has done its best. But it seems that for some people in America black lives continue not to matter.
The media often comments on people taking to the streets, in protest at these deaths, as if the protests are just random disorder and the murderous policemen are “bad apples in the barrel”. But the deaths of black people in America at the hands of the police and the protests that follow represent some fundamental realities of the relationship of the American state to black people.
When Obama became President, his wife Michelle remarked that slaves originally built the White House. In the same way, the legacy of slavery has shaped race relations in the America up until to the present day. And in some ways in 2020 race relations are as toxic as they have ever been and institutional racism just as bad. For one thing, this is all taking place against the backdrop of the coronavirus pandemic, which has taken the lives of black Americans in a wholly disproportionate way. But there is also Donald Trump installed as President of the United States.
Sadly, the election of Trump was in many ways a backlash against the progress that America appeared to have made by electing Obama. Trump’s slogan “Make America Great Again” was a transparent reference to the days when a black person could not hope to be elected President. And Trump in office has been relentless in appealing to white nationalists.
Faced with the current civil unrest, Trump has made no effort to understand what has motivated people to come out and demonstrate. Instead, he calls the protestors anarchists, claims the protests have been orchestrated and makes threats of violent retaliation. Trump’s attitude is remarkable. Any other American President, Democrat or Republican, would have made promises – however tokenistic – to listen and would have called for peace. Trump just seems to want to inflame things further.
The British political class need not think that it could not happen here. All the elements that have generated a wave of civil unrest in America are present in the UK: the terrible coronavirus death toll amongst black people; a history of a disproportionate use of force against black people by the state; institutional racism generally; and a national leader who shows no understanding or empathy about issues of race.
We should remember that it was the death of Cynthia Jarrett, in the aftermath of a police raid on her house, that triggered the 1985 Tottenham riots. Faced with the threat of the coronavirus pandemic, British politicians did not content themselves with wringing their hands and making token protestations of concern. They had to act firmly and decisively. Fighting institutional racism seriously will require similar levels of seriousness from British politicians of all political parties.


labourlist--2020-06-02--MPs set to continue “Mogg conga” physical voting as amendment fails

MPs are set to continue voting in the Commons by forming lengthy socially-distanced queues around parliament – dubbed the “ Mogg conga ” – after an amendment to keep virtual arrangements failed .
Leader of the Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg decided to end the hybrid Commons that was put in place for the coronavirus crisis , allowing MPs to vote remotely and participate in debates via Zoom .
Labour ’ s amendment to reject this proposal was not selected by the Speaker , while the procedures committee amendment was selected but was defeated with 185 voting in favour and 242 against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ around 45 minutes to complete , as MPs were forced to queue with two-metre distances between one another , in a line that snaked all around the parliamentary estate .
Rees-Mogg made a partial concession today that will allow MPs who are ‘ shielding ’ as a result of medical conditions to participate in parliamentary scrutiny , such as questions , urgent questions and statements .
But MPs not able to attend parliament in person this afternoon did not get a vote on the amendment or main motion .
Over 200 MPs did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ not right or just or fair to all Members ” by Labour .
Rees-Mogg argued in the chamber that with a hybrid Commons in place “ the House has not worked effectively on behalf of constituents ” .
Yet he also made the case that shielding MPs would have to represent constituents in ways other than voting .
The Commons leader said he did not agree with continued digital voting because “ some people tweeted they were doing it whilst going for a walk ” .
He added : “ Voting while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ watching television , does democracy a disservice.
” Responding to Rees-Mogg at the despatch box this afternoon , shadow Commons leader Valerie Vaz said : “ Members rightly demand parity .
This is staggeringly arrogant from the Leader of the House.
” A number of MPs raised concerns that , despite the length of the queue and voting process , social distancing was not being followed and commented that the situation was “ dangerous ” and a “ farce ” .

MPs are set to continue voting in the Commons by forming lengthy socially-distanced queues around parliament – dubbed the “Mogg conga” – after an amendment to keep virtual arrangements failed.
Leader of the Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg decided to end the hybrid Commons that was put in place for the coronavirus crisis, allowing MPs to vote remotely and participate in debates via Zoom.
Labour’s amendment to reject this proposal was not selected by the Speaker, while the procedures committee amendment was selected but was defeated with 185 voting in favour and 242 against.
The division on the amendment took around 45 minutes to complete, as MPs were forced to queue with two-metre distances between one another, in a line that snaked all around the parliamentary estate.
Rees-Mogg made a partial concession today that will allow MPs who are ‘shielding’ as a result of medical conditions to participate in parliamentary scrutiny, such as questions, urgent questions and statements.
But MPs not able to attend parliament in person this afternoon did not get a vote on the amendment or main motion. Over 200 MPs did not vote in the proceedings described as “not right or just or fair to all Members” by Labour.
Rees-Mogg argued in the chamber that with a hybrid Commons in place “the House has not worked effectively on behalf of constituents”. Yet he also made the case that shielding MPs would have to represent constituents in ways other than voting.
The Commons leader said he did not agree with continued digital voting because “some people tweeted they were doing it whilst going for a walk”. He added: “Voting while enjoying a sunny walk, or whilst watching television, does democracy a disservice.”
Responding to Rees-Mogg at the despatch box this afternoon, shadow Commons leader Valerie Vaz said: “Members rightly demand parity. This is staggeringly arrogant from the Leader of the House.”
A number of MPs raised concerns that, despite the length of the queue and voting process, social distancing was not being followed and commented that the situation was “dangerous” and a “farce”.
Rees-Mogg’s bizarre airport style queue system around parliamentary estate for voting later – when MPs could vote perfectly well by clicking a button on our computers. (We’ve done it before and it works fine) pic.twitter.com/OmR1UfQIju — Jeff Smith (@JeffSmithetc) June 2, 2020
The utter madness of this charade is that as well as putting lives at risk, it may result in a democratic process which excludes 100s of MPs shielding having the ability to participate.
I hope Parliament brings Mogg to his senses and halts his batshit ideology. pic.twitter.com/amli9DMERL — lan Byrne MP (@IanByrneMP) June 2, 2020
Social distancing for the vote going spectacularly badly, what a joke. pic.twitter.com/PzqsZAzQ0v — Charlotte Nichols (@charlotte2153) June 2, 2020
We’re starting to run out of space on the grassy knoll whilst queueing for 2nd vote. Exasperated security man just asked if we ‘could bunch up’
“Errr, No not really.” pic.twitter.com/RyqgUMvTjn — Toby Perkins (@tobyperkinsmp) June 2, 2020
Absolute farce!
Mile long congo of MPs queuing to vote, because Govt can’t do sensible thing and vote online. This inept Govt, having made UK a classic case study of how not to deal with a pandemic, has now completely lost its marbles and made us an international laughing stock. pic.twitter.com/VsAZdHD5GY — Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi MP (@TanDhesi) June 2, 2020
Absolutely ludicrous we’re queued all the way back in Portcullis House. MPs still coming! Real difficulty in social distancing. The man himself thinks it’s hilarious pic.twitter.com/BduuYqlzKy — Alex Sobel says stay home (@alexsobel) June 2, 2020
Queuing up outside Westminster to vote against having to vote in Westminster pic.twitter.com/pY8F0zHkNJ — Louise Haigh (@LouHaigh) June 2, 2020
Voting. In the 21st century. Yep. pic.twitter.com/jIoHKABjvG — Liz Kendall (@leicesterliz) June 2, 2020
This is ridiculous. pic.twitter.com/M77e1kYlm0 — Luke Pollard MP (@LukePollard) June 2, 2020


labourlist--2020-06-02--Forward Momentum: Our bold vision for change – a plan to rebuild Momentum

There is something stirring at the grassroots .
Momentum , until recently in decline , is showing signs of new life .
Members are once again beginning to invest their ideas and hopes in an organisation that has so much promise but has lost its way .
We believe that Forward Momentum has played a leading role in sparking this surge of energy , and we are proud to stand as its candidates for Momentum ’ s national coordinating group ( NCG ) elections .
We are united in one ambition : to rebuild Momentum from the ground up into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can be .
And we are asking you to join and support us .
Even though there are too many people invested in the status quo to let change happen easily , there are more of us than them .
We know Momentum can be changed when grassroots members work together .
We know this because , like you , we have worked tirelessly in and alongside Momentum groups with hundreds of other activists united by shared socialist values .
We have seen Momentum at its best , campaigning in communities and organising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Party .
But too often this energy and commitment has been taken for granted or shut down by Momentum ’ s leadership .
Too many decisions have been made in back rooms , unwanted candidates have been imposed on local groups , and bold socialist strategy has been abandoned , often for no strategy at all .
Momentum is failing because of this .
Members have left in droves and trust in the organisation is at an all time low .
We are standing to change this .
The open primaries through which @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the opportunity to stand in this election .
It was votes from activists who trusted our work on the ground that gave us the legitimacy to stand .
But this isn ’ t democracy for its own sake .
Democratic organising builds capacity and creates the alliances we need to build broad and winning campaigns .
And the only way the left can successfully confront the immense challenges of this political moment is if our organisations are fighting at full capacity .
For Momentum , that means letting the membership take the lead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to overhaul how Momentum works and give members a real say in key decisions and control over strategy and resources .
But changing how Momentum works only matters if we use it to change what Momentum does .
Transforming the Labour Party through winning votes , passing policy and political education is crucial , and we can not draw back from that .
That ’ s why we at Forward Momentum have spent hundreds of hours reaching out across the Labour left to develop a plan for each of these tasks , starting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ next national executive committee ( NEC ) elections .
That said , socialism isn ’ t just built in party meetings or through canvassing , and it can ’ t be delivered in a manifesto alone .
It requires deep organising in working-class communities across the country , from our city heartlands to our post-industrial ones , and across every nation of the UK .
Momentum must be at the heart of a new wave of socialist organising , providing a hub for activists to share skills and experiences , and empowering local @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to support trade unions and social movements to win theirs .
Only by the left being an active and relevant force in working class communities will support for socialism grow , and we can not leave it to the labour movement to fight that fight alone .
We at Forward Momentum want to turn Momentum into an organising machine .
The majority of Momentum members know this is necessary – they have done for five years now .
It ’ s finally time that we made it happen .
This is why we @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Forward Momentum ’ s plan are five key areas we believe reflect the change needed .
If elected , these will be our overriding objectives : • Unite the socialist left and transform the Labour Party • Build power in our workplaces and communities • Give more control to Momentum ’ s local groups , regions and the nations • Campaign for a just and green response to Covid-19 This plan was developed through thousands of conversations among Momentum members , and we encourage you to engage with it in full on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ commit to using our positions on the NCG to actually deliver on this bold vision for change .
You might not know each of us as well as our unions or local Momentum groups do , but what you do know is that we owe our position in this slate to grassroots members , not because of some backroom deal .
Our records and the policies we are advocating speak for themselves .
We firmly believe that after years of being ignored and seen as expendable , it is time that Momentum members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ themselves .
And then the fight really begins .

There is something stirring at the grassroots. Momentum, until recently in decline, is showing signs of new life. Members are once again beginning to invest their ideas and hopes in an organisation that has so much promise but has lost its way.
We believe that Forward Momentum has played a leading role in sparking this surge of energy, and we are proud to stand as its candidates for Momentum’s national coordinating group (NCG) elections. We are united in one ambition: to rebuild Momentum from the ground up into the socialist campaigning organisation we know it can be. And we are asking you to join and support us.
Even though there are too many people invested in the status quo to let change happen easily, there are more of us than them. We know Momentum can be changed when grassroots members work together.
We know this because, like you, we have worked tirelessly in and alongside Momentum groups with hundreds of other activists united by shared socialist values. We have seen Momentum at its best, campaigning in communities and organising to transform and win in the Labour Party.
But too often this energy and commitment has been taken for granted or shut down by Momentum’s leadership. Too many decisions have been made in back rooms, unwanted candidates have been imposed on local groups, and bold socialist strategy has been abandoned, often for no strategy at all. Momentum is failing because of this. Members have left in droves and trust in the organisation is at an all time low. We are standing to change this.
The open primaries through which we were selected gave many of us the opportunity to stand in this election. It was votes from activists who trusted our work on the ground that gave us the legitimacy to stand. But this isn’t democracy for its own sake. Democratic organising builds capacity and creates the alliances we need to build broad and winning campaigns. And the only way the left can successfully confront the immense challenges of this political moment is if our organisations are fighting at full capacity.
For Momentum, that means letting the membership take the lead. To do this, we need to overhaul how Momentum works and give members a real say in key decisions and control over strategy and resources.
But changing how Momentum works only matters if we use it to change what Momentum does. Transforming the Labour Party through winning votes, passing policy and political education is crucial, and we cannot draw back from that. That’s why we at Forward Momentum have spent hundreds of hours reaching out across the Labour left to develop a plan for each of these tasks, starting with a unified left slate in the next national executive committee (NEC) elections.
That said, socialism isn’t just built in party meetings or through canvassing, and it can’t be delivered in a manifesto alone. It requires deep organising in working-class communities across the country, from our city heartlands to our post-industrial ones, and across every nation of the UK.
Momentum must be at the heart of a new wave of socialist organising, providing a hub for activists to share skills and experiences, and empowering local groups to launch their own campaigns and to support trade unions and social movements to win theirs. Only by the left being an active and relevant force in working class communities will support for socialism grow, and we cannot leave it to the labour movement to fight that fight alone.
We at Forward Momentum want to turn Momentum into an organising machine. The majority of Momentum members know this is necessary – they have done for five years now. It’s finally time that we made it happen. This is why we are standing, and at the core of Forward Momentum’s plan are five key areas we believe reflect the change needed. If elected, these will be our overriding objectives:
Unite the socialist left and transform the Labour Party
Refound Momentum and put members in charge
Build power in our workplaces and communities
Give more control to Momentum’s local groups, regions and the nations
Campaign for a just and green response to Covid-19
This plan was developed through thousands of conversations among Momentum members, and we encourage you to engage with it in full on our website. If elected, we commit to using our positions on the NCG to actually deliver on this bold vision for change.
You might not know each of us as well as our unions or local Momentum groups do, but what you do know is that we owe our position in this slate to grassroots members, not because of some backroom deal. Our records and the policies we are advocating speak for themselves. We firmly believe that after years of being ignored and seen as expendable, it is time that Momentum members are given the chance to speak for themselves. And then the fight really begins.


labourlist--2020-06-02--Labour BAME Network: United we stand, divided we fall

More than a week has now passed since George Floyd was murdered in cold blood by a Minneapolis police officer .
The video of Derek Chauvin ending the life of Floyd is horrific – the very embodiment of an abuse of power by those who are supposed to serve all , not to oppress – though unfortunately it is not unique .
In recent days , social media has exposed the extraordinary lengths that US city police departments will go to suppress protest , discontent and accountability .
It has also spectacularly exposed the poverty of leadership that has gripped @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the case of Christian Cooper in New York City , Floyd ’ s death has laid bare the stark realities that black people can not expect to be treated fairly by either the US police or the criminal justice system .
We in the UK can not look passively at events in the US , however , but must confront our own realities and our own truths here at home .
It is almost 200 years since Sir Robert Peel established the Metropolitan Police .
Among the principles of law enforcement laid down @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence , actions and behaviour , and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect ” .
Yet such respect can only be earned if every citizen – no matter who they are – is treated fairly and equally .
We recognise that many police officers execute their duties judiciously and responsibly to keep communities safe .
Yet we must also acknowledge the fact that , for too many black Britons , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Prejudice , not justice .
On too many occasions , the actions and behaviour of our police have fallen far short of the required standard .
The statistics speak for themselves .
In 2020 , if you are black in England and Wales , you are nine and half times more likely to be stopped and searched by the police than if you are white .
You are more likely to be involved in an incident in which the police use a firearm or a taser .
Black men are 26 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remanded in custody , despite being 60 % more likely to plead not guilty .
And despite making up approximately 3 % of the general population , black people account for 12 % of the total prison population .
It is for these reasons of injustice that we , the Labour BAME Network , unambiguously affirm our support of the Black Lives Matter movements in the US and the UK .
We support protests that are peaceful , responsible and inspiring .
And we do so proudly as democratic socialists .
Our party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a society “ where the rights we enjoy , reflect the duties we owe ” .
It must therefore follow that if black people – be they British , American , or from elsewhere – are expected to uphold their duties as citizens to respect and follow the law , they must in turn be assured that they will enjoy the same rights as the rest of the population .
They must be free from harassment in the streets ; be treated fairly in our police station and our courts ; and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But talk is cheap .
Action defines who we are .
So if you are at a loss of how you can help , here are five suggestions : • Donate your money .
In the US , this can be to victims ’ families , protesters ’ bail funds or black-owned businesses whose outlets have been destroyed by the riots .
In the UK , you could support StopWatch , which campaigns for fair and accountable policing , or a whole range of other not-for-profit organisations that support racial equality and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black , talk to your white friends about how you are feeling .
If you ’ re white , listen .
Embrace this opportunity to engage .
If you don ’ t have a friend of the other race – get one !
• Hold your elected representatives accountable for the actions they take on racial justice .
Challenge your MP , your assembly member or your local councillor to demonstrate how they are contributing to progress .
• And if you ’ re not happy with their answer : organise and mobilise @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) .
Not only by protesting in the streets , but by actively participating in our democratic process to make sure that our institutions – our parliaments , our assemblies and our police and crime commissioners – are filled with people committed to delivering practical change .
• Show your support on social media .
Various platforms are making the world more connected every day , so consider producing your own content or sharing the content produced by your black friends and acquaintances .
As Martin Luther King Jr. said : “ The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but it bends toward justice.
” The path is never simple or quick .
It takes time .
Only by working together as one people can we root out injustice in our society : united we stand , divided we fall .
No speech , statement or article will return Floyd back to his loved ones .
Instead , it is now incumbent on a new generation to seize this opportunity to lead and achieve the change and justice we need .

More than a week has now passed since George Floyd was murdered in cold blood by a Minneapolis police officer. The video of Derek Chauvin ending the life of Floyd is horrific – the very embodiment of an abuse of power by those who are supposed to serve all, not to oppress – though unfortunately it is not unique.
In recent days, social media has exposed the extraordinary lengths that US city police departments will go to suppress protest, discontent and accountability. It has also spectacularly exposed the poverty of leadership that has gripped American politics.
Above all, like the case of Christian Cooper in New York City, Floyd’s death has laid bare the stark realities that black people cannot expect to be treated fairly by either the US police or the criminal justice system. We in the UK cannot look passively at events in the US, however, but must confront our own realities and our own truths here at home.
It is almost 200 years since Sir Robert Peel established the Metropolitan Police. Among the principles of law enforcement laid down was that every officer should “recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour, and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect”. Yet such respect can only be earned if every citizen – no matter who they are – is treated fairly and equally.
We recognise that many police officers execute their duties judiciously and responsibly to keep communities safe. Yet we must also acknowledge the fact that, for too many black Britons, the police offer fear, not security. Prejudice, not justice. On too many occasions, the actions and behaviour of our police have fallen far short of the required standard.
The statistics speak for themselves. In 2020, if you are black in England and Wales, you are nine and half times more likely to be stopped and searched by the police than if you are white. You are more likely to be involved in an incident in which the police use a firearm or a taser. Black men are 26% more likely than white men to be remanded in custody, despite being 60% more likely to plead not guilty. And despite making up approximately 3% of the general population, black people account for 12% of the total prison population.
It is for these reasons of injustice that we, the Labour BAME Network, unambiguously affirm our support of the Black Lives Matter movements in the US and the UK. We support protests that are peaceful, responsible and inspiring. And we do so proudly as democratic socialists. Our party’s constitution states that we believe in a society “where the rights we enjoy, reflect the duties we owe”.
It must therefore follow that if black people – be they British, American, or from elsewhere – are expected to uphold their duties as citizens to respect and follow the law, they must in turn be assured that they will enjoy the same rights as the rest of the population.
They must be free from harassment in the streets; be treated fairly in our police station and our courts; and have access to legal advice and representation. But talk is cheap. Action defines who we are. So if you are at a loss of how you can help, here are five suggestions:
Donate your money. In the US, this can be to victims’ families, protesters’ bail funds or black-owned businesses whose outlets have been destroyed by the riots. In the UK, you could support StopWatch, which campaigns for fair and accountable policing, or a whole range of other not-for-profit organisations that support racial equality and justice. If you’re black, talk to your white friends about how you are feeling. If you’re white, listen. Embrace this opportunity to engage. If you don’t have a friend of the other race – get one! Hold your elected representatives accountable for the actions they take on racial justice. Challenge your MP, your assembly member or your local councillor to demonstrate how they are contributing to progress. And if you’re not happy with their answer: organise and mobilise (or at least join a campaign). Not only by protesting in the streets, but by actively participating in our democratic process to make sure that our institutions – our parliaments, our assemblies and our police and crime commissioners – are filled with people committed to delivering practical change. Show your support on social media. Various platforms are making the world more connected every day, so consider producing your own content or sharing the content produced by your black friends and acquaintances.
As Martin Luther King Jr. said: “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” The path is never simple or quick. It takes time. Only by working together as one people can we root out injustice in our society: united we stand, divided we fall.
No speech, statement or article will return Floyd back to his loved ones. Instead, it is now incumbent on a new generation to seize this opportunity to lead and achieve the change and justice we need.


labourlist--2020-06-02--Covid-19 BAME review “presents no recommendations”, says Labour

Labour has criticised the Public Health England report into the disproportionate impact of Covid-19 on BAME communities for its failure to present any recommendations .
The findings published this afternoon examine the impact of the virus across different groups within the population – exploring disparities by age , sex , geography , deprivation , ethnicity , occupation and pre-existing health conditions .
Shadow Women and Equalities Secretary Marsha de Cordova expressed frustration that the report contained no recommendations and said that “ when it comes to the question of how we reduce these disparities , it is notably silent ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cordova said : “ This review confirms what we already knew – that racial and health inequalities amplify the risks of Covid-19 .
Those in the poorest households and people of colour are disproportionately impacted.
” The report shows that age is the biggest risk factor in relation to Covid-19 , but it also reveals that people from black and Asian ethnic groups are twice as likely to die from Covid-19 than those from a white British background .
Those from Chinese , Indian , Pakistani , other Asian , Caribbean and other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 50 % higher risk of death .
In terms of deaths per 100,000 population , black groups had the most – 485 in women and 224 in men .
She added : “ When it comes to the question of how we reduce these disparities , it is notably silent .
It presents no recommendations .
Having the information is a start – but now is the time for action .
“ The government must not wait any longer to mitigate the risks faced by these communities and must act immediately to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lives are lost.
” The terms of reference for the review , published in May , state that one of the objectives of the process was to “ suggest recommendations for further action that should be taken to reduce disparities in risk and outcomes from Covid-19 ” .
Discussing the findings in parliament , Matt Hancock said that coming from a non-white background is a “ major risk factor ” .
He added that the disparity “ holds even after accounting for the effect of age , deprivation , region and sex ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government would be conducting a further review into why BAME people are disproportionately impacted by coronavirus , to be headed up by Liz Truss and working with PHE .
The report also found that the impact of the virus has varied significantly in terms of geography , with local authorities in London having a death rate three times that of those in the lowest region – the South West .
Among those who tested positive for coronavirus , when compared with those under 40 , people who were 80 or older were seventy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ younger counterparts .
Sex was another disparity in risk analysed , with the review showing that working age men diagnosed with Covid-19 were twice as likely as women to die .
The report states that “ people who live in deprived areas have higher diagnosis rates and death rates than those living in less deprived areas ” and that this is “ greater than the inequality in mortality rates seen in recent years ” .
On coronavirus-related deaths in the care sector , it reports that “ there have been 2.3 times the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ expected between March 20th and May 7th when compared to previous years ” .

Labour has criticised the Public Health England report into the disproportionate impact of Covid-19 on BAME communities for its failure to present any recommendations.
The findings published this afternoon examine the impact of the virus across different groups within the population – exploring disparities by age, sex, geography, deprivation, ethnicity, occupation and pre-existing health conditions.
Shadow Women and Equalities Secretary Marsha de Cordova expressed frustration that the report contained no recommendations and said that “when it comes to the question of how we reduce these disparities, it is notably silent”.
Commenting on the findings, de Cordova said: “This review confirms what we already knew – that racial and health inequalities amplify the risks of Covid-19. Those in the poorest households and people of colour are disproportionately impacted.”
The report shows that age is the biggest risk factor in relation to Covid-19, but it also reveals that people from black and Asian ethnic groups are twice as likely to die from Covid-19 than those from a white British background.
Those from Chinese, Indian, Pakistani, other Asian, Caribbean and other black ethnicities had between a 10% and 50% higher risk of death. In terms of deaths per 100,000 population, black groups had the most – 485 in women and 224 in men.
She added: “When it comes to the question of how we reduce these disparities, it is notably silent. It presents no recommendations. Having the information is a start – but now is the time for action.
“The government must not wait any longer to mitigate the risks faced by these communities and must act immediately to protect BAME people so that no more lives are lost.”
The terms of reference for the review, published in May, state that one of the objectives of the process was to “suggest recommendations for further action that should be taken to reduce disparities in risk and outcomes from Covid-19”.
Discussing the findings in parliament, Matt Hancock said that coming from a non-white background is a “major risk factor”. He added that the disparity “holds even after accounting for the effect of age, deprivation, region and sex”.
The Health Secretary announced that the government would be conducting a further review into why BAME people are disproportionately impacted by coronavirus, to be headed up by Liz Truss and working with PHE.
The report also found that the impact of the virus has varied significantly in terms of geography, with local authorities in London having a death rate three times that of those in the lowest region – the South West.
Among those who tested positive for coronavirus, when compared with those under 40, people who were 80 or older were seventy times more likely to die than their younger counterparts.
Sex was another disparity in risk analysed, with the review showing that working age men diagnosed with Covid-19 were twice as likely as women to die.
The report states that “people who live in deprived areas have higher diagnosis rates and death rates than those living in less deprived areas” and that this is “greater than the inequality in mortality rates seen in recent years”.
On coronavirus-related deaths in the care sector, it reports that “there have been 2.3 times the number of deaths in care homes than expected between March 20th and May 7th when compared to previous years”.


labourlist--2020-06-02--“Disenfranchised”: Labour MPs react to proposed Commons voting system

Labour MPs have reacted angrily in response to government proposals that would force the Commons to vote in person once again , declaring that they are being “ disenfranchised ” by scrapping virtual participation .
Several MPs have expressed their frustration with the changes put forward by Commons leader Jacob Rees-Mogg , which are to be debated and voted on – in person – in parliament this afternoon .
Labour ’ s Virendra Sharma took to social media this morning .
He said that the proposals amount to “ fundamental discrimination against older MPs , the disabled and those who @ @ @ @ @ @ @ added : “ It ’ s not safe yet , and almost anyone can see that .
There are lots of us and my amazing colleagues Vicky Foxroft and Margaret Hodge are just the beginning .
Parliament will be worse off without them there.
” Hodge tweeted on Monday that “ as somebody in the ‘ vulnerable ’ category , I am unable to join them .
I am furious that for the first time in my 25 years as an MP I am being denied the right to vote !
” Foxcroft @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the shielding category – described it as “ poor policymaking ” that as shadow disabilities minister she is being “ disenfranchised from being able to contribute to parliament ” .
She added : “ Right the way through this crisis disabled people have been discriminated against .
They need to be at the heart of decision-making and not just an after-thought.
” Equalities and Human Rights Commission chief executive Rebecca Hilsenrath condemned the proposals in a letter to Foxcroft this morning .
She said that proceedings “ must remain fully inclusive during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the plan , the EHRC said : “ This will place at significant disadvantage MPs who are shielding or self-isolating because of age , disability , health conditions or pregnancy , as well as other members who will struggle to attend the chamber in person due to travel restrictions and caring responsibilities .
“ It can not be right for parliament to proceed without provision for remote participation , when many elected representatives can not attend in person.
” In order to vote on the motion today , members of the House of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ queue stretching through the parliamentary estate after the debate .
Jeff Smith MP tweeted a photo of the queuing arrangement and wrote : “ Rees-Mogg ’ s bizarre airport style queue system around parliamentary estate for voting later – when MPs could vote perfectly well by clicking a button on our computers.
” It is expected that around 250 of the 400 MPs will not be able to take part in the vote because they are shielding , vulnerable due to being over 70 , pregnant , have a health condition , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Leader of the House of Commons and Labour MP for Rhondda Chris Bryant told Sky News this morning that the new system is “ survival of the fittest , and that isn ’ t democracy ” .
He declared that “ every MP should be able to participate in all the proceedings in parliament , especially at a time when the government needs proper scrutiny ” .
Labour has rejected the proposals as “ discriminatory ” and tabled an amendment to the motion seeking to retain the provisions allowing MPs to participate remotely @

Labour MPs have reacted angrily in response to government proposals that would force the Commons to vote in person once again, declaring that they are being “disenfranchised” by scrapping virtual participation.
Several MPs have expressed their frustration with the changes put forward by Commons leader Jacob Rees-Mogg, which are to be debated and voted on – in person – in parliament this afternoon.
Labour’s Virendra Sharma took to social media this morning. He said that the proposals amount to “fundamental discrimination against older MPs, the disabled and those who live with the vulnerable”.
He added: “It’s not safe yet, and almost anyone can see that. There are lots of us and my amazing colleagues Vicky Foxroft and Margaret Hodge are just the beginning. Parliament will be worse off without them there.”
Hodge tweeted on Monday that “as somebody in the ‘vulnerable’ category, I am unable to join them. I am furious that for the first time in my 25 years as an MP I am being denied the right to vote!”
Foxcroft – who has rheumatoid arthritis and is in the shielding category – described it as “poor policymaking” that as shadow disabilities minister she is being “disenfranchised from being able to contribute to parliament”.
She added: “Right the way through this crisis disabled people have been discriminated against. They need to be at the heart of decision-making and not just an after-thought.”
Equalities and Human Rights Commission chief executive Rebecca Hilsenrath condemned the proposals in a letter to Foxcroft this morning. She said that proceedings “must remain fully inclusive during the coronavirus pandemic”.
Commenting on the plan, the EHRC said: “This will place at significant disadvantage MPs who are shielding or self-isolating because of age, disability, health conditions or pregnancy, as well as other members who will struggle to attend the chamber in person due to travel restrictions and caring responsibilities.
“It cannot be right for parliament to proceed without provision for remote participation, when many elected representatives cannot attend in person.”
In order to vote on the motion today, members of the House of Commons will form a socially-distanced, kilometre-long queue stretching through the parliamentary estate after the debate.
Jeff Smith MP tweeted a photo of the queuing arrangement and wrote: “Rees-Mogg’s bizarre airport style queue system around parliamentary estate for voting later – when MPs could vote perfectly well by clicking a button on our computers.”
It is expected that around 250 of the 400 MPs will not be able to take part in the vote because they are shielding, vulnerable due to being over 70, pregnant, have a health condition, or are caring for others.
Former Shadow Leader of the House of Commons and Labour MP for Rhondda Chris Bryant told Sky News this morning that the new system is “survival of the fittest, and that isn’t democracy”.
He declared that “every MP should be able to participate in all the proceedings in parliament, especially at a time when the government needs proper scrutiny”.
Labour has rejected the proposals as “discriminatory” and tabled an amendment to the motion seeking to retain the provisions allowing MPs to participate remotely.


labourlist--2020-06-03--As MPs get taken for a ride, Keir Starmer sends message to PM: No more Mr Nice Guy

The House of Commons returned from recess on Tuesday , and MPs were greeted with a new voting system thanks to the refusal of Jacob Rees-Mogg to keep the remote voting method that was working perfectly well .
Public Health England said normal crowding in the voting lobbies would be unsafe amid a deadly pandemic that the government seems intent on ignoring .
And that is how the genius solution of a “ Mogg conga ” was born .
It was described by furious MPs as “ batshit ” , “ a joke ” , “ absolute farce ” and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Alton Towers that has just turned out to be a bit shit ” .
As well as making the UK parliament “ an international laughing stock ” , as noted by Tan Dhesi MP , the Equalities and Human Rights Commission said the changes “ can not be right ” .
They exclude those who must shield or have shielding responsibilities , and they will have a discriminatory impact on older and BAME MPs and those with health conditions .
Labour ’ s Cat Smith confirmed that she almost fainted yesterday while queuing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ each vote .
And all apparently because Rees-Mogg found it distasteful that with remote voting in place “ some people tweeted they were doing it whilst going for a walk ” .
While we ’ re on the subject of Covid-19 risk for different groups , that Public Health England review did get released after all .
But its publication was without fanfare and without press release .
It certainly looks like the Sky News report about its further delay spooked the government into getting it out quickly .
As for the report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much .
It confirms that outcomes vary according to racial and health inequalities but , as pointed out by Labour , does not make recommendations despite those being promised .
It doesn ’ t even try to explain the disparities , stopping short of merely describing them .
The Health Service Journal may have found out why : apparently those sections “ did not survive contact with Matt Hancock ’ s office ” .
The staggering incompetence and openly hostile attitude of this government has nudged Keir Starmer towards a tougher opposition style @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The Labour leader has accused the Prime Minister of “ winging it ” and of overseeing “ mismanagement ” of the lockdown easing that has “ made a difficult situation ten times worse ” .
He needs to “ get a grip ” , Starmer has warned .
Thankfully , The Telegraph exclusively reports today that “ Boris Johnson is to take “ direct control ” of the government ’ s handling of the coronavirus crisis ” .
Exactly who was in charge before now could be one of questions put by the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ chamber this afternoon .
Sign up to LabourList ’ s morning email for everything Labour , every weekday morning .

The House of Commons returned from recess on Tuesday, and MPs were greeted with a new voting system thanks to the refusal of Jacob Rees-Mogg to keep the remote voting method that was working perfectly well. Public Health England said normal crowding in the voting lobbies would be unsafe amid a deadly pandemic that the government seems intent on ignoring. And that is how the genius solution of a “Mogg conga” was born. It was described by furious MPs as “batshit”, “a joke”, “absolute farce” and “like queuing for a ride at Alton Towers that has just turned out to be a bit shit”.
As well as making the UK parliament “an international laughing stock”, as noted by Tan Dhesi MP, the Equalities and Human Rights Commission said the changes “cannot be right”. They exclude those who must shield or have shielding responsibilities, and they will have a discriminatory impact on older and BAME MPs and those with health conditions. Labour’s Cat Smith confirmed that she almost fainted yesterday while queuing, which took around 40 minutes for each vote. And all apparently because Rees-Mogg found it distasteful that with remote voting in place “some people tweeted they were doing it whilst going for a walk”.
While we’re on the subject of Covid-19 risk for different groups, that Public Health England review did get released after all. But its publication was without fanfare and without press release. It certainly looks like the Sky News report about its further delay spooked the government into getting it out quickly. As for the report itself… it doesn’t tell us much. It confirms that outcomes vary according to racial and health inequalities but, as pointed out by Labour, does not make recommendations despite those being promised. It doesn’t even try to explain the disparities, stopping short of merely describing them. The Health Service Journal may have found out why: apparently those sections “did not survive contact with Matt Hancock’s office”.
The staggering incompetence and openly hostile attitude of this government has nudged Keir Starmer towards a tougher opposition style. No more Mr Nice Guy. The Labour leader has accused the Prime Minister of “winging it” and of overseeing “mismanagement” of the lockdown easing that has “made a difficult situation ten times worse”. He needs to “get a grip”, Starmer has warned. Thankfully, The Telegraph exclusively reports today that “Boris Johnson is to take “direct control” of the government’s handling of the coronavirus crisis”. Exactly who was in charge before now could be one of questions put by the opposition leader to the PM in the chamber this afternoon. Sign up to LabourList’s morning email for everything Labour, every weekday morning.


labourlist--2020-06-03--Labour demands suspension of riot gear exports to US amid George Floyd protests

Labour ’ s Emily Thornberry has demanded the suspension by the UK government of riot control equipment exports to the United States amid violent police responses to American protesters .
Writing to her opposite number Liz Truss , the Shadow International Trade Secretary said that law enforcement in the US has used “ excessive force in response to these protests ” since the murder of George Floyd .
Noting that it is UK policy to “ refuse licences for the export of arms and equipment that might be used for internal repression ” , Thornberry concluded that exports to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of concern ” .
Labour has called on the government to publish a list of all current export licences to the US of riot control projectiles and equipment and to suspend all existing licences until their use has been determined .
Thornberry said : “ The British public deserve to know how arms exported by this country are being used across the world , and the American public deserve the right to protest peacefully without the threat of violent repression.
” President Trump threatened to deploy the US Army against Black Lives Matter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been accused of “ fanning the flames of division ” .
Demonstrations have continued in dozens of US cities .
The protests were sparked by the police killing of George Floyd , a black man in Minneapolis .
Police officer Derek Chauvin was captured on video kneeling on Floyd ’ s neck for almost nine minutes while he said “ I can ’ t breathe ” .
Floyd suffered a cardiac arrest while being restrained , an official post-mortem examination found .
Several days later , Chauvin was charged with third-degree murder and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ text of Emily Thornberry ’ s letter to Liz Truss .
I am writing to ask you as a matter of urgency to address a number of serious questions about the export of riot control equipment to the United States , following a week when people across America have taken to the streets to demand justice for the murder of George Floyd and all the other Black Americans whose lives have been lost as a result of police brutality .
These protesters are calling for the basic human rights of Black people to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about their daily lives without the threat of police violence , and for all of us to take action to dismantle the structural and institutional practices which entrench racism in our societies .
In cities across America , we have seen law enforcement authorities using excessive force in response to these protests , including against children and members of the media .
Donald Trump ’ s statement yesterday threatened the deployment of the US military to escalate this response , and took place as peaceful protesters were tear-gassed and beaten nearby by federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has been the policy of successive governments over the past two decades to refuse licences for the export of arms and equipment that might be used for internal repression in the countries to whom they are being sold .
It is therefore an obvious matter of concern if any exports from the UK have been used in the response to the ongoing protests in the United States .
According to your department ’ s latest Strategic Export Controls : Country Pivot Report , the UK has recently issued licences for the export of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ equipment to the United States , including anti-riot/ballistic shields , anti-riot guns , components for anti-riot guns , portable riot control electric shock devices , and tear gas/riot control agents .
If there is a risk that any of these riot control projectiles and equipment are being used in the United States against peaceful , unarmed civilians , then the government must act immediately to stop their export .
I would be grateful if you could therefore as a matter of urgency : a .
Publish a comprehensive list of all current export @ @ @ @ @ @ @ projectiles and equipment , along with all available end-user data to clarify who has purchased these items and for what declared purpose within the last five years ; and b .
Suspend all existing licences and halt the issue of any new licences for the export of riot control projectiles and equipment to the United States until you have determined whether any of these items are being used in response to the ongoing protests , or risk being used in the coming days if the US military is deployed as part of that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will agree that , at a time when Donald Trump is gearing up to use the US military to crush the legitimate protests taking place across America over the murder of Black civilians , it would be a disgrace for the UK to supply him with the arms and equipment he will use to do so .
If this were any other leader , in any other country in the world , the suspension of any such exports is the least we could expect from the British government in response to their actions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States is no reason to shirk that responsibility now .
Indeed , because our alliance is above all based on the values we share with the American people , that is all the more reason why we must not supply arms and equipment that Donald Trump is willing to use to attack his own people , in total contravention of those values .
I hope that you will investigate these points and provide me with an urgent response .
The British public deserve to know how arms exported by this country are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the American public deserve the right to protest peacefully without the threat of violent repression .

Labour’s Emily Thornberry has demanded the suspension by the UK government of riot control equipment exports to the United States amid violent police responses to American protesters.
Writing to her opposite number Liz Truss, the Shadow International Trade Secretary said that law enforcement in the US has used “excessive force in response to these protests” since the murder of George Floyd.
Noting that it is UK policy to “refuse licences for the export of arms and equipment that might be used for internal repression”, Thornberry concluded that exports to the US are now “an obvious matter of concern”.
Labour has called on the government to publish a list of all current export licences to the US of riot control projectiles and equipment and to suspend all existing licences until their use has been determined.
Thornberry said: “The British public deserve to know how arms exported by this country are being used across the world, and the American public deserve the right to protest peacefully without the threat of violent repression.”
President Trump threatened to deploy the US Army against Black Lives Matter protesters on Tuesday, and has since been accused of “fanning the flames of division”. Demonstrations have continued in dozens of US cities.
The protests were sparked by the police killing of George Floyd, a black man in Minneapolis. Police officer Derek Chauvin was captured on video kneeling on Floyd’s neck for almost nine minutes while he said “I can’t breathe”.
Floyd suffered a cardiac arrest while being restrained, an official post-mortem examination found. Several days later, Chauvin was charged with third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter.
Below is the full text of Emily Thornberry’s letter to Liz Truss.
I am writing to ask you as a matter of urgency to address a number of serious questions about the export of riot control equipment to the United States, following a week when people across America have taken to the streets to demand justice for the murder of George Floyd and all the other Black Americans whose lives have been lost as a result of police brutality.
These protesters are calling for the basic human rights of Black people to be respected, for them to go about their daily lives without the threat of police violence, and for all of us to take action to dismantle the structural and institutional practices which entrench racism in our societies.
In cities across America, we have seen law enforcement authorities using excessive force in response to these protests, including against children and members of the media. Donald Trump’s statement yesterday threatened the deployment of the US military to escalate this response, and took place as peaceful protesters were tear-gassed and beaten nearby by federal police.
As you know, it has been the policy of successive governments over the past two decades to refuse licences for the export of arms and equipment that might be used for internal repression in the countries to whom they are being sold. It is therefore an obvious matter of concern if any exports from the UK have been used in the response to the ongoing protests in the United States.
According to your department’s latest Strategic Export Controls: Country Pivot Report, the UK has recently issued licences for the export of a variety of riot control projectiles and equipment to the United States, including anti-riot/ballistic shields, anti-riot guns, components for anti-riot guns, portable riot control electric shock devices, and tear gas/riot control agents.
If there is a risk that any of these riot control projectiles and equipment are being used in the United States against peaceful, unarmed civilians, then the government must act immediately to stop their export. I would be grateful if you could therefore as a matter of urgency:
a. Publish a comprehensive list of all current export licences to the USA of riot control projectiles and equipment, along with all available end-user data to clarify who has purchased these items and for what declared purpose within the last five years; and
b. Suspend all existing licences and halt the issue of any new licences for the export of riot control projectiles and equipment to the United States until you have determined whether any of these items are being used in response to the ongoing protests, or risk being used in the coming days if the US military is deployed as part of that response.
I’m sure you will agree that, at a time when Donald Trump is gearing up to use the US military to crush the legitimate protests taking place across America over the murder of Black civilians, it would be a disgrace for the UK to supply him with the arms and equipment he will use to do so.
If this were any other leader, in any other country in the world, the suspension of any such exports is the least we could expect from the British government in response to their actions, and our historic alliance with the United States is no reason to shirk that responsibility now.
Indeed, because our alliance is above all based on the values we share with the American people, that is all the more reason why we must not supply arms and equipment that Donald Trump is willing to use to attack his own people, in total contravention of those values.
I hope that you will investigate these points and provide me with an urgent response. The British public deserve to know how arms exported by this country are being used across the world, and the American public deserve the right to protest peacefully without the threat of violent repression.
Yours Sincerely,
Rt Hon Emily Thornberry MP
Shadow Secretary of State for International Trade


labourlist--2020-06-03--My priorities as Labour’s Shadow Environment Secretary

The coronavirus crisis means that business as usual is no longer an option .
Business as usual wasn ’ t working .
Brexit , coronavirus and the climate emergency demand a very different approach .
For me in my role as Shadow Environment Secretary , that means getting Labour ’ s message heard loud and clear in our coastal and rural communities .
My first priority is to support and rebuild our food sector after this crisis .
Coronavirus has exposed the fragility of our food supply chains .
We ’ ve seen supermarket shelves left bare , while millions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thrown away and fishers have found themselves on the brink of bankruptcy .
The government ’ s plan for a volunteer land army to fill the gaping holes in our agricultural work force has left a lot to be desired .
We need to take action to make our food supplies more resilient – but the focus here has to be making sure that every single one of us has enough to eat .
The Food Foundation finding that 1.5 million people had gone a whole day without eating since the lockdown began @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proposed the creation of a Coronavirus Emergency Food Plan .
There is more than enough food for everyone to eat three nutritious meals a day : this is not a crisis of food supply , but a crisis of poverty .
We still need to solve a whole host of problems for food , farming and fishing that Brexit has thrown up .
I want to see a Britain that is a world leader in high food quality and animal welfare standards .
But the government ’ s lack of leadership on this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a race to the bottom to get a deal with Donald Trump .
We can ’ t allow Britain ’ s hardworking farmers to be undercut by cheap , low-quality imports from abroad , which will devastate our domestic food production – and we need them getting food on our plates now more than ever .
The truth is that Britain ’ s rural communities have been ignored and taken for granted for too long .
That must change .
Huge numbers of Labour ’ s target seats now include rural and coastal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hard – unable to access education , affordable housing , proper broadband or decent public transport .
The lack of opportunity is pushing more and more people into poverty , and accessing support is nearly impossible .
Those communities share their values with Labour and reconnecting must be a priority .
We start by listening , building confidence in our approach and details to our policies .
We need to present a vision for the future to our rural and coastal communities , not just technical solutions .
Labour is not short on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
On a simple comparison , our policies fit those communities better than those proposed by the Tories , especially those that have a Brexit impact .
Fishing and farming are identity issues too , and Labour needs to speak for those communities for whom growing crops , rearing animals and fishing our waters are part of who they are .
As a West Country lad representing a coastal city , I know what this means and I know why it matters .
DEFRA is a department whose time has come .
For @ @ @ @ @ @ @ technically managing hugely important parts of our daily lives : the air we breathe , the food we eat and the water we drink .
But the truth is that the virus , Brexit and the climate emergency means these fundamentals need addressing with new energy , new focus and new policy .
I ’ m proud to have a broad shadow team in Daniel Zeichner , Stephanie Peacock , Lloyd Russell-Moyle , Ruth Jones , Lord John Granchester and Baroness Maggie Jones .
There ’ s a Labour case to be made @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , green on the inside .
Join us for our upcoming online event ‘ LabourList in conversation with Luke Pollard ’ on Tuesday , June 9th , at 6pm .

The coronavirus crisis means that business as usual is no longer an option. Business as usual wasn’t working. Brexit, coronavirus and the climate emergency demand a very different approach. For me in my role as Shadow Environment Secretary, that means getting Labour’s message heard loud and clear in our coastal and rural communities.
My first priority is to support and rebuild our food sector after this crisis. Coronavirus has exposed the fragility of our food supply chains. We’ve seen supermarket shelves left bare, while millions of pints of milk have just been thrown away and fishers have found themselves on the brink of bankruptcy.
The government’s plan for a volunteer land army to fill the gaping holes in our agricultural work force has left a lot to be desired. We need to take action to make our food supplies more resilient – but the focus here has to be making sure that every single one of us has enough to eat. The Food Foundation finding that 1.5 million people had gone a whole day without eating since the lockdown began – and that’s why I proposed the creation of a Coronavirus Emergency Food Plan. There is more than enough food for everyone to eat three nutritious meals a day: this is not a crisis of food supply, but a crisis of poverty.
We still need to solve a whole host of problems for food, farming and fishing that Brexit has thrown up. I want to see a Britain that is a world leader in high food quality and animal welfare standards. But the government’s lack of leadership on this risks trading away these British standards in a race to the bottom to get a deal with Donald Trump. We can’t allow Britain’s hardworking farmers to be undercut by cheap, low-quality imports from abroad, which will devastate our domestic food production – and we need them getting food on our plates now more than ever.
The truth is that Britain’s rural communities have been ignored and taken for granted for too long. That must change. Huge numbers of Labour’s target seats now include rural and coastal communities. Austerity has hit these communities hard – unable to access education, affordable housing, proper broadband or decent public transport. The lack of opportunity is pushing more and more people into poverty, and accessing support is nearly impossible. Those communities share their values with Labour and reconnecting must be a priority. We start by listening, building confidence in our approach and details to our policies.
We need to present a vision for the future to our rural and coastal communities, not just technical solutions. Labour is not short on good technical policies for fishing and farming. On a simple comparison, our policies fit those communities better than those proposed by the Tories, especially those that have a Brexit impact. Fishing and farming are identity issues too, and Labour needs to speak for those communities for whom growing crops, rearing animals and fishing our waters are part of who they are. As a West Country lad representing a coastal city, I know what this means and I know why it matters.
DEFRA is a department whose time has come. For the past decade, it has been technically managing hugely important parts of our daily lives: the air we breathe, the food we eat and the water we drink. But the truth is that the virus, Brexit and the climate emergency means these fundamentals need addressing with new energy, new focus and new policy. I’m proud to have a broad shadow team in Daniel Zeichner, Stephanie Peacock, Lloyd Russell-Moyle, Ruth Jones, Lord John Granchester and Baroness Maggie Jones. There’s a Labour case to be made for Defra: red on the outside, green on the inside.
This piece is part of a series by members of the new shadow cabinet.
Join us for our upcoming online event ‘LabourList in conversation with Luke Pollard’ on Tuesday, June 9th, at 6pm.