labourlist--2020-11-19--Suspension of Corbyn’s Labour whip is for three months but reviewable

The suspension of the Labour whip from former leader Jeremy Corbyn is set to last for three months pending a parliamentary party investigation , though this timescale is “ reviewable ” , LabourList understands .
According to well-placed LabourList sources , Corbyn has been informed by chief whip Nick Brown that the whip is to be suspended for three months and that a probe will be conducted under Parliamentary Labour Party rules .
The whip suspension is to be kept under review , which means it is not a hard deadline and could be shorter or longer than the time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Corbyn ’ s team is challenging the contents of Brown ’ s letter .
Corbyn-supporting members of the national executive committee ( NEC ) also tonight wrote to general secretary David Evans , who made the original decision to suspend Corbyn over his comments on Labour antisemitism .
The joint statement describes Keir Starmer ’ s decision to withhold the whip following the lifting of Corbyn ’ s suspension as “ an act of deliberate political interference in the handling of a complaint ” and a “ matter of double jeopardy ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ suspension “ flies in the face of natural justice ” , “ undermines the rule book ” and is “ the type of action found to be unlawful indirect discrimination by the EHRC report ” .
They also argue that Starmer saying the current complaints process “ does not have the confidence of the Jewish community ” can be considered a “ direct criticism of the decision reached ” by the disputes panel this week .
Pointing out that the disputes panel received legal advice on the day and a recommendation from Labour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of legal appointed by Starmer , it accuses the leader of launching “ an unacceptable attack on the lay volunteers ” .
It also raises concerns over the potential for legal action against the party and the possibility that members of the Labour NEC panel will be “ asked to give evidence in a court of law ” , which is described as “ unconscionable ” .
The letter was signed by Howard Beckett , Jayne Taylor , Ian Murray , Andi Fox , Mick Whelan , Andy Kerr , Pauline McCarthy , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Rahman , Laura Pidcock , Yasmine Dar , Nadia Jama and Gemma Bolton .
Commenting on the fresh developments and three-month guideline , Momentum co-chair Andrew Scattergood said : “ The leadership are issuing their own ‘ sanction ’ outside of due process .
The cracks are showing.
” Corbyn was suspended in October after claiming that “ the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents ” in his response to the Equality and Human Rights Commission report .
The report on antisemitism within the Labour @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ unlawful acts of harassment and discrimination ” and “ serious failings in leadership ” during the time that Corbyn was in charge .
Corbyn was readmitted to the party after a meeting of a panel of five NEC members on Tuesday evening .
But Starmer declared on Wednesday that his predecessor would not have the Labour whip restored .
Starmer ’ s spokesperson confirmed on Wednesday that the leader spoke to Margaret Hodge after the NEC ruling on Tuesday evening .
It is understood that the veteran Jewish Labour MP said she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s reinstatement .
Solicitors acting on behalf of Corbyn have written to the party calling for his whip suspension to be lifted , as they contend that the action constitutes political interference in a disciplinary process and goes against EHRC recommendations .
Local Labour parties on Thursday evening passed motions in support of restoring the whip to Corbyn , while Dulwich and West Norwood Labour passed a motion of no confidence in the general secretary by 87 votes to 34 .

The suspension of the Labour whip from former leader Jeremy Corbyn is set to last for three months pending a parliamentary party investigation, though this timescale is “reviewable”, LabourList understands.
According to well-placed LabourList sources, Corbyn has been informed by chief whip Nick Brown that the whip is to be suspended for three months and that a probe will be conducted under Parliamentary Labour Party rules.
The whip suspension is to be kept under review, which means it is not a hard deadline and could be shorter or longer than the time period specified. It is understood that Corbyn’s team is challenging the contents of Brown’s letter.
Corbyn-supporting members of the national executive committee (NEC) also tonight wrote to general secretary David Evans, who made the original decision to suspend Corbyn over his comments on Labour antisemitism.
The joint statement describes Keir Starmer’s decision to withhold the whip following the lifting of Corbyn’s suspension as “an act of deliberate political interference in the handling of a complaint” and a “matter of double jeopardy”.
The NEC members say the continued whip suspension “flies in the face of natural justice”, “undermines the rule book” and is “the type of action found to be unlawful indirect discrimination by the EHRC report”.
They also argue that Starmer saying the current complaints process “does not have the confidence of the Jewish community” can be considered a “direct criticism of the decision reached” by the disputes panel this week.
Pointing out that the disputes panel received legal advice on the day and a recommendation from Labour’s legal unit including its head of legal appointed by Starmer, it accuses the leader of launching “an unacceptable attack on the lay volunteers”.
It also raises concerns over the potential for legal action against the party and the possibility that members of the Labour NEC panel will be “asked to give evidence in a court of law”, which is described as “unconscionable”.
The letter was signed by Howard Beckett, Jayne Taylor, Ian Murray, Andi Fox, Mick Whelan, Andy Kerr, Pauline McCarthy, Ellen Morrison, Lara McNeill, Mish Rahman, Laura Pidcock, Yasmine Dar, Nadia Jama and Gemma Bolton.
Commenting on the fresh developments and three-month guideline, Momentum co-chair Andrew Scattergood said: “The leadership are issuing their own ‘sanction’ outside of due process. The cracks are showing.”
Corbyn was suspended in October after claiming that “the scale of the problem was also dramatically overstated for political reasons by our opponents” in his response to the Equality and Human Rights Commission report.
The report on antisemitism within the Labour Party had found the party responsible for “unlawful acts of harassment and discrimination” and “serious failings in leadership” during the time that Corbyn was in charge.
Corbyn was readmitted to the party after a meeting of a panel of five NEC members on Tuesday evening. But Starmer declared on Wednesday that his predecessor would not have the Labour whip restored.
Starmer’s spokesperson confirmed on Wednesday that the leader spoke to Margaret Hodge after the NEC ruling on Tuesday evening. It is understood that the veteran Jewish Labour MP said she could quit the party over Corbyn’s reinstatement.
Solicitors acting on behalf of Corbyn have written to the party calling for his whip suspension to be lifted, as they contend that the action constitutes political interference in a disciplinary process and goes against EHRC recommendations.
Local Labour parties on Thursday evening passed motions in support of restoring the whip to Corbyn, while Dulwich and West Norwood Labour passed a motion of no confidence in the general secretary by 87 votes to 34.


labourlist--2020-11-19--Government decision to pull LGBT+ anti-bullying funding “callous”, says Labour

Labour frontbencher Tulip Siddiq MP has criticised the decision by the government to pull funding for projects tackling the bullying of lesbian , gay , bisexual and transgender ( LGBT ) children in schools as “ callous ” .
Responding to the announcement , the shadow minister for children and early years warned of the impact of the decision made despite commitments made to invest in targeting homophobic , biphobic and transphobic bullying of pupils .
The Government Equalities Office has admitted that those identifying as LGBT+ are at higher risk of bullying , but ministers have argued that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to come to an end .
Commenting on the decision taken by the government to cut the funding , shadow minister for children and early years Tulip Siddiq said : “ This decision will only serve to further marginalise LGBT+ young people .
“ Government itself has admitted that young people who identify as LGBT+ have higher risk of bullying and long term harm to their education , health and wellbeing , so to be pulling away financial support from those fighting this abuse is especially callous.
” The government has funded several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since 2014 costing around £4m .
The Homophobic , Biphobic and Transphobic Challenge Fund allowed schools to run free training for teachers , staff and students .
Providers of the workshops , as well as school staff , parents and teachers , had expected the programme to continue given the government has acknowledged the impact anti-LGBT+ bullying can have on attainment , absence and mental health .
GMB national equality and inclusion officer Nell Andrew said : “ This decision is yet another example of this government ’ s wafer-thin commitment to equality @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers .
“ Announcing it during transphobia awareness week and when hate crimes against LGBT+ are rising shows callous insensitivity .
“ This time last year this government was running in an election on a manifesto with a commitment to ‘ continue to tackle all forms of bullying in our schools ’ .
We now know that promise was another blatant lie .
“ This is especially cruel during lock down , when we know that children and young people ’ s mental health is already being affected and that LGBT+ children are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ health due to bullying at school .
“ GMB calls on ministers to act fast and reverse this entirely reprehensible and unjust decision now.
” The Conservative Party pledged in its 2019 general election manifesto to “ vigorously combat harassment and violence ” against LGBT+ people with a specific commitment to “ help teachers tackle bullying ” in schools .
Chief executive of Stonewall Nancy Kelley explained that young LGBT+ people face significant bullying in schools .
The charity ’ s 2017 schools report revealed that 45 % of LGBT+ pupils were still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We know LGBT+ people are disproportionately affected by poor mental health , and some of this is because of the way they were treated at school.
” She added : “ This is why it ’ s crucial this government invests money in funding anti-LGBT+ bullying programmes across England .
We can ’ t leave students to suffer in silence.
” Anti-bullying charity Metro , which provides training in schools and colleges across England , said its projects have been “ hugely impactful ” but stressed the need for funding to continue to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vital support ” .

Labour frontbencher Tulip Siddiq MP has criticised the decision by the government to pull funding for projects tackling the bullying of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) children in schools as “callous”.
Responding to the announcement, the shadow minister for children and early years warned of the impact of the decision made despite commitments made to invest in targeting homophobic, biphobic and transphobic bullying of pupils.
The Government Equalities Office has admitted that those identifying as LGBT+ are at higher risk of bullying, but ministers have argued that the funding for the school programmes were due to come to an end.
Commenting on the decision taken by the government to cut the funding, shadow minister for children and early years Tulip Siddiq said: “This decision will only serve to further marginalise LGBT+ young people.
“Government itself has admitted that young people who identify as LGBT+ have higher risk of bullying and long term harm to their education, health and wellbeing, so to be pulling away financial support from those fighting this abuse is especially callous.”
The government has funded several projects to tackle bullying towards LGBT children since 2014 costing around £4m. The Homophobic, Biphobic and Transphobic Challenge Fund allowed schools to run free training for teachers, staff and students.
Providers of the workshops, as well as school staff, parents and teachers, had expected the programme to continue given the government has acknowledged the impact anti-LGBT+ bullying can have on attainment, absence and mental health.
GMB national equality and inclusion officer Nell Andrew said: “This decision is yet another example of this government’s wafer-thin commitment to equality for LGBT+ children, families, and workers.
“Announcing it during transphobia awareness week and when hate crimes against LGBT+ are rising shows callous insensitivity.
“This time last year this government was running in an election on a manifesto with a commitment to ‘continue to tackle all forms of bullying in our schools’. We now know that promise was another blatant lie.
“This is especially cruel during lock down, when we know that children and young people’s mental health is already being affected and that LGBT+ children are much more likely to experience poor mental health due to bullying at school.
“GMB calls on ministers to act fast and reverse this entirely reprehensible and unjust decision now.”
The Conservative Party pledged in its 2019 general election manifesto to “vigorously combat harassment and violence” against LGBT+ people with a specific commitment to “help teachers tackle bullying” in schools.
Chief executive of Stonewall Nancy Kelley explained that young LGBT+ people face significant bullying in schools. The charity’s 2017 schools report revealed that 45% of LGBT+ pupils were still being bullied.
Kelley said: “We know LGBT+ people are disproportionately affected by poor mental health, and some of this is because of the way they were treated at school.”
She added: “This is why it’s crucial this government invests money in funding anti-LGBT+ bullying programmes across England. We can’t leave students to suffer in silence.”
Anti-bullying charity Metro, which provides training in schools and colleges across England, said its projects have been “hugely impactful” but stressed the need for funding to continue to “ensure all schools can access this vital support”.


labourlist--2020-11-19--The contradictions at the heart of the row over Corbyn’s reinstatement

Labour frontbencher Anneliese Dodds told BBC Radio 4 this morning that the decision by a panel of five national executive committee ( NEC ) members to readmit Jeremy Corbyn under the current disciplinary system “ indicates that that process is not the right one ” .
Steve Reed on Wednesday said the NEC ruling showed that “ the system isn ’ t fit for purpose ” .
Keir Starmer has remarked that the complaints process “ does not have the confidence of the Jewish community ” and that this “ became clear once again ” following the reinstatement of his @ @ @ @ @ @ @ knows of complaints that have made no progress for months and even years .
The party acted to expedite Corbyn ’ s high-profile case , whereas it hasn ’ t done so for Pete Willsman , for example , who only just vacated his NEC place .
The responsibility for this haste lies with party headquarters .
Southside is headed by Starmer ally David Evans , who was the leadership ’ s pick for general secretary , and it can be assumed that the steps for Corbyn ’ s case coming before the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s new executive director of legal affairs who was Starmer ’ s head of compliance during the leadership election .
Implying that the NEC panel based its Corbyn reinstatement decision on factional motivations amounts to throwing those ruling body members under a bus , considering that the speed and framework for the process – and indeed the choice of panel members – was the responsibility of party officials .
And this blame game makes even less sense in light of talks during Corbyn ’ s suspension between Corbyn allies such as Len McCluskey @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The latter insists that no deal was struck and what took place was merely lobbying , but the speed of Corbyn ’ s case was a pro-active decision taken by the party and the outcome of the panel was predictable .
This is the first key contradiction .
The thread posted by Gurinder Singh Josan , a pro-Starmer NEC member elected on the Labour to Win platform who was one of five NEC members who considered Corbyn ’ s case this week , highlights the second key contradiction .
He has suggested that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ halting all further disputes panels pending the implementation of an independent complaints process ” .
This idea touches on the absurdity of the leadership ’ s current position , which at once says the NEC-driven process is not fit for purpose and at the same time intends to clear the backlog of antisemitism cases using this same system .
Labour is facing a dilemma .
One route is to do as Starmer ’ s spokesperson suggested this week : carry on concluding cases , including antisemitism complaints , under the current non-independent system @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resubmitted once a new process is set up and nobody trusts that they are being handled correctly right now , this is an enormous waste of time for NEC members who take up their roles as volunteers and – thanks to leaks leading to public criticism – have just been given more reason to be cautious about putting themselves forward for disputes panels .
The other route would be to pause Labour ’ s processing of internal complaints until a new , EHRC-approved system is in place .
Nobody is certain as to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , as a rule change – required to change the complaints process – would usually need conference approval .
A party conference is not set to take place until September 2021 ( and Starmer supporters do not want to hold an earlier special conference as it is assumed this would involve recalling 2019 delegates ) .
The EHRC recommendations are legally mandated , the equality body does expect Labour to implement them before September and Starmer now has stronger support on the NEC – but this circle hasn ’ t yet been squared @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for what to do in the meantime either .

Labour frontbencher Anneliese Dodds told BBC Radio 4 this morning that the decision by a panel of five national executive committee (NEC) members to readmit Jeremy Corbyn under the current disciplinary system “indicates that that process is not the right one”. Steve Reed on Wednesday said the NEC ruling showed that “the system isn’t fit for purpose”. Keir Starmer has remarked that the complaints process “does not have the confidence of the Jewish community” and that this “became clear once again” following the reinstatement of his predecessor.
Yet every active Labour member knows of complaints that have made no progress for months and even years. The party acted to expedite Corbyn’s high-profile case, whereas it hasn’t done so for Pete Willsman, for example, who only just vacated his NEC place. The responsibility for this haste lies with party headquarters. Southside is headed by Starmer ally David Evans, who was the leadership’s pick for general secretary, and it can be assumed that the steps for Corbyn’s case coming before the NEC quickly were overseen by Labour’s new executive director of legal affairs who was Starmer’s head of compliance during the leadership election.
Implying that the NEC panel based its Corbyn reinstatement decision on factional motivations amounts to throwing those ruling body members under a bus, considering that the speed and framework for the process – and indeed the choice of panel members – was the responsibility of party officials. And this blame game makes even less sense in light of talks during Corbyn’s suspension between Corbyn allies such as Len McCluskey and the leader’s office. The latter insists that no deal was struck and what took place was merely lobbying, but the speed of Corbyn’s case was a pro-active decision taken by the party and the outcome of the panel was predictable. This is the first key contradiction.
The thread posted by Gurinder Singh Josan, a pro-Starmer NEC member elected on the Labour to Win platform who was one of five NEC members who considered Corbyn’s case this week, highlights the second key contradiction. He has suggested that it would be “prudent to consider halting all further disputes panels pending the implementation of an independent complaints process”. This idea touches on the absurdity of the leadership’s current position, which at once says the NEC-driven process is not fit for purpose and at the same time intends to clear the backlog of antisemitism cases using this same system.
Labour is facing a dilemma. One route is to do as Starmer’s spokesperson suggested this week: carry on concluding cases, including antisemitism complaints, under the current non-independent system. But as complaints could simply be resubmitted once a new process is set up and nobody trusts that they are being handled correctly right now, this is an enormous waste of time for NEC members who take up their roles as volunteers and – thanks to leaks leading to public criticism – have just been given more reason to be cautious about putting themselves forward for disputes panels.
The other route would be to pause Labour’s processing of internal complaints until a new, EHRC-approved system is in place. Nobody is certain as to how exactly this will unfold, however, as a rule change – required to change the complaints process – would usually need conference approval. A party conference is not set to take place until September 2021 (and Starmer supporters do not want to hold an earlier special conference as it is assumed this would involve recalling 2019 delegates). The EHRC recommendations are legally mandated, the equality body does expect Labour to implement them before September and Starmer now has stronger support on the NEC – but this circle hasn’t yet been squared, and there are no good options for what to do in the meantime either.


labourlist--2020-11-19--My message ahead of chairing West Yorkshire mayor selection hustings

It ’ s nearly ten years since I took part in an incredibly memorable hustings at Oakwell , the home of Barnsley Football Club .
That evening , which is seared into my memory , Barnsley Central Constituency Labour Party members met to select their prospective parliamentary candidate ahead of a forthcoming by-election .
It was a nerve-racking experience , not least because I had to draw lots with another candidate to see who progressed following a tie in the second round of voting !
This evening , I will have the pleasure of chairing a selection hustings for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a great opportunity for local members to grill the candidates ahead of the eventual winner being announced next month .
While I am sure it will prove to be a less stressful experience for me and involve fewer games of chance for the candidates , the stakes are incredibly high for the region .
The reason is obvious : Covid has hit the North of England hard .
The brutal reality is that rather than levelling up , we are on course for a painful period of levelling down .
In South Yorkshire @ @ @ @ @ @ @ benefits is now higher than at any time since the grim aftermath of the pit closures .
While this is cause for great concern , it is in no way surprising .
That is because the UK is one of the most regionally unequal countries in the developed world .
Where you grow up should not determine where you end up but , shamefully , if you live in the North you are more likely to earn less and die younger .
Instead of addressing this disparity , the government has chosen to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one hand while taking with the other .
The ‘ Northern Powerhouse ’ serves as a prime example .
It ’ s more than five years since George Osborne launched the government ’ s flagship proposal to boost local economies through investment .
In that same period , an additional 200,000 northern children have been driven into poverty , largely due to the former Chancellor ’ s brutal cuts to welfare and local government spending .
One policy area in which there has been near consensus is on the need for greater devolution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ key tenet of the government ’ s approach .
West Yorkshire ’ s will be the sixth of its kind in the North .
Whoever is elected will be responsible for an important remit including economic regeneration , transport , planning and skills , and much more besides .
It is a massive undertaking .
Decisions about allocating precious and often scarce resources are made daily .
As an MP , with the unusual privilege of also serving as a mayor , I know first-hand that Labour can and does deliver in regional @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I was elected , we have created or protected 15,000 jobs .
Our pioneering ‘ Working Win ’ programme has helped 6,000 people into work .
We ’ ve established a regional net-zero partnership to decarbonise our economy , plant millions of trees , champion active travel and achieve net-zero emissions by 2040 at the latest .
Just this week , we approved £72m in funding to kick start our fight back from the public health crisis .
This is money that will be spent on revitalising our high streets , creating apprenticeships @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turn , we are using innovative funding arrangements to support priority projects and drawing people together to maximise the benefits of devolution .
I am incredibly proud of what we have achieved .
But as a friendly warning to West Yorkshire ’ s shortlisted candidates : the job comes with huge frustrations .
On both funding and powers , the government simply has not devolved enough .
Too much time and effort is spent tinkering , not transforming .
One of the most damaging examples of this Whitehall-centric ideology was the government ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ programme .
Despite an eye-watering cost of £12bn , the outsourced system reached only 60.4 % of contacts in the week prior to the second lockdown in England .
Calderdale Council took matters into its own hands when it became clear that the national strategy was failing to protect its communities .
The West Yorkshire borough pioneered a locally-led scheme that pushed the contact rate to 95 % .
More proof , not that we needed it , of why the government must relinquish control to local public health teams .
I champion @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it is right in principle but because it works in practice .
At a local and regional level , it means Labour has the power to change people ’ s lives for the better .
If we are to win trust again , we must harness that power to help build collaborative , sustainable and inclusive economies in every town , city , region and nation we represent .
This evening , the focus is on West Yorkshire .
To our candidates : thank you for stepping forward and good luck .
To @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a comradely debate , then do everything we can to elect a Labour mayor for your region .
Labour ’ s candidates for the inaugural West Yorkshire mayoralty are Tracy Brabin MP , Hugh Goulbourne and councillor Susan Hinchcliffe .
The winner of the selection contest will be declared on December 11th , and the election is set to take place on May 6th , 2021 .

It’s nearly ten years since I took part in an incredibly memorable hustings at Oakwell, the home of Barnsley Football Club. That evening, which is seared into my memory, Barnsley Central Constituency Labour Party members met to select their prospective parliamentary candidate ahead of a forthcoming by-election. It was a nerve-racking experience, not least because I had to draw lots with another candidate to see who progressed following a tie in the second round of voting!
This evening, I will have the pleasure of chairing a selection hustings for the inaugural West Yorkshire mayoralty. It is a great opportunity for local members to grill the candidates ahead of the eventual winner being announced next month. While I am sure it will prove to be a less stressful experience for me and involve fewer games of chance for the candidates, the stakes are incredibly high for the region.
The reason is obvious: Covid has hit the North of England hard. The brutal reality is that rather than levelling up, we are on course for a painful period of levelling down. In South Yorkshire, the level of people claiming unemployment-related benefits is now higher than at any time since the grim aftermath of the pit closures. While this is cause for great concern, it is in no way surprising.
That is because the UK is one of the most regionally unequal countries in the developed world. Where you grow up should not determine where you end up but, shamefully, if you live in the North you are more likely to earn less and die younger. Instead of addressing this disparity, the government has chosen to pursue a policy agenda of giving with one hand while taking with the other.
The ‘Northern Powerhouse’ serves as a prime example. It’s more than five years since George Osborne launched the government’s flagship proposal to boost local economies through investment. In that same period, an additional 200,000 northern children have been driven into poverty, largely due to the former Chancellor’s brutal cuts to welfare and local government spending.
One policy area in which there has been near consensus is on the need for greater devolution. Establishing regional mayors has become a key tenet of the government’s approach. West Yorkshire’s will be the sixth of its kind in the North. Whoever is elected will be responsible for an important remit including economic regeneration, transport, planning and skills, and much more besides.
It is a massive undertaking. Decisions about allocating precious and often scarce resources are made daily. As an MP, with the unusual privilege of also serving as a mayor, I know first-hand that Labour can and does deliver in regional government. In South Yorkshire, since I was elected, we have created or protected 15,000 jobs. Our pioneering ‘Working Win’ programme has helped 6,000 people into work. We’ve established a regional net-zero partnership to decarbonise our economy, plant millions of trees, champion active travel and achieve net-zero emissions by 2040 at the latest.
Just this week, we approved £72m in funding to kick start our fight back from the public health crisis. This is money that will be spent on revitalising our high streets, creating apprenticeships and supporting local businesses. At every turn, we are using innovative funding arrangements to support priority projects and drawing people together to maximise the benefits of devolution.
I am incredibly proud of what we have achieved. But as a friendly warning to West Yorkshire’s shortlisted candidates: the job comes with huge frustrations. On both funding and powers, the government simply has not devolved enough. Too much time and effort is spent tinkering, not transforming.
One of the most damaging examples of this Whitehall-centric ideology was the government’s approach to the Test and Trace programme. Despite an eye-watering cost of £12bn, the outsourced system reached only 60.4% of contacts in the week prior to the second lockdown in England.
Calderdale Council took matters into its own hands when it became clear that the national strategy was failing to protect its communities. The West Yorkshire borough pioneered a locally-led scheme that pushed the contact rate to 95%. More proof, not that we needed it, of why the government must relinquish control to local public health teams.
I champion devolution like this, not just because it is right in principle but because it works in practice. At a local and regional level, it means Labour has the power to change people’s lives for the better. If we are to win trust again, we must harness that power to help build collaborative, sustainable and inclusive economies in every town, city, region and nation we represent.
This evening, the focus is on West Yorkshire. To our candidates: thank you for stepping forward and good luck. To our members: let’s have a comradely debate, then do everything we can to elect a Labour mayor for your region.
Labour’s candidates for the inaugural West Yorkshire mayoralty are Tracy Brabin MP, Hugh Goulbourne and councillor Susan Hinchcliffe. The winner of the selection contest will be declared on December 11th, and the election is set to take place on May 6th, 2021.


labourlist--2020-11-20--In this interconnected world, UK aid protects people overseas and at home

The coronavirus pandemic has shown how interconnected and vulnerable we all are to global challenges .
A virus that began by first latching itself to one community has reverberated around the world with devastating effect .
Over 50 million people are known to have contracted the virus , and it has tragically claimed the lives of over one million people .
These numbers continue to rise every day .
From the relatively calm streets of London or New York to fragile conflict zones and communities on the frontlines of the climate emergency in Yemen or Bangladesh , nobody has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that has followed .
At Prime Minister ’ s Questions this week , I asked the Prime Minister whether he was committed to stopping the UK ’ s retreat from the international stage by ruling out if he would honour his own manifesto commitment and rule out for cuts to the aid budget , which saves lives and builds resilience .
His response was full of the usual bluff and bluster we have come to expect , with no straight answer .
On Thursday , when pressed again by Keir during the integrated @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to past promises .
We are witnessing a rise in viral outbreaks and infectious diseases that attack the health of the vulnerable , an ecological catastrophe that uproots and displaces whole villages , towns or cities and fuels food insecurity , and conflicts that worsen as the race to control dwindling and scant resources intensifies .
These challenges create or aggravate humanitarian crises , and in turn make life here in the UK less secure and the future more uncertain .
Life right now is tough for many people .
Providing a stable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the table and worrying whether the paycheque will last until the end of the month are growing concerns .
These fears and anxieties are not detached from daily struggles on the minds of people around the world .
By working together , however , to tackle poverty and inequalities and create health and environmental security , we can partner countries and communities to ensure that we are better able to absorb future shocks and mitigate risks that have implications for us all and make achieving the fair , just and stable world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aid spend isn ’ t just about solving immediate humanitarian , health and security challenges .
It should also focus on tackling structural issues that prevent countries from becoming stable partners and the burning injustices that drive future emergencies .
The aid budget must be protected to allow us to shield people overseas as well as at home .
The 0.7 % of UK GNI commitment is not only a moral good but a vital way to achieve future shared prosperity , peace around the world and security for the future .
During @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hold dear , such as fairness , equality and solidarity with our neighbours and partners , have come to the fore .
Britain has a long , proud internationalist history , UK aid is testament of that .
The Tories should not be allowed to break that tradition .
Leave no-one behind is the core value of the UN Sustainable Development Goals – now is the time for the government to recommit to that mantra both overseas and here at home .
Cutting the aid budget does not allow us to meet our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ undermine the UK ’ s moral authority on the international stage at a time when we must be strengthening our hand ahead of hosting both the G7 summit and COP26 in 2021 .
If the Prime Minister slashes the UK aid budget , he is not only breaking the Conservatives ’ own manifesto commitment , he is challenging both the spirit and letter of UK law .
So much rests on the UK being a force for good and a global leader .
Aid saves lives and projects the future we want to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the middle of a pandemic and when the scale of need has never been so great across our interconnected world , the UK must not turn its back and retreat from the global stage .

The coronavirus pandemic has shown how interconnected and vulnerable we all are to global challenges. A virus that began by first latching itself to one community has reverberated around the world with devastating effect.
Over 50 million people are known to have contracted the virus, and it has tragically claimed the lives of over one million people. These numbers continue to rise every day. From the relatively calm streets of London or New York to fragile conflict zones and communities on the frontlines of the climate emergency in Yemen or Bangladesh, nobody has been immune to the health or economic chaos that has followed.
At Prime Minister’s Questions this week, I asked the Prime Minister whether he was committed to stopping the UK’s retreat from the international stage by ruling out if he would honour his own manifesto commitment and rule out for cuts to the aid budget, which saves lives and builds resilience. His response was full of the usual bluff and bluster we have come to expect, with no straight answer. On Thursday, when pressed again by Keir during the integrated review statement, he failed to commit to past promises.
We are witnessing a rise in viral outbreaks and infectious diseases that attack the health of the vulnerable, an ecological catastrophe that uproots and displaces whole villages, towns or cities and fuels food insecurity, and conflicts that worsen as the race to control dwindling and scant resources intensifies. These challenges create or aggravate humanitarian crises, and in turn make life here in the UK less secure and the future more uncertain.
Life right now is tough for many people. Providing a stable home for your children, putting food on the table and worrying whether the paycheque will last until the end of the month are growing concerns. These fears and anxieties are not detached from daily struggles on the minds of people around the world. By working together, however, to tackle poverty and inequalities and create health and environmental security, we can partner countries and communities to ensure that we are better able to absorb future shocks and mitigate risks that have implications for us all and make achieving the fair, just and stable world we all deserve much harder.
UK aid spend isn’t just about solving immediate humanitarian, health and security challenges. It should also focus on tackling structural issues that prevent countries from becoming stable partners and the burning injustices that drive future emergencies. The aid budget must be protected to allow us to shield people overseas as well as at home. The 0.7% of UK GNI commitment is not only a moral good but a vital way to achieve future shared prosperity, peace around the world and security for the future.
During this pandemic, the values that we hold dear, such as fairness, equality and solidarity with our neighbours and partners, have come to the fore. Britain has a long, proud internationalist history, UK aid is testament of that. The Tories should not be allowed to break that tradition. Leave no-one behind is the core value of the UN Sustainable Development Goals – now is the time for the government to recommit to that mantra both overseas and here at home.
Cutting the aid budget does not allow us to meet our international obligations, and it would recklessly undermine the UK’s moral authority on the international stage at a time when we must be strengthening our hand ahead of hosting both the G7 summit and COP26 in 2021. If the Prime Minister slashes the UK aid budget, he is not only breaking the Conservatives’ own manifesto commitment, he is challenging both the spirit and letter of UK law.
So much rests on the UK being a force for good and a global leader. Aid saves lives and projects the future we want to secure for the next generation. In the middle of a pandemic and when the scale of need has never been so great across our interconnected world, the UK must not turn its back and retreat from the global stage.


labourlist--2020-11-20--Bakers’ Union plans to consult members on staying affiliated to Labour

The left-wing Bakers , Food and Allied Workers ’ Union ( BFAWU ) has today announced the launch of an upcoming membership consultation on whether the trade union should remain affiliated to the Labour Party .
In a statement by national president Ian Hodson , who has been critical of Keir Starmer , the union has declared that the “ political direction ” of the party under its new leadership has “ given members cause for concern ” .
Hodson cites the approach taken by Starmer during Covid , which the Labour leader describes as “ constructive ” but the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government amid “ avoidable deaths , job losses and hardship ” .
The statement also criticises “ Labour ’ s apparent support for landlords ” and “ failure to stand up for tenants ” , which touches on the leadership taking the view that a ‘ cancel the rent ’ policy would be “ un-Labour ” .
It refers to Labour abstentions on parliamentary votes , such as the covert human intelligence sources ( criminal conduct ) ‘ spycops ’ bill that led to 34 Labour MPs including several frontbenchers breaking the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there is something rotten at the heart of Labour ” in light of the leaked report earlier this year , the European and Human Rights Commission report and the “ downplayed ” report on Labour Islamophobia .
“ If that wasn ’ t bad enough , the move by the leadership to both suspend and then overturn an executive decision relating to former leader Jeremy Corbyn was a disgraceful act , ” Hodson ’ s statement reads .
The BFAWU further contends that the evidence available points towards Labour intending to “ end @ @ @ @ @ @ @ replace it with money from wealthy individuals and corporations ” .
Concluding that “ we feel further away from having a political voice than ever ” , the union has resolved to conduct a consultation of members from January 2021 , which will inform any decision on whether to leave the party .
BFAWU , which has represents workers in the food industry since 1847 , backed Corbyn allies Rebecca Long-Bailey for the Labour leadership and Richard Burgon in the deputy leadership race earlier this year .
The new announcement follows the decision @ @ @ @ @ @ @ affiliation to Labour by 10 % , or 50,000 affiliates , and use the withdrawn funding to “ support and nurture the newer voices in our movement ” .
After the executive council of Unite narrowly voted for the move in October , Len McCluskey said the money would instead help “ very talented thinkers and energetic organisations out there who could do with our assistance ” .
The Mirror reported on Thursday that senior figures in three left-wing unions – Unite , the Fire Brigades ( FBU ) and the Communication Workers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said they would push to slash funding for Labour .
The unions have said they could cut their funding ahead of the party fighting a bumper set of elections in May 2021 if former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn does not have the party whip restored by Starmer .
The BFAWU currently has a seat on Labour ’ s ruling body , the national executive committee , which is taken up by Pauline McCarthy .
The union won a seat for the first time ever on the body after a vote in 2015 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ trade union section are nominated by affiliated trade unions and elected by their delegations at the UK Labour conference .
Of the 12 unions affiliated to the party , nine are represented on the NEC .

The left-wing Bakers, Food and Allied Workers’ Union (BFAWU) has today announced the launch of an upcoming membership consultation on whether the trade union should remain affiliated to the Labour Party.
In a statement by national president Ian Hodson, who has been critical of Keir Starmer, the union has declared that the “political direction” of the party under its new leadership has “given members cause for concern”.
Hodson cites the approach taken by Starmer during Covid, which the Labour leader describes as “constructive” but the BFAWU considers to be too supportive of the government amid “avoidable deaths, job losses and hardship”.
The statement also criticises “Labour’s apparent support for landlords” and “failure to stand up for tenants”, which touches on the leadership taking the view that a ‘cancel the rent’ policy would be “un-Labour”.
It refers to Labour abstentions on parliamentary votes, such as the covert human intelligence sources (criminal conduct) ‘spycops’ bill that led to 34 Labour MPs including several frontbenchers breaking the whip.
And it states that “there is something rotten at the heart of Labour” in light of the leaked report earlier this year, the European and Human Rights Commission report and the “downplayed” report on Labour Islamophobia.
“If that wasn’t bad enough, the move by the leadership to both suspend and then overturn an executive decision relating to former leader Jeremy Corbyn was a disgraceful act,” Hodson’s statement reads.
The BFAWU further contends that the evidence available points towards Labour intending to “end its financial relationship with trade unions and replace it with money from wealthy individuals and corporations”.
Concluding that “we feel further away from having a political voice than ever”, the union has resolved to conduct a consultation of members from January 2021, which will inform any decision on whether to leave the party.
BFAWU, which has represents workers in the food industry since 1847, backed Corbyn allies Rebecca Long-Bailey for the Labour leadership and Richard Burgon in the deputy leadership race earlier this year.
The new announcement follows the decision of Unite the Union to reduce its affiliation to Labour by 10%, or 50,000 affiliates, and use the withdrawn funding to “support and nurture the newer voices in our movement”.
After the executive council of Unite narrowly voted for the move in October, Len McCluskey said the money would instead help “very talented thinkers and energetic organisations out there who could do with our assistance”.
The Mirror reported on Thursday that senior figures in three left-wing unions – Unite, the Fire Brigades (FBU) and the Communication Workers’ Union (CWU) – had said they would push to slash funding for Labour.
The unions have said they could cut their funding ahead of the party fighting a bumper set of elections in May 2021 if former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn does not have the party whip restored by Starmer.
The BFAWU currently has a seat on Labour’s ruling body, the national executive committee, which is taken up by Pauline McCarthy. The union won a seat for the first time ever on the body after a vote in 2015.
Members of the NEC’s 13-strong trade union section are nominated by affiliated trade unions and elected by their delegations at the UK Labour conference. Of the 12 unions affiliated to the party, nine are represented on the NEC.


labourlist--2020-11-20--Scrapping the Union Learning Fund is a spiteful act of economic vandalism

‘ If it ain ’ t broke , don ’ t fix it ’ , as the saying goes .
Certainly don ’ t scrap it .
But that ’ s what Education Secretary Gavin Williamson is planning to do to the Union Learning Fund ( ULF ) in an act of spectacular vandalism for our economy and the life chances of hundreds of thousands of people .
ULF was set up as a national scheme in 1998 , one of the first acts of the newly elected Labour government .
It is currently helping around 200,000 learners in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ success in outcomes has held good ever since then .
At a time when the government has struggled to make a major dent in the millions who lack basic skills , the ULF is playing a crucial role in getting both younger and older workers on a ladder of progression to acquiring Levels 2 and 3 .
That will be critical in trying to safeguard their future employability .
It will also enable them to have better chances of retraining for new and better jobs and livelihoods , at a time when the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of existing jobs .
The pandemic is turbocharging existing trends for the 2020s , where automation and digitalisation will mean many existing jobs and workplaces will change rapidly or no longer exist .
The 44,000 Union Learning reps across England would be a critical part of that renewal .
They could be huge enablers and persuaders for any Green New Deal – particularly the ambitious one that Ed Miliband and Anneliese Dodds has just unveiled for Labour – giving people the confidence and tools to gain new skills for retrofitting businesses , homes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the public sector , including the expansion of solar power .
The ULF also has a key role to play here and now , as the economic consequences of Covid are consigning so many workers to furlough , joblessness and reduced hours .
In the case of apprentices , many are uncertain about being able to complete their training due to lockdown , their employers going bust or unable to sustain those apprenticeships – not least in service sectors and areas with high numbers of small and medium-sized enterprises .
The ULF and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these categories of workers with their Learning At Home online campaign designed to reach furloughed , home-working or redundant trade unionists .
Current figures for unemployment and claimant counts show how badly this support is needed .
Having been Blackpool South ’ s MP for over two decades until last year , I know how critical ULF programmes , such as those operated out of our local centre for the unemployed , can be .
Statistics released in September showed that nearly one in ten people of working age were jobless in Blackpool @ @ @ @ @ @ @ topping the national tables along with Liverpool and Hull .
One in every five young people aged 18 to 24 in Blackpool South were having to claim benefits .
These figures are likely to worsen on the back of the Tier 3 restrictions and the latest national lockdown , which will hit many small businesses in the town , especially in the visitor economy .
In the post-Covid world , we can expect to see the increased importance of logistics , online working , digital skills , and of course of the health @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the NHS but care staff in the care homes and home support sector – to be vital elements in the 2020s economy .
Without the ability to progress , workers who previously could have benefitted from ULF Learning Rep support could find themselves excluded from a ladder to those jobs .
The dismal record of government departments since 2010 in tackling low skills rates and learning for workers stands in stark contrast to the achievements of ULF .
The take-up of basic qualifications – English and Maths to Level 2 – declined @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
After the government scrapped grants in FE and replaced them in 2013 with ‘ Advanced Learner Loans ’ for people over 24 studying at Levels 3 and 4 , year on year I highlighted as shadow skills minister that more than half of them of them were not taken up , with nearly £1bn of funding sent back by education ministers , unused , to the Treasury .
By contrast , ULF-supported projects covering a range of qualifications for workers have consistently exceeded the targets .
This is evidenced in the detailed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ carried out by the University of Exeter , which recently calculated that there had been an overall benefit for employers and individuals of £1.4bn in return for Unionlearn ’ s £12m annual grant .
Just in this last year , ULF helped 37,000 learners to take up Level 2 training courses in English and Maths , a 48 % increase on the 25,000 target set them by the Department of Education .
ULF programmes have a huge positive impact on Skills for Life .
Over two thirds of participants who obtained qualifications under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and four out of five of them said they had developed skills to make them more effective in their current job or seeking a new one .
The annual £12m from the government to ULF that the Education Secretary says he will scrap from next March currently levers in an additional £54m from employers , unions and training providers .
Much if not all of that extra funding is likely to be lost .
This will come into effect just when the government ’ s much vaunted , if flawed , Lifetime Skills @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to study for a free first Level 3 qualification , is set to start in spring 2021 .
The huge irony here has not been lost on the TUC as they and others – including Labour – campaign against the ULF decision .
Just this week , TUC general secretary Frances O ’ Grady has said that the new entitlement will be a ‘ paper promise ’ that , bereft of support from Union Learning reps ( available incidentally to both union members and non-members ) , only small numbers are likely to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the ULF , not only will tens of thousands of workers miss out on skills to help them keep their jobs now , but for future ones in the 2020s .
Many of those new jobs will come in self-employment , which is why the ULF would be a critical factor in signposting workers to the enabling skills and qualifications that will benefit their future careers , not just the short-term needs ( however valuable ) of their current employers .
Without the ULF , many workers will be unable to access self @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in jobs such as plumbers , electricians , builders , or in service sectors in health , social care and childcare , travel and the visitor economy .
That supportive role will be lost by the government clawing back the ULF ’ s £12m , which is chicken feed in Treasury terms or compared to the £100s of millions that the National Audit Office has shown the government has wasted on failed Covid personal protective equipment procurement .
This was poignantly highlighted this week by Labour MP and former regional education officer for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Westminster Hall debate by saying : The chamber was packed with MPs from all parts of the country , brimming over with examples of life changing achievements that they had seen and had come in their communities .
Not a single Tory MP was there to speak in defence of Williamson ’ s decision , and Toby Perkins , my successor as shadow skills minister , powerfully reminded everyone there that only a couple of years ago the then skills minister Anne Milton had emphasised ULF ’ s crucial role as an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ National Training Scheme .
As he said , there has been no attempt by government to have an impact assessment on the decision , and a long list of companies – including British Steel , Heathrow Airport , Make UK and Tesco – are opposing it .
In reality , it is an act of vindictive anti-union spitefulness from the Education Secretary , for which there should be no legitimate justification in 21st-century Britain .
The government has no answer to the question Lilian Greenwood put to them in the debate : “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ engaging reluctant learners ?
” .
The losers will not just be our economy , UK productivity and our communities over the next decade , but the aspirations of hundreds of thousands of people .
As someone who worked with hundreds of adult learners as an Open University tutor over two decades , I know just how valuable learning through life can be in opening up people ’ s lives , confidence and wellbeing , as well as the practical and job related benefits it can bring .
It ’ s been a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the work of Union Learning reps , for whom it was an honour for me when I was shadow skills minister to hear their life stories and present awards at the annual UnionLearn event at the TUC .
The ‘ right to learn ’ is something that is deeply rooted in the trade union and labour movement – and it is something that I am proud we embedded in the Lifelong Learning Commission ’ s recommendations to the Labour Party last November .
It has been echoed in the College of the Future @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of that aspiration – and we should continue to be relentless in the campaign to keep it so .

‘If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’, as the saying goes. Certainly don’t scrap it. But that’s what Education Secretary Gavin Williamson is planning to do to the Union Learning Fund (ULF) in an act of spectacular vandalism for our economy and the life chances of hundreds of thousands of people. ULF was set up as a national scheme in 1998, one of the first acts of the newly elected Labour government. It is currently helping around 200,000 learners in the workplace across England. Its record of success in outcomes has held good ever since then.
At a time when the government has struggled to make a major dent in the millions who lack basic skills, the ULF is playing a crucial role in getting both younger and older workers on a ladder of progression to acquiring Levels 2 and 3. That will be critical in trying to safeguard their future employability.
It will also enable them to have better chances of retraining for new and better jobs and livelihoods, at a time when the Covid pandemic is scything through many thousands of existing jobs. The pandemic is turbocharging existing trends for the 2020s, where automation and digitalisation will mean many existing jobs and workplaces will change rapidly or no longer exist.
The 44,000 Union Learning reps across England would be a critical part of that renewal. They could be huge enablers and persuaders for any Green New Deal – particularly the ambitious one that Ed Miliband and Anneliese Dodds has just unveiled for Labour – giving people the confidence and tools to gain new skills for retrofitting businesses, homes, schools and raising green standards in the public sector, including the expansion of solar power.
The ULF also has a key role to play here and now, as the economic consequences of Covid are consigning so many workers to furlough, joblessness and reduced hours. In the case of apprentices, many are uncertain about being able to complete their training due to lockdown, their employers going bust or unable to sustain those apprenticeships – not least in service sectors and areas with high numbers of small and medium-sized enterprises.
The ULF and the TUC have already started support of these categories of workers with their Learning At Home online campaign designed to reach furloughed, home-working or redundant trade unionists. Current figures for unemployment and claimant counts show how badly this support is needed. Having been Blackpool South’s MP for over two decades until last year, I know how critical ULF programmes, such as those operated out of our local centre for the unemployed, can be.
Statistics released in September showed that nearly one in ten people of working age were jobless in Blackpool, three times the national average, topping the national tables along with Liverpool and Hull. One in every five young people aged 18 to 24 in Blackpool South were having to claim benefits. These figures are likely to worsen on the back of the Tier 3 restrictions and the latest national lockdown, which will hit many small businesses in the town, especially in the visitor economy.
In the post-Covid world, we can expect to see the increased importance of logistics, online working, digital skills, and of course of the health and social care sector – not just in the NHS but care staff in the care homes and home support sector – to be vital elements in the 2020s economy. Without the ability to progress, workers who previously could have benefitted from ULF Learning Rep support could find themselves excluded from a ladder to those jobs.
The dismal record of government departments since 2010 in tackling low skills rates and learning for workers stands in stark contrast to the achievements of ULF. The take-up of basic qualifications – English and Maths to Level 2 – declined by 30% from 2013 to 2018. After the government scrapped grants in FE and replaced them in 2013 with ‘Advanced Learner Loans’ for people over 24 studying at Levels 3 and 4, year on year I highlighted as shadow skills minister that more than half of them of them were not taken up, with nearly £1bn of funding sent back by education ministers, unused, to the Treasury.
By contrast, ULF-supported projects covering a range of qualifications for workers have consistently exceeded the targets. This is evidenced in the detailed independent analysis of ULF success in outcomes carried out by the University of Exeter, which recently calculated that there had been an overall benefit for employers and individuals of £1.4bn in return for Unionlearn’s £12m annual grant. Just in this last year, ULF helped 37,000 learners to take up Level 2 training courses in English and Maths, a 48% increase on the 25,000 target set them by the Department of Education.
ULF programmes have a huge positive impact on Skills for Life. Over two thirds of participants who obtained qualifications under ULF had had no previous ones – and four out of five of them said they had developed skills to make them more effective in their current job or seeking a new one. The annual £12m from the government to ULF that the Education Secretary says he will scrap from next March currently levers in an additional £54m from employers, unions and training providers. Much if not all of that extra funding is likely to be lost.
This will come into effect just when the government’s much vaunted, if flawed, Lifetime Skills Guarantee, which will allow all adults to study for a free first Level 3 qualification, is set to start in spring 2021. The huge irony here has not been lost on the TUC as they and others – including Labour – campaign against the ULF decision. Just this week, TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady has said that the new entitlement will be a ‘paper promise’ that, bereft of support from Union Learning reps (available incidentally to both union members and non-members), only small numbers are likely to use.
Without that enabling support from the ULF, not only will tens of thousands of workers miss out on skills to help them keep their jobs now, but for future ones in the 2020s. Many of those new jobs will come in self-employment, which is why the ULF would be a critical factor in signposting workers to the enabling skills and qualifications that will benefit their future careers, not just the short-term needs (however valuable) of their current employers. Without the ULF, many workers will be unable to access self employment, co-operatives or small businesses, in jobs such as plumbers, electricians, builders, or in service sectors in health, social care and childcare, travel and the visitor economy.
That supportive role will be lost by the government clawing back the ULF’s £12m, which is chicken feed in Treasury terms or compared to the £100s of millions that the National Audit Office has shown the government has wasted on failed Covid personal protective equipment procurement. This was poignantly highlighted this week by Labour MP and former regional education officer for UNISON, Lilian Greenwood. She opened the Westminster Hall debate by saying:
“If someone thinks education is not for them, or struggles with reading and writing, numbers or using new technology, they might not want to tell their supervisor or someone in human resources, but they will talk to a colleague – someone like them – especially if they know that their colleague faces the same problem. That is the beauty of union learning: it is incredibly effective at engaging those hard-to-reach learners.”
The chamber was packed with MPs from all parts of the country, brimming over with examples of life changing achievements that they had seen and had come in their communities. Not a single Tory MP was there to speak in defence of Williamson’s decision, and Toby Perkins, my successor as shadow skills minister, powerfully reminded everyone there that only a couple of years ago the then skills minister Anne Milton had emphasised ULF’s crucial role as an external partner in the government’s National Training Scheme. As he said, there has been no attempt by government to have an impact assessment on the decision, and a long list of companies – including British Steel, Heathrow Airport, Make UK and Tesco – are opposing it.
In reality, it is an act of vindictive anti-union spitefulness from the Education Secretary, for which there should be no legitimate justification in 21st-century Britain. The government has no answer to the question Lilian Greenwood put to them in the debate: “Which organisation will replace Union Learn in engaging reluctant learners?”. The losers will not just be our economy, UK productivity and our communities over the next decade, but the aspirations of hundreds of thousands of people.
As someone who worked with hundreds of adult learners as an Open University tutor over two decades, I know just how valuable learning through life can be in opening up people’s lives, confidence and wellbeing, as well as the practical and job related benefits it can bring. It’s been a great privilege to see that again in the work of Union Learning reps, for whom it was an honour for me when I was shadow skills minister to hear their life stories and present awards at the annual UnionLearn event at the TUC.
The ‘right to learn’ is something that is deeply rooted in the trade union and labour movement – and it is something that I am proud we embedded in the Lifelong Learning Commission’s recommendations to the Labour Party last November. It has been echoed in the College of the Future report. UnionLearn is a key part of that aspiration – and we should continue to be relentless in the campaign to keep it so.