labourlist--2020-05-17--Sunday shows: Labour urges government to “publish the science” on schools reopening

Rachel Reeves , Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Michael Gove ’ s opposite , warned that the reopening of schools has not been approached in the right way .
She called on the government to publish the evidence behind the decision and to work with teachers , unions and parents to ensure confidence .
• On reopening schools safely : “ The government needs to work with parents , teachers and their unions to ensure that the new plans have the confidence of everybody… But also we need more transparency from government.
” • On transparency : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all the decisions that are going to be made about easing the lockdown will be based on the science – and here we are a week later and those decisions have not been published.
” • She added : “ Government need to put in place some of the measures to improve confidence and that includes the test , trace and isolate strategy .
The government abandoned that back in the middle of March – that was a mistake.
” • On contact tracing : “ The government has now said it wants @ @ @ @ @ @ @ well , it is now the 17th May .
The government has contracted out the recruitment of people to that to the private firm , Serco .
They ’ ve only recruited one in ten of the people the government say that they need.
” • Asked if it is Labour ’ s position that children should not go back to school before a contact tracing strategy is in place : “ We want that to be up and running to ease the whole range of the lockdown restrictions.
” • On whether @ @ @ @ @ @ @ independent schools are not : “ I would like to see schools in the state sector and the independent sector open , but my biggest concern is about the most disadvantaged children.
” • On working with stakeholders : “ It is so important that instead of dialling up the rhetoric , the government actually start working with teachers and other staff at schools and with parents to build that confidence.
” • On the approach from government : “ The government has still got two weeks to get this right , they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ right way so far .
Please , government , use the next two weeks to get this right.
” • Asked if it is Labour ’ s position to avoid leaving the EU without a deal at all costs : “ We absolutely do not want to leave the EU without a deal… We want to ensure that there is as good a deal as possible by the end of this year.
” • On an extension to the transition period : “ The government has enshrined in law that the transition period @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of this year… the government is still saying that is possible.
” • Asked why Labour is not calling for an extension : “ We ’ re saying that they mustn ’ t rush this and if they are not going to secure a deal , we mustn ’ t crash out without a deal – and that means taking the time that is necessary.
” • On negotiating a deal by the end of this year : “ It is up to the government to show that they can deliver the promises @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people… And that is getting a good deal , and a good deal by the end of this year .
And if they are not in a position to do that , they need to come back and explain a timetable.
” Michael Gove announced that the government has recruited “ just over 17,000 ” of the 18,000 people that it says are needed for its contact tracing strategy .
On reopening schools , he said children are “ less likely to have serious symptoms ” than older people , but that “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ensure children and those who work in schools are as safe as possible ” .
Angela Rayner , Labour ’ s new deputy leader and former Shadow Education Secretary , called on the government to “ publish the science ” on the reopening of schools .
She said the Labour councils refusing to reopen schools on June 1st were trying to “ make sure that their citizens are safe ” .
• On whether schools should reopen on June 1st : “ Schools have been open throughout this whole crisis for vulnerable children @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I think it ’ s important that schools feel safe in introducing more pupils to the classroom as quickly as possible .
I think what Gavin needs to do , the Education Secretary , is publish the science… and ensure there is testing and tracing , which he promised yesterday that on 1st June that would be available but at the moment we ’ ve not seen any evidence that they can provide that.
” • On whether it is unsafe for schools to reopen : “ Children can catch the virus , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus… We have to make sure that social distancing measures where possible are in place .
We know that teachers have died as a result of catching Covid.
” • She added : “ We do want as many pupils as possible to go back into the classroom .
But we ’ ve got to reassure the teaching professionals… And that means testing has to be there.
” • On home learning : “ I think that ’ s patchy .
They need to increase that .
What we know is that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” • On Labour councils such as Liverpool and Hartlepool refusing to reopen schools on June 1st : “ The communication from government in terms of safety measures for areas like Greater Manchester , Liverpool , the North East , has been patchy .
The information hasn ’ t been there .
We believe the R rate is higher in those areas.
” • You support those councils ?
“ I urge the government to publish the science , and to ensure that the testing and tracing is in place… Councils want to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I support them in trying to do that.
” • Asked how badly care homes have been let down : “ Terribly badly.
” Added that “ there should be an investigation ” into 10,000 additional care home deaths unaccounted for .
• On whether Labour has been “ too aggressive ” in its response : “ We want to be a constructive opposition .
Honestly , I really want them to succeed .
I was working with the DfE when I was Shadow Education Secretary , I was working with Gavin @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were in place .
And I think that ’ s absolutely the right thing to do .
But we also have to call out when things are not done correctly.
” Michael Gove also appeared on Marr .
Asked about those same Labour councils , he said : “ I respectfully ask them to think again.
” He said teaching unions “ understandably want to look after their members and they are being cautious ” , but he encouraged them to “ think about the future of the children ” , “ look @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at foreign examples ” .

Ridge on Sunday
Rachel Reeves, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Michael Gove’s opposite, warned that the reopening of schools has not been approached in the right way. She called on the government to publish the evidence behind the decision and to work with teachers, unions and parents to ensure confidence.
On reopening schools safely: “The government needs to work with parents, teachers and their unions to ensure that the new plans have the confidence of everybody… But also we need more transparency from government.”
On transparency: “The PM said last Sunday that all the decisions that are going to be made about easing the lockdown will be based on the science – and here we are a week later and those decisions have not been published.”
She added: “Government need to put in place some of the measures to improve confidence and that includes the test, trace and isolate strategy. The government abandoned that back in the middle of March – that was a mistake.”
On contact tracing: “The government has now said it wants to bring that back by mid-May – well, it is now the 17th May. The government has contracted out the recruitment of people to that to the private firm, Serco. They’ve only recruited one in ten of the people the government say that they need.”
Asked if it is Labour’s position that children should not go back to school before a contact tracing strategy is in place: “We want that to be up and running to ease the whole range of the lockdown restrictions.”
On whether state schools should be opening when most independent schools are not: “I would like to see schools in the state sector and the independent sector open, but my biggest concern is about the most disadvantaged children.”
On working with stakeholders: “It is so important that instead of dialling up the rhetoric, the government actually start working with teachers and other staff at schools and with parents to build that confidence.”
On the approach from government: “The government has still got two weeks to get this right, they haven’t approached it in the right way so far. Please, government, use the next two weeks to get this right.”
Asked if it is Labour’s position to avoid leaving the EU without a deal at all costs: “We absolutely do not want to leave the EU without a deal… We want to ensure that there is as good a deal as possible by the end of this year.”
On an extension to the transition period: “The government has enshrined in law that the transition period comes to an end at the end of this year… the government is still saying that is possible.”
Asked why Labour is not calling for an extension: “We’re saying that they mustn’t rush this and if they are not going to secure a deal, we mustn’t crash out without a deal – and that means taking the time that is necessary.”
On negotiating a deal by the end of this year: “It is up to the government to show that they can deliver the promises that they have made to the British people… And that is getting a good deal, and a good deal by the end of this year. And if they are not in a position to do that, they need to come back and explain a timetable.”
"Instead of dialling up the rhetoric, we want govt to work with teachers, parents and unions to get this right."@RachelReevesMP says a lack of transparency around plans to reopen schools is 'adding to anxiety' amongst teachers and parents.#Ridge: https://t.co/Wq4PpB19pM pic.twitter.com/mHf5XiPoVd — Sophy Ridge on Sunday (@RidgeOnSunday) May 17, 2020
Michael Gove announced that the government has recruited “just over 17,000” of the 18,000 people that it says are needed for its contact tracing strategy. On reopening schools, he said children are “less likely to have serious symptoms” than older people, but that “steps are being taken in order to ensure children and those who work in schools are as safe as possible”.
The Andrew Marr Show
Angela Rayner, Labour’s new deputy leader and former Shadow Education Secretary, called on the government to “publish the science” on the reopening of schools. She said the Labour councils refusing to reopen schools on June 1st were trying to “make sure that their citizens are safe”.
On whether schools should reopen on June 1st: “Schools have been open throughout this whole crisis for vulnerable children and for children of frontline workers. I think it’s important that schools feel safe in introducing more pupils to the classroom as quickly as possible. I think what Gavin needs to do, the Education Secretary, is publish the science… and ensure there is testing and tracing, which he promised yesterday that on 1st June that would be available but at the moment we’ve not seen any evidence that they can provide that.”
On whether it is unsafe for schools to reopen: “Children can catch the virus, and we believe that they could transmit the virus… We have to make sure that social distancing measures where possible are in place. We know that teachers have died as a result of catching Covid.”
She added: “We do want as many pupils as possible to go back into the classroom. But we’ve got to reassure the teaching professionals… And that means testing has to be there.”
On home learning: “I think that’s patchy. They need to increase that. What we know is that this virus isn’t going away.”
On Labour councils such as Liverpool and Hartlepool refusing to reopen schools on June 1st: “The communication from government in terms of safety measures for areas like Greater Manchester, Liverpool, the North East, has been patchy. The information hasn’t been there. We believe the R rate is higher in those areas.”
You support those councils? “I urge the government to publish the science, and to ensure that the testing and tracing is in place… Councils want to make sure that their citizens are safe. I support them in trying to do that.”
Asked how badly care homes have been let down: “Terribly badly.” Added that “there should be an investigation” into 10,000 additional care home deaths unaccounted for.
On whether Labour has been “too aggressive” in its response: “We want to be a constructive opposition. Honestly, I really want them to succeed. I was working with the DfE when I was Shadow Education Secretary, I was working with Gavin to try to make sure the provisions were in place. And I think that’s absolutely the right thing to do. But we also have to call out when things are not done correctly.”
“If we’ve got the test, tracking and tracing in place for schools then that would reassure parents” Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner says the government should reassure parents and teachers, & publish the science behind plan to reopen schools #Marr https://t.co/lFtwIJGUT1 pic.twitter.com/Z8eduxfu3C — BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) May 17, 2020
Michael Gove also appeared on Marr. Asked about those same Labour councils, he said: “I respectfully ask them to think again.” He said teaching unions “understandably want to look after their members and they are being cautious”, but he encouraged them to “think about the future of the children”, “look at the science” and “look at foreign examples”.


labourlist--2020-05-18--WATCH: Cooper says “in cross-party spirit” she will not vote against Tory immigration bill

Yvette Cooper has revealed that she intends to defy the Labour whip tonight and not vote against the Tory immigration bill at this stage of its passage “ in cross-party spirit ” .
The chair of the home affairs select committee and former Labour leadership candidate told the Commons : “ I believe that this bill is flawed , but I recognise that legislation on immigration is now needed .
“ And as select committee chair , I will put forward amendments that I hope will receive cross-party support .
“ In that cross-party spirit , I will not vote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government ’ s approach does not change I would expect to oppose it when it returns to the House .
“ Because I think it is immensely important we should be trying to build that new consensus .
And I urge the government to do so because it has the opportunity to do so now.
” Labour ’ s new Shadow Home Secretary , Nick Thomas-Symonds , argued earlier that the bill ’ s salary threshold of £25,600 sent a signal that those earning less are “ unskilled and unwelcome ” .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Commons at the second reading stage .
It aims to end EU freedom of movement and confer powers to ministers to create a new , post-Brexit system .
15 Labour MPs including Diane Abbott signed an amendment to the bill today that would decline to give it a second reading , partly because it “ contains no provisions to end the hostile environment ” .

Yvette Cooper has revealed that she intends to defy the Labour whip tonight and not vote against the Tory immigration bill at this stage of its passage “in cross-party spirit”.
The chair of the home affairs select committee and former Labour leadership candidate told the Commons: “I believe that this bill is flawed, but I recognise that legislation on immigration is now needed.
“And as select committee chair, I will put forward amendments that I hope will receive cross-party support.
“In that cross-party spirit, I will not vote against the bill tonight, although if the government’s approach does not change I would expect to oppose it when it returns to the House.
“Because I think it is immensely important we should be trying to build that new consensus. And I urge the government to do so because it has the opportunity to do so now.”
Labour’s new Shadow Home Secretary, Nick Thomas-Symonds, argued earlier that the bill’s salary threshold of £25,600 sent a signal that those earning less are “unskilled and unwelcome”.
The proposed legislation is currently being debated in the Commons at the second reading stage. It aims to end EU freedom of movement and confer powers to ministers to create a new, post-Brexit system.
15 Labour MPs including Diane Abbott signed an amendment to the bill today that would decline to give it a second reading, partly because it “contains no provisions to end the hostile environment”.


labourlist--2020-05-18--WATCH: Immigration bill tells key workers they are “unskilled and unwelcome”, says Labour

Nick Thomas-Symonds has said that the immigration bill sends a signal to frontline workers in the coronavirus pandemic , many of whom earn under £25,600 , that they are “ unskilled and unwelcome ” .
In parliament today , the Shadow Home Secretary said that “ those who clapped on Thursday are only too happy to vote through a bill today that will send a powerful message to those same people that they are not considered by this government to be skilled workers ” .
He said : “ We on this frontbench know that people are not being paid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that what our frontline workers earn does not reflect what they contribute to our society.
” The MP for Torfaen warned of the impact that the bill would have on staffing in the health and social care sectors , emphasising that there is an existing shortfall in the number of nurses in the UK with a total of 40,000 vacancies .
He also described how the legislation would delegate “ sweeping powers ” to government ministers to set up a new immigration system , by relying largely on statutory instruments , with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Home Secretary said that the Immigration Bill represents a “ threat to our national interest ” by risking the ability to fill roles for health and care workers .
The Royal College of Nursing said : “ The government ’ s proposals for the immigration system will exclude some health and care workers from entering the UK , primarily social care staff , and will have a devastating impact on the health and care sector.
” The immigration bill makes provision to end the freedom of movement under EU law , and to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a new , post-Brexit system .
The Brexit transition period is due to come to an end later this year .
The bill is currently being debated in the House of Commons at the second reading stage , with a remote vote due to take place this evening .
With a government majority of 80 , it is expected to pass without difficulty .

Nick Thomas-Symonds has said that the immigration bill sends a signal to frontline workers in the coronavirus pandemic, many of whom earn under £25,600, that they are “unskilled and unwelcome”.
In parliament today, the Shadow Home Secretary said that “those who clapped on Thursday are only too happy to vote through a bill today that will send a powerful message to those same people that they are not considered by this government to be skilled workers”.
He said: “We on this frontbench know that people are not being paid the value of what they do, and that what our frontline workers earn does not reflect what they contribute to our society.”
"In the midst of this crisis," the salary threshold of £25,600 put forward in the immigration bill sends a signal "that anyone earning less than that is unskilled and unwelcome in this country," says shadow home secretary Nick Thomas-Symondshttps://t.co/5vHwao0SNL pic.twitter.com/tpRY0cFYhT — BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) May 18, 2020
The MP for Torfaen warned of the impact that the bill would have on staffing in the health and social care sectors, emphasising that there is an existing shortfall in the number of nurses in the UK with a total of 40,000 vacancies.
He also described how the legislation would delegate “sweeping powers” to government ministers to set up a new immigration system, by relying largely on statutory instruments, with little oversight from parliament.
The Shadow Home Secretary said that the Immigration Bill represents a “threat to our national interest” by risking the ability to fill roles for health and care workers.
The Royal College of Nursing said: “The government’s proposals for the immigration system will exclude some health and care workers from entering the UK, primarily social care staff, and will have a devastating impact on the health and care sector.”
The immigration bill makes provision to end the freedom of movement under EU law, and to confer powers to government ministers to create a new, post-Brexit system. The Brexit transition period is due to come to an end later this year.
The bill is currently being debated in the House of Commons at the second reading stage, with a remote vote due to take place this evening. With a government majority of 80, it is expected to pass without difficulty.


labourlist--2020-05-18--Forward Momentum unveils slate for internal Momentum elections

The Forward Momentum slate of candidates for the upcoming internal Momentum national coordinating group ( NCG ) elections has been revealed tonight .
The # Forward24 includes Labour MP Nadia Whittome , metro-mayor Jamie Driscoll , former parliamentary candidate Jennifer Forbes and writer Alan Gibbons .
The slate was determined via a process of open primaries , a first for NCG elections , and these saw 64 people stand and nearly 2,000 Forward Momentum supporters take part in the vote .
Digital hustings were held as part of the process , in which candidates gave speeches and answered questions using @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attended .
The candidates selected – said to include key workers , shop stewards and community organisers – are described by the campaign as “ representing a break with the current leadership faction ” .
Forward Momentum has been officially supported by the party-affiliated Fire Brigades Union , and regional secretary Andrew Scattergood is on the slate – along with the NEU ’ s Phil Clarke .
Callum Bell , a working nurse and community organiser in Newcastle elected to the slate , said : “ I ’ m proud to be a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ break with the status quo in Momentum.
” Harriet Protheroe Soltani , a Forward Momentum organiser in Wales elected to the slate , added : “ Our open primaries process has shown we don ’ t need backroom deals .
“ We ’ ve been chosen by thousands of Momentum members to stand for a different approach in our organisation .
We ’ re not afraid of democracy and we don ’ t think it ’ s a distraction .
“ We think it ’ s the way we ’ re going to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turn thousands of Momentum members into organisers.
” Forward Momentum has said that it will now finalise its manifesto , through a series of meetings with delegates from across the country , before contesting the NCG elections in June .
The alternative slate being put forward by another time-limited initiative , ‘ Momentum Renewal ‘ , is expected to be released in the coming days , ahead of NCG nominations opening on May 28th .
‘ Renewal ’ launched over the weekend , backed by MPs such as Ian Lavery , several members @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and high-profile writers including Aaron Bastani and Grace Blakeley .
Their founding statement stressed the importance of “ left unity ” and the need for a “ single socialist slate ” in the next round of Labour ’ s national executive committee ( NEC ) elections .
The news came after founder and current chair Jon Lansman announced via a LabourList piece that he would not be standing for the forthcoming NCG elections .
NCG nominations will close on June 11th , then a one-member-one-vote ballot will be conducted by Momentum from June @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is entirely taking place online .

The Forward Momentum slate of candidates for the upcoming internal Momentum national coordinating group (NCG) elections has been revealed tonight.
The #Forward24 includes Labour MP Nadia Whittome, metro-mayor Jamie Driscoll, former parliamentary candidate Jennifer Forbes and writer Alan Gibbons.
London:
Deborah Hermanns
Sonali Bhattacharyya
Ana Oppenheim
Mick Moore
Midlands and East:
Andrew Scattergood
Solma Ahmed
Mish Rahman
Abbie Clark
North West and Wales:
Alan Gibbons
Tracey Hilton
Harriet Protheroe Soltani
Charlie Bollaan
North East, Yorkshire & Humberside, Scotland, Northern Ireland and International:
Callum Bell
Liz Smith
Gaya Sriskanthan
Rory MacLean
South East and South West:
Phil Clarke
Jennifer Forbes
Darran McLaughlin
Shona Jemphrey
Public office holders:
Mayor Jamie Driscoll
Nadia Whittome MP
Cllr Christine Howard
Cllr Barrie Margetts
The slate was determined via a process of open primaries, a first for NCG elections, and these saw 64 people stand and nearly 2,000 Forward Momentum supporters take part in the vote.
Digital hustings were held as part of the process, in which candidates gave speeches and answered questions using Zoom video conferencing. Over 500 people attended.
The candidates selected – said to include key workers, shop stewards and community organisers – are described by the campaign as “representing a break with the current leadership faction”.
Forward Momentum has been officially supported by the party-affiliated Fire Brigades Union, and regional secretary Andrew Scattergood is on the slate – along with the NEU’s Phil Clarke.
Callum Bell, a working nurse and community organiser in Newcastle elected to the slate, said: “I’m proud to be a part of this slate… We need to break with the status quo in Momentum.”
Harriet Protheroe Soltani, a Forward Momentum organiser in Wales elected to the slate, added: “Our open primaries process has shown we don’t need backroom deals.
“We’ve been chosen by thousands of Momentum members to stand for a different approach in our organisation. We’re not afraid of democracy and we don’t think it’s a distraction.
“We think it’s the way we’re going to rejuvenate Momentum, unite the left and turn thousands of Momentum members into organisers.”
Forward Momentum has said that it will now finalise its manifesto, through a series of meetings with delegates from across the country, before contesting the NCG elections in June.
The alternative slate being put forward by another time-limited initiative, ‘Momentum Renewal‘, is expected to be released in the coming days, ahead of NCG nominations opening on May 28th.
‘Renewal’ launched over the weekend, backed by MPs such as Ian Lavery, several members of Labour’s ruling body, and high-profile writers including Aaron Bastani and Grace Blakeley.
Their founding statement stressed the importance of “left unity” and the need for a “single socialist slate” in the next round of Labour’s national executive committee (NEC) elections.
The news came after founder and current chair Jon Lansman announced via a LabourList piece that he would not be standing for the forthcoming NCG elections.
NCG nominations will close on June 11th, then a one-member-one-vote ballot will be conducted by Momentum from June 16th to June 30th. The process is entirely taking place online.


labourlist--2020-05-18--Labour set to decide on switch to preferential voting for NEC elections

Labour ’ s ruling body is set to decide whether it should switch to a preferential voting system for electing local party representatives on the national executive committee ( NEC ) .
At a meeting on Tuesday , NEC members will discuss the idea of scrapping the first-past-the-post system for choosing its nine CLP reps and replacing it with the single transferable vote ( STV ) method .
The NEC is being urged to approve the change by groups such as the Electoral Reform Society , and over 500 party members have signed an open letter in favour of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ organised by Fair Internal Labour Elections ( FILE ) and soft-left group Open Labour .
The push for Labour to adopt STV in more elections has long been a demand of the party ’ s soft left .
Commenting ahead of the meeting , Tom Laing , founder of FILE , said : “ The winner-takes-all nature of the NEC at the moment promotes hyper factionalism .
But with STV we can ensure a pluralistic Labour , where the proud traditions of our movement can always be heard.
” In a comment piece @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lewis described STV as “ no silver bullet ” but a “ good ‘ routine ’ that encourages a culture of cooperation and consensus building ” .
Sam Tarry MP said : “ Labour shouldn ’ t model its elections on Westminster ’ s broken system… We can move forward united , with more democracy , and less division , by bringing NEC elections into line with our other internal elections.
” Alex Sobel MP added : “ STV will give legitimacy to NEC members as under FPTP you can be elected on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a more open culture because you need to appeal broadly to attract transfers.
” Neal Lawson , chair of think tank Compass , said the switch would “ put Labour ’ s values of political equality into practice ” , “ secure fair representation for all members ” and “ build a more inclusive culture ” .
Joe Sousek , of Make Votes Matter and Labour Campaign for Electoral Reform , commented : “ Labour has an opportunity to lead the UK towards a new democracy fit for the 21st century – and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ elections would be a hugely symbolic first step on this journey.
” Politics for the Many ’ s Lynn Henderson pointed out : “ Labour ensured the Welsh and Scottish Parliaments , London Assembly , mayoral votes , local elections in Scotland and more use proportional or preferential voting.
” Darren Hughes , chief executive of the Electoral Reform Society , also backed the move , which he said would “ boost Labour ’ s authority on issues of democracy ” .
He described STV as a “ tried-and-tested system that gives voters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The ERS head said : “ It ’ s great to see this consensus for fair representation moving forward .
Labour already uses preferential voting for its leadership elections , so bringing the NEC into harmony with this would give members confidence their vote will always count.
” Angela Rayner committed to the reform during her deputy leadership campaign , and Keir Starmer is thought to have agreed to it .
If the issue goes to a vote on the NEC , it is expected to secure a majority in favour .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that over 45 % voted for candidates from the Labour left in the recent NEC by-elections , yet only Corbynsceptic candidates were successful in the contests .
However , there is not consensus among Labour ’ s NEC members on the proposal , with the opposition largely coming from the left .
One member against the move said it was “ factional ” of Starmer .
LabourList has spoken to another Labour left NEC member who said they were “ not against STV ” but would like to see it introduced for other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ party reps .
It has been suggested by STV advocates that the Parliamentary Labour Party standing orders could be amended so that its NEC reps are also elected using the preferential system .
Labour ’ s NEC is also set to discuss arrangements for party conference , which is supposed to held in September , and the next round of NEC elections , due to take place this summer .
LabourList has been told by NEC sources that the idea of a virtual conference has been raised , but the main event will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coronavirus .
Covid-19 rules on distancing may still be in place in September , and local parties have not had the chance to meet over recent months to nominate NEC candidates or pass motions for conference .

Labour’s ruling body is set to decide whether it should switch to a preferential voting system for electing local party representatives on the national executive committee (NEC).
At a meeting on Tuesday, NEC members will discuss the idea of scrapping the first-past-the-post system for choosing its nine CLP reps and replacing it with the single transferable vote (STV) method.
The NEC is being urged to approve the change by groups such as the Electoral Reform Society, and over 500 party members have signed an open letter in favour of the move to STV.
The letter was organised by Fair Internal Labour Elections (FILE) and soft-left group Open Labour. The push for Labour to adopt STV in more elections has long been a demand of the party’s soft left.
Commenting ahead of the meeting, Tom Laing, founder of FILE, said: “The winner-takes-all nature of the NEC at the moment promotes hyper factionalism. But with STV we can ensure a pluralistic Labour, where the proud traditions of our movement can always be heard.”
In a comment piece for LabourList today, Labour MP Clive Lewis described STV as “no silver bullet” but a “good ‘routine’ that encourages a culture of cooperation and consensus building”.
Sam Tarry MP said: “Labour shouldn’t model its elections on Westminster’s broken system… We can move forward united, with more democracy, and less division, by bringing NEC elections into line with our other internal elections.”
Alex Sobel MP added: “STV will give legitimacy to NEC members as under FPTP you can be elected on a low percentage. It also creates a more open culture because you need to appeal broadly to attract transfers.”
Neal Lawson, chair of think tank Compass, said the switch would “put Labour’s values of political equality into practice”, “secure fair representation for all members” and “build a more inclusive culture”.
Joe Sousek, of Make Votes Matter and Labour Campaign for Electoral Reform, commented: “Labour has an opportunity to lead the UK towards a new democracy fit for the 21st century – and adopting a fair system for its own elections would be a hugely symbolic first step on this journey.”
Politics for the Many’s Lynn Henderson pointed out: “Labour ensured the Welsh and Scottish Parliaments, London Assembly, mayoral votes, local elections in Scotland and more use proportional or preferential voting.”
Darren Hughes, chief executive of the Electoral Reform Society, also backed the move, which he said would “boost Labour’s authority on issues of democracy”. He described STV as a “tried-and-tested system that gives voters a strong voice and real choice”.
The ERS head said: “It’s great to see this consensus for fair representation moving forward. Labour already uses preferential voting for its leadership elections, so bringing the NEC into harmony with this would give members confidence their vote will always count.”
Angela Rayner committed to the reform during her deputy leadership campaign, and Keir Starmer is thought to have agreed to it. If the issue goes to a vote on the NEC, it is expected to secure a majority in favour.
Advocates on the soft left have argued that over 45% voted for candidates from the Labour left in the recent NEC by-elections, yet only Corbynsceptic candidates were successful in the contests.
However, there is not consensus among Labour’s NEC members on the proposal, with the opposition largely coming from the left. One member against the move said it was “factional” of Starmer.
LabourList has spoken to another Labour left NEC member who said they were “not against STV” but would like to see it introduced for other sections – such as equalities and parliamentary party reps.
It has been suggested by STV advocates that the Parliamentary Labour Party standing orders could be amended so that its NEC reps are also elected using the preferential system.
Labour’s NEC is also set to discuss arrangements for party conference, which is supposed to held in September, and the next round of NEC elections, due to take place this summer.
LabourList has been told by NEC sources that the idea of a virtual conference has been raised, but the main event will probably have to be delayed due to coronavirus.
Covid-19 rules on distancing may still be in place in September, and local parties have not had the chance to meet over recent months to nominate NEC candidates or pass motions for conference.


labourlist--2020-05-18--Want to build a modern, united Labour Party? Start with STV for the NEC

“ Everyone thinks of changing the world , but no one thinks of changing himself.
” ― Leo Tolstoy Our party ’ s fractious nature is deeply embedded and now , sadly , almost instinctive .
That doesn ’ t mean it will be impossible to change , but it will be tough .
The question is , how do we change to win ?
As anyone who has tried to kick a bad habit will know , doing so requires not just resolve but also fundamental changes of routine and behaviour .
In politics , voting systems are the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ First-past-the-post ( FPTP ) , currently used for Labour ’ s national executive committee ( NEC ) , is a ‘ routine ’ that by its very nature encourages a culture of ‘ winner takes all ’ , stitch-ups and diktats .
These in turn build resentment , animosity and irreconcilable factionalism .
Why seek difficult consensus , when you can just smash your opposition and impose your political will if you can just get across ‘ the line ’ ?
And so , the cycle continues ad nauseum .
STV should be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that encourages a culture of cooperation and consensus building .
It ’ s certainly no silver bullet – we ’ ll still have division .
But it does begin to put in place the building blocks for deep , cultural change in how we relate to one another in our ‘ broad church ’ party .
One that understands political differences are a source strength , not just weakness , if we have a political culture capable of navigating them .
Using STV to elect the NEC ’ s nine Constituency Labour Party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the way for better ‘ habits ’ and for a 21st-century modernisation programme within the Labour Party .
We need bold changes acting as the springboard for us to be able to take our vision out into the country as a unified force , unafraid of discussion , debate and disagreement .
The left of the party can assist in making that change .
It will be important to start by finding the common ground between Keir Starmer ’ s vision of a “ new , more inclusive , more democratic culture of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ aspire to greater democratisation in the party with , for example , open selections .
This means avoiding a retreat into the old partisan trenches .
If we do not retreat from that , many proposals for change – no matter how good or sensible – risk being attacked simply because they came from the ‘ wrong faction ’ .
We must be open to new and different ideas – to have them challenged and , hopefully in the process , strengthened .
This will help us build a modern , united party @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and ideas of our membership and wider civil society .
But we need stability and more capacity for consensus to do that .
That ’ s where STV for constituency seats on the NEC comes in .
STV is the same voting model we use in the leader and deputy leader contests .
It ’ s much more representative and inclusive than the FPTP system currently used to elect our NEC constituency seats .
When Momentum ’ s # JC9 slate swept the board in 2018 , some saw it as a triumph @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the fact that Momentum candidates won 100 % of the seats by securing between 50-55 % of the vote .
Fast forward to the two NEC by-elections this year , and Progress-Labour First candidates secured just over 30 % of the votes yet secured 100 % of the seats up for grabs .
A small shift of balance on the see-saw means it crashes down one side , then the other .
Winner takes all .
Loser gets nothing .
‘ Unity ’ declared with a boot on the throat of factional opponents @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for division and in-fighting , where potentially 70 % of voting members see no representation at all .
STV is well-suited to our multi-member CLP section .
You simply rank the candidates from ‘ 1 ’ until you come to the end of the candidates you want to support .
Successful candidates stay in the ballot ; unsuccessful candidates drop out of the running and have their votes transferred .
Your top preferences may not win but your other choices can help elect the successful candidates .
This new system would five greater @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would otherwise be ‘ wasted ’ , and allows those elected to be accountable to a wider proportion of the voting membership .
The need for a united and modern , democratic socialist party – one grounded in tolerance and solidarity that can embrace bold ideas with confidence – is long overdue .
So , let ’ s use STV to elect our NEC .

“Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.” ― Leo Tolstoy
Our party’s fractious nature is deeply embedded and now, sadly, almost instinctive. That doesn’t mean it will be impossible to change, but it will be tough. The question is, how do we change to win? As anyone who has tried to kick a bad habit will know, doing so requires not just resolve but also fundamental changes of routine and behaviour.
In politics, voting systems are the equivalent of such routine and habit. First-past-the-post (FPTP), currently used for Labour’s national executive committee (NEC), is a ‘routine’ that by its very nature encourages a culture of ‘winner takes all’, stitch-ups and diktats. These in turn build resentment, animosity and irreconcilable factionalism. Why seek difficult consensus, when you can just smash your opposition and impose your political will if you can just get across ‘the line’? And so, the cycle continues ad nauseum.
STV should be seen as a good ‘routine’ that encourages a culture of cooperation and consensus building. It’s certainly no silver bullet – we’ll still have division. But it does begin to put in place the building blocks for deep, cultural change in how we relate to one another in our ‘broad church’ party. One that understands political differences are a source strength, not just weakness, if we have a political culture capable of navigating them.
Using STV to elect the NEC’s nine Constituency Labour Party (CLP) seats could help pave the way for better ‘habits’ and for a 21st-century modernisation programme within the Labour Party. We need bold changes acting as the springboard for us to be able to take our vision out into the country as a unified force, unafraid of discussion, debate and disagreement.
The left of the party can assist in making that change. It will be important to start by finding the common ground between Keir Starmer’s vision of a “new, more inclusive, more democratic culture of dignity and respect” and those who aspire to greater democratisation in the party with, for example, open selections. This means avoiding a retreat into the old partisan trenches. If we do not retreat from that, many proposals for change – no matter how good or sensible – risk being attacked simply because they came from the ‘wrong faction’.
We must be open to new and different ideas – to have them challenged and, hopefully in the process, strengthened. This will help us build a modern, united party based on democracy and using the energy and ideas of our membership and wider civil society.
But we need stability and more capacity for consensus to do that. That’s where STV for constituency seats on the NEC comes in. STV is the same voting model we use in the leader and deputy leader contests. It’s much more representative and inclusive than the FPTP system currently used to elect our NEC constituency seats.
When Momentum’s #JC9 slate swept the board in 2018, some saw it as a triumph set in stone. Others pointed to the fact that Momentum candidates won 100% of the seats by securing between 50-55% of the vote. Fast forward to the two NEC by-elections this year, and Progress-Labour First candidates secured just over 30% of the votes yet secured 100% of the seats up for grabs.
A small shift of balance on the see-saw means it crashes down one side, then the other. Winner takes all. Loser gets nothing. ‘Unity’ declared with a boot on the throat of factional opponents. This is an almost perfect recipe for division and in-fighting, where potentially 70% of voting members see no representation at all.
STV is well-suited to our multi-member CLP section. You simply rank the candidates from ‘1’ until you come to the end of the candidates you want to support. Successful candidates stay in the ballot; unsuccessful candidates drop out of the running and have their votes transferred. Your top preferences may not win but your other choices can help elect the successful candidates.
This new system would five greater power and influence to members whose votes would otherwise be ‘wasted’, and allows those elected to be accountable to a wider proportion of the voting membership. The need for a united and modern, democratic socialist party – one grounded in tolerance and solidarity that can embrace bold ideas with confidence – is long overdue. So, let’s use STV to elect our NEC.


labourlist--2020-05-18--What it’s like to be a school teacher during the coronavirus crisis, part two

Two months ago , I wrote about what was happening in school during the coronavirus crisis .
What ’ s happened since then ?
The biggest change is that schools have been closed for most children .
Unlike what the right-wing press would have you believe , this has not meant that we teachers have been sat at home twiddling our thumbs .
Across the country , teachers and support staff have been busy providing education and welfare support to children and their families .
At my school , we ’ ve provided online activities for pupils to complete at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ activity every day .
For those who do not have internet access at home , we have adapted the activities for paper packs and sent these directly to the children ’ s homes .
In addition to the daily activities , there is an ongoing project on birds that the children can complete more independently .
They have all been sent a sketchbook where they can draw , annotate and take notes on the subject .
Finally , the whole school is working on a project to grow tomatoes .
The plants are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ want one .
The whole family can get involved .
All-in-all , a rich curriculum to keep the children engaged !
Our work doesn ’ t end there .
There are , of course , children still coming into school .
These are the children of key workers but also those with an EHCP ( education , health and care plan ) or a social worker .
They need more adult support than most , so even with the low numbers of children attending , plenty of teachers and teaching assistants are needed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on a rota .
There is also a welfare element to the role .
My colleagues and I have divided up the list of children and made sure we have regular phone contact with the parents .
We check that they have access to the government ’ s free school meals vouchers , that they can access the home-learning we are providing , and that they are generally getting on alright .
Not much time for thumb-twiddling by the end of this .
No one would pretend this is an adequate replacement for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the health and safety of children , staff , and the wider community .
The same can not be said for the government ’ s reckless plan .
Gavin Williamson , the Education Secretary , wants to begin a phased reopening of schools , starting on June 1st and with all primary pupils before the end of the month .
This is despite there being no personal protective equipment ( PPE ) , no system in place for test-and-trace , and their own acknowledgement that social distancing is impossible in primary schools .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ bare in their choice of which pupils should come back first .
There ’ s a case for prioritising Year 6 – the oldest children in primary school .
After all , they are preparing for their big transition to secondary school and they should be given some support .
And if they don ’ t return to school before September , there will be no chance to say goodbye .
But alongside the Year 6s , the government wants the three youngest year groups to return too : the four- , five- @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Year 1 .
These kids are least able to follow social distancing rules and most likely to be damaged by the experience .
How can you tell a five-year-old to stay two metres away from their friends ?
And if you even succeed , what will it do to their social and emotional development to be taught it ’ s dangerous to be too close to other people ?
Worse still , if a child develops symptoms while at school , the guidance is that they should be isolated in a closed room @ @ @ @ @ @ @ How can a five-year-old understand this ?
The government ’ s choice to prioritise the youngest has nothing to do with education or child welfare .
Rather , they want to send everyone back to work and they know that it isn ’ t possible with young children at home .
Fortunately , while the government might not have children and teachers ’ best interests at heart , the labour movement does .
In an almost unprecedented display of unity , nine education unions ≠ including the major teaching unions and the headteachers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the government to step back from the 1st June and work with us to create the conditions for a safe return to schools ” .
Right-wing commentators responded with the classic divide-and-rule tactic , saying that if doctors are risking their lives then education workers should too .
Doctors disagree and have sided with the education unions : the British Medical Association argues that “ until we have got case numbers much lower , we should not consider reopening schools ” .
Teachers and education workers are faced with a choice .
Do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ safe ?
Or do they trust their unions , and the representatives of the medical profession ?
It ’ s not really a choice at all .

Two months ago, I wrote about what was happening in school during the coronavirus crisis. What’s happened since then?
The biggest change is that schools have been closed for most children. Unlike what the right-wing press would have you believe, this has not meant that we teachers have been sat at home twiddling our thumbs. Across the country, teachers and support staff have been busy providing education and welfare support to children and their families.
At my school, we’ve provided online activities for pupils to complete at home – one Maths and one English activity every day. For those who do not have internet access at home, we have adapted the activities for paper packs and sent these directly to the children’s homes. In addition to the daily activities, there is an ongoing project on birds that the children can complete more independently. They have all been sent a sketchbook where they can draw, annotate and take notes on the subject. Finally, the whole school is working on a project to grow tomatoes. The plants are delivered to the homes of children who want one. The whole family can get involved. All-in-all, a rich curriculum to keep the children engaged!
Our work doesn’t end there. There are, of course, children still coming into school. These are the children of key workers but also those with an EHCP (education, health and care plan) or a social worker. They need more adult support than most, so even with the low numbers of children attending, plenty of teachers and teaching assistants are needed in school. This has been organised on a rota.
There is also a welfare element to the role. My colleagues and I have divided up the list of children and made sure we have regular phone contact with the parents. We check that they have access to the government’s free school meals vouchers, that they can access the home-learning we are providing, and that they are generally getting on alright. Not much time for thumb-twiddling by the end of this.
No one would pretend this is an adequate replacement for face-to-face teaching. But it does prioritise the health and safety of children, staff, and the wider community. The same cannot be said for the government’s reckless plan. Gavin Williamson, the Education Secretary, wants to begin a phased reopening of schools, starting on June 1st and with all primary pupils before the end of the month. This is despite there being no personal protective equipment (PPE), no system in place for test-and-trace, and their own acknowledgement that social distancing is impossible in primary schools.
The government’s motivations are laid bare in their choice of which pupils should come back first. There’s a case for prioritising Year 6 – the oldest children in primary school. After all, they are preparing for their big transition to secondary school and they should be given some support. And if they don’t return to school before September, there will be no chance to say goodbye.
But alongside the Year 6s, the government wants the three youngest year groups to return too: the four-, five- and six-year-olds in Nursery, Reception and Year 1. These kids are least able to follow social distancing rules and most likely to be damaged by the experience. How can you tell a five-year-old to stay two metres away from their friends? And if you even succeed, what will it do to their social and emotional development to be taught it’s dangerous to be too close to other people? Worse still, if a child develops symptoms while at school, the guidance is that they should be isolated in a closed room until they can be picked up. How can a five-year-old understand this?
The government’s choice to prioritise the youngest has nothing to do with education or child welfare. Rather, they want to send everyone back to work and they know that it isn’t possible with young children at home.
Fortunately, while the government might not have children and teachers’ best interests at heart, the labour movement does. In an almost unprecedented display of unity, nine education unions – including the major teaching unions and the headteachers’ union – have called “on the government to step back from the 1st June and work with us to create the conditions for a safe return to schools”.
Right-wing commentators responded with the classic divide-and-rule tactic, saying that if doctors are risking their lives then education workers should too. Doctors disagree and have sided with the education unions: the British Medical Association argues that “until we have got case numbers much lower, we should not consider reopening schools”.
Teachers and education workers are faced with a choice. Do they trust their government to keep them safe? Or do they trust their unions, and the representatives of the medical profession? It’s not really a choice at all.


labourlist--2020-05-18--Labour demands Covid support for creative industry and media freelancers

Labour ’ s Jo Stevens has urged the government to take action for PAYE freelancers who are not able to access support via the coronavirus financial assistance schemes , saying that there is a “ specific problem within the television and media sectors ” .
In a letter sent to Rishi Sunak today , the Shadow Culture Secretary described how staff at the BBC are particularly affected since , as a public sector body , the organisation does not qualify for the job retention programme .
Stevens said that “ many in the creative industries have been left to go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ warned that a failure to retain workers in the creative industries will “ prevent this critical sector from surviving ” .
She wrote that concerns had been raised by the BBC and other UK broadcasters in a letter to Sunak last month , but that they had received no response .
She urged the Chancellor to answer the following questions urgently : • Have the solutions proposed over six weeks ago by the BBC and other UK broadcasters been considered ?
• If they have not been considered , when will that happen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • If they have been considered , what is the government ’ s response and rationale and will you make that public ?
• If you are not able to adopt the suggested solutions , what alternative support will you put in place for PAYE freelancers who are currently not support by any scheme ?
Commenting on the situation , Stevens said : “ Creative industries have become a vital , successful part of the UK economy – outgrowing the UK economy on the whole and contributing £13m every hour .
“ But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ left to go through this crisis without support and their concerns and proposed solutions to the government have so far been ignored .
“ The Chancellor needs to listen to these pleas .
We know that many talented people are now considering their futures in the sector .
If we lose these skills , it will prevent this critical sector from surviving and playing its part in our recovery once the virus is beaten for good.
” Labour has highlighted a survey by the union BECTU , which showed that only 50 % @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to access support through a government support scheme during the pandemic .
Below is the full text of the letter sent by Jo Stevens to the Chancellor .
You will be aware that within the creative industries sector there are a significant number of people who are unable to access either the job retention scheme ( JRS ) or the self-employed income support scheme ( SEISS ) .
Creative and cultural industries significantly contribute to the 5.3 million jobs across the DCMS sector , a sector that accounts for nearly 16 % of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ specific problem within the television and media sectors for those whose work is a combination of PAYE and freelance , where the PAYE element exceeds 50 % of income .
This has led to a situation where freelancers who have correctly been given short term PAYE contracts by the BBC , can not access SEISS and can not be furloughed because the BBC does not qualify for the JRS as a public sector organisation .
This has left them in a situation where they can not access support from any scheme .
Such @ @ @ @ @ @ @ staff , the attached open letter has been sent to the director general , Lord Hall .
The issue however , goes far wider than the BBC affecting thousands of PAYE freelancers across our economically vital creative industries .
This was raised with you by my colleague , the Shadow Chancellor , in an intervention on 9th April .
These concerns had also been highlighted to the Culture Secretary in a letter from the BBC and other UK broadcasters over six weeks ago ( April 3rd ) following a roundtable with those broadcasting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ still awaiting a response .
In view of the importance and urgency of this issue to those working in our creative industries , and the time that has lapsed , please could you respond to the following questions ?
• Have the solutions proposed over six weeks ago by the BBC and other UK broadcasters been considered ?
• If they have not been considered , when will that happen and when will the government respond ?
• If they have been considered , what is the government ’ s response and rationale @ @ @ @ @ @ @ • If you are not able to adopt the suggested solutions , what alternative support will you put in place for PAYE freelancers who are currently not support by any scheme ?
I look forward to your reply .
Jo Stevens MP Shadow Secretary of State for Digital , Culture , Media and Sport

Labour’s Jo Stevens has urged the government to take action for PAYE freelancers who are not able to access support via the coronavirus financial assistance schemes, saying that there is a “specific problem within the television and media sectors”.
In a letter sent to Rishi Sunak today, the Shadow Culture Secretary described how staff at the BBC are particularly affected since, as a public sector body, the organisation does not qualify for the job retention programme.
Stevens said that “many in the creative industries have been left to go through this crisis without support” and warned that a failure to retain workers in the creative industries will “prevent this critical sector from surviving”.
She wrote that concerns had been raised by the BBC and other UK broadcasters in a letter to Sunak last month, but that they had received no response. She urged the Chancellor to answer the following questions urgently:
Have the solutions proposed over six weeks ago by the BBC and other UK broadcasters been considered? If they have not been considered, when will that happen and when will the government respond? If they have been considered, what is the government’s response and rationale and will you make that public? If you are not able to adopt the suggested solutions, what alternative support will you put in place for PAYE freelancers who are currently not support by any scheme?
Commenting on the situation, Stevens said: “Creative industries have become a vital, successful part of the UK economy – outgrowing the UK economy on the whole and contributing £13m every hour.
“But many in the creative industries have been left to go through this crisis without support and their concerns and proposed solutions to the government have so far been ignored.
“The Chancellor needs to listen to these pleas. We know that many talented people are now considering their futures in the sector. If we lose these skills, it will prevent this critical sector from surviving and playing its part in our recovery once the virus is beaten for good.”
Labour has highlighted a survey by the union BECTU, which showed that only 50% of creative industry workers have been able to access support through a government support scheme during the pandemic.
Below is the full text of the letter sent by Jo Stevens to the Chancellor.
Dear Chancellor,
Creative Industries and Media PAYE and Freelancers
You will be aware that within the creative industries sector there are a significant number of people who are unable to access either the job retention scheme (JRS) or the self-employed income support scheme (SEISS). Creative and cultural industries significantly contribute to the 5.3 million jobs across the DCMS sector, a sector that accounts for nearly 16% of all UK jobs.
There is a specific problem within the television and media sectors for those whose work is a combination of PAYE and freelance, where the PAYE element exceeds 50% of income.
This has led to a situation where freelancers who have correctly been given short term PAYE contracts by the BBC, cannot access SEISS and cannot be furloughed because the BBC does not qualify for the JRS as a public sector organisation.
This has left them in a situation where they cannot access support from any scheme. Such is the level of concern amongst BBC staff, the attached open letter has been sent to the director general, Lord Hall.
The issue however, goes far wider than the BBC affecting thousands of PAYE freelancers across our economically vital creative industries. This was raised with you by my colleague, the Shadow Chancellor, in an intervention on 9th April.
These concerns had also been highlighted to the Culture Secretary in a letter from the BBC and other UK broadcasters over six weeks ago (April 3rd) following a roundtable with those broadcasting chief executives. I understand they are still awaiting a response.
In view of the importance and urgency of this issue to those working in our creative industries, and the time that has lapsed, please could you respond to the following questions?
Have the solutions proposed over six weeks ago by the BBC and other UK broadcasters been considered? If they have not been considered, when will that happen and when will the government respond? If they have been considered, what is the government’s response and rationale and will you make that public? If you are not able to adopt the suggested solutions, what alternative support will you put in place for PAYE freelancers who are currently not support by any scheme?
I look forward to your reply.
Yours sincerely,
Jo Stevens MP
Shadow Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport


labourlist--2020-05-18--There must be accountability on Covid outsourcing – lives depend on it

Public health emergencies require rapid action to put in place measures to limit disease transmission , keep people safe and support those who need extra help .
The Coronavirus Act recognises that need , and allows more flexibility than the government would usually have in relation to public procurement .
This flexibility does not remove the need for accountability and transparency .
The lack of information placed in the public domain about a series of government contracts related to Covid-19 is very troubling , especially since some of these contracts are linked to parts of the government ’ s response @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It is understood that Deloitte has been appointed in relation to personal protective equipment ( PPE ) and Covid-19 testing .
Procurement of PPE has been a disaster .
The NHS and care sector have faced appalling shortages , unusable supplies were purchased and there has been insufficient engagement with UK companies who are willing and able to redirect their skills to manufacturing PPE .
On testing , the initial strategy of a small number of sub-regional testing centres made tests inaccessible for anyone without access to a car , there have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ test samples are reported to have been sent to the US for analysis .
Serco has been appointed to deliver a manual contact tracing service by recruiting 18,000 staff to deliver a centralised call centre service working for the minimum wage .
Again , no details of this contract have been placed in the public domain , but 18,000 falls far short of the 50,000 staff that many experts say are needed .
Contact tracing is skilled work involving sensitive personal data .
Local authority public health professionals and academic researchers have these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to see how the government ’ s contract can possibly deliver what is required .
Yet we do not know the cost of this work , the assessment process which led to Serco ’ s appointment or what key performance indicators they will be measured against .
Procurement concerns do not end there .
Concerns have also been raised about the £113m contract for testing kits that was recently awarded to Randox , a firm that pays Conservative MP Owen Paterson £100,000 a year for consultancy advice .
The government is spending billions @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Even in an emergency , it should be able to demonstrate whether and why outsourcing is necessary instead of funding the public sector to deliver , how it has tested the expertise and capacity of the companies with which it is contracting , and that there are no conflicts of interest or murky backroom deals .
Rachel Reeves has written to Michael Gove to seek answers to these questions .
The Cabinet Office and the Treasury must urgently publish details of every contract that they have let during the pandemic – including the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ payment terms , key performance indicators and length of each .
Where private contractors have failed to deliver , there must be accountability – public confidence , and ultimately lives , depend on it .

Public health emergencies require rapid action to put in place measures to limit disease transmission, keep people safe and support those who need extra help. The Coronavirus Act recognises that need, and allows more flexibility than the government would usually have in relation to public procurement. This flexibility does not remove the need for accountability and transparency. The lack of information placed in the public domain about a series of government contracts related to Covid-19 is very troubling, especially since some of these contracts are linked to parts of the government’s response which have clearly failed to deliver.
It is understood that Deloitte has been appointed in relation to personal protective equipment (PPE) and Covid-19 testing. Procurement of PPE has been a disaster. The NHS and care sector have faced appalling shortages, unusable supplies were purchased and there has been insufficient engagement with UK companies who are willing and able to redirect their skills to manufacturing PPE. On testing, the initial strategy of a small number of sub-regional testing centres made tests inaccessible for anyone without access to a car, there have been long waits for test results and 50,000 test samples are reported to have been sent to the US for analysis.
Serco has been appointed to deliver a manual contact tracing service by recruiting 18,000 staff to deliver a centralised call centre service working for the minimum wage. Again, no details of this contract have been placed in the public domain, but 18,000 falls far short of the 50,000 staff that many experts say are needed. Contact tracing is skilled work involving sensitive personal data. Local authority public health professionals and academic researchers have these skills already, and it is hard to see how the government’s contract can possibly deliver what is required. Yet we do not know the cost of this work, the assessment process which led to Serco’s appointment or what key performance indicators they will be measured against.
Procurement concerns do not end there. Concerns have also been raised about the £113m contract for testing kits that was recently awarded to Randox, a firm that pays Conservative MP Owen Paterson £100,000 a year for consultancy advice. The government is spending billions of pounds to respond to Covid-19. Even in an emergency, it should be able to demonstrate whether and why outsourcing is necessary instead of funding the public sector to deliver, how it has tested the expertise and capacity of the companies with which it is contracting, and that there are no conflicts of interest or murky backroom deals.
Rachel Reeves has written to Michael Gove to seek answers to these questions. The Cabinet Office and the Treasury must urgently publish details of every contract that they have let during the pandemic – including the assessment process used, the value, payment terms, key performance indicators and length of each. Where private contractors have failed to deliver, there must be accountability – public confidence, and ultimately lives, depend on it.


labourlist--2020-05-18--Don’t lose sight of the bigger picture – and be ready to build back better

Battered and depressed by the tragic details of the daily news updates and the frustrations of lockdown , it is easy to lose sight of the bigger picture .
It is easy to forget that the Tory response to the crisis is governed by an extreme right-wing ideology that , when combined with the arrogance and greed of the British upper class , means their decisions have little to do with saving lives , let alone the NHS .
There are three key elements of Tory ideology that we must not forget as we recoil in horror at what is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reforms ’ , or the 2012 Health and Social Care Act , which institutionalised competition within the NHS .
Second , austerity , which didn ’ t just starve the NHS of resources but led to follies such as the failure to replenish stockpiles of essential equipment – despite the recommendations of the Exercise Cygnus simulation .
And , finally , privatisation at every level of the economy , shrinking the state and putting profit before people .
Add to these the poisonous concept of British exceptionalism , cultivated during and by Brexit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Johnson and his advisers are in Downing Street .
The appalling and avoidable result of which is that the UK has the most deaths in Europe .
We begin to understand why we have had to experience : • • The herd immunity policy pushed by Downing Street ’ s eugenicists , more appropriately called the ‘ cull the herd ’ policy ; • A strategy of mitigation rather than suppression – failure to comply with World Health Organisation guidance to test , trace and isolate , and the refusal to lockdown and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ thousands of deaths ; • The Nightingale hospitals – white elephants that diverted resources from existing hospitals and care homes ( the question of who profited from building these has yet to be asked ) ; • The disregard and indifference towards social care and care home residents and workers – unsurprising when the Tories have repeatedly failed to come up with any social care policy , let alone one that would integrate a sector dominated by private companies with the public NHS ; • The refusal to work with Europe – not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now on data collection with the Vote Leave data harvesters directly involved in Downing Street ’ s preferred contact-tracing app ; • Private companies involved at every level – Deloitte , G4S , Serco and Capita , for example , are all involved in one way or another with procurement and contact tracing – with data harvesting a binary choice between the US tech giants and AI firms linked to the Tories ’ cronies ; and • The exposure of the health , wealth and race divides in our society – inequalities that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that are now resulting in increased deaths in poor and multi-racial communities .
Now we must add messaging on easing the lockdown .
So muddled that – as economic libertarianism has conflicted with public health – key members of the government have been unable to explain what we are all being advised to do .
Labour has a historically poor record of confronting the Tories on an ideological level , often letting them get away with pretending that they haven ’ t really got one .
Labour failed to challenge austerity until 2015 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ treat Brexit as a technical issue to do with trade and EU institutions , rather than internationalism and solidarity – and it was reluctant to call out its motivating mixture of deeply entrenched xenophobic bigotry , atlanticism and the demands of a faction of capital .
The opposition party ’ s response to the health crisis has similarly focused on immediate issues rather than challenging the ideological reasons underlying the Tories ’ failure to protect the health and lives of all their citizens .
This is largely understandable whilst we are in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of those tagged with that horrible expression ‘ extremely clinically vulnerable ’ , my most frequent criticism is why are we not all shouting louder and louder about the government ’ s catastrophic mismanagement of almost every single aspect of the crisis .
But just as we must not lose sight of the bigger picture in the now , we also need to be looking at it for the future .
One of the most depressing features of the global response to the pandemic has been the lack of international solidarity .
Britain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ own beggar-thy-neighbour policies .
Donald Trump ’ s xenophobia threatens the whole world .
The global economy is in free fall and , because globalisation and technology have linked the world ’ s populations like never before , the coming depression will hit everyone .
By the time the pandemic is under control , millions of working people will have lost their homes and their livelihoods .
Hunger and destitution will make many desperate .
Add the climate crisis to the pandemic crisis , and humanity ’ s future is bleak if the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their strong-men leaders perceive as their own national interests , failing to learn the importance of international solidarity and what could be the real meaning and strength of globalisation .
If it is left to the Tories , the ‘ new normal ’ will be a return – with a few tweaks here and there – to the same old system of profit first , people last .
To this will be added the spice of a no-deal Brexit at the end of the year .
As many of us would love much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way that they were just a few weeks ago , it is going to be hard to challenge the ‘ Britain will bounce back ’ concept .
However , we must do exactly that .
Labour should seize the opportunity to articulate our values , challenge the Conservatives on an ideological level , and develop a new programme that really grasps the existential challenges the world faces .
Our immediate demand has to be that workers neither in the developed north nor the global south pay for the pandemic through unemployment , tax @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we then need to go much further than that .
Our last manifesto was written for a different time and for a different economic situation .
Some of its policies have shown themselves to be the most vital in the current situation .
The much-mocked free broadband , nationalised railways and NHS investment are now on the agenda , as well as a universal basic income and a national care service .
But our vision needs to be even greater than any of those .
Lockdown has shown both the vital role of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy are essential .
If we are serious about tackling the climate crisis , that information must be used to inform a new transformative and radical industrial strategy .
One that goes beyond the Green New Deal and addresses new ways of working and living , a shift in the balance between the public and private sectors , and the pressing need to alter the whole basis of income and wealth distribution .
The world changed after the 1919 flu epidemic , and again following the World War Two .
VE Day was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fighting in Europe and the Allies ’ collective defeat of fascism .
It was a day of celebration and comradeship that paved the way for one of the most transformative periods in this country ’ s history .
This did not happen by accident : we came together , restructured our society and economy to fight the war , and rebuilt afterwards .
‘ No going back to the way things were ’ applies just as much today as it did in 1945 .
Keir Starmer rightly says that we can not go @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we must go forward with a vision of a better society .
But what does that mean ?
And how do we turn the rhetoric into reality ?
Across the world , most communities have responded to the crisis with kindness , neighbourliness , sympathy and collectivity .
We must all , across the labour movement , now make use of whatever downtime we have – and the way that we can now use technology to talk to each other , to brainstorm new , imaginative and progressive ways of living and organising @ @ @ @ @ @ @ # BuildBackBetter for a future based on the collective ideas , understanding and experiences of our movement .
For a future that rejects the Tories ’ right-wing virus breeding ground of fragmented public services , greed and survival of the fittest .
For one founded on genuine solidarity and socialism .

Battered and depressed by the tragic details of the daily news updates and the frustrations of lockdown, it is easy to lose sight of the bigger picture. It is easy to forget that the Tory response to the crisis is governed by an extreme right-wing ideology that, when combined with the arrogance and greed of the British upper class, means their decisions have little to do with saving lives, let alone the NHS.
There are three key elements of Tory ideology that we must not forget as we recoil in horror at what is happening. First, the Lansley ‘reforms’, or the 2012 Health and Social Care Act, which institutionalised competition within the NHS. Second, austerity, which didn’t just starve the NHS of resources but led to follies such as the failure to replenish stockpiles of essential equipment – despite the recommendations of the Exercise Cygnus simulation. And, finally, privatisation at every level of the economy, shrinking the state and putting profit before people.
Add to these the poisonous concept of British exceptionalism, cultivated during and by Brexit and given free rein now that Boris Johnson and his advisers are in Downing Street. The appalling and avoidable result of which is that the UK has the most deaths in Europe. We begin to understand why we have had to experience:
The herd immunity policy pushed by Downing Street’s eugenicists, more appropriately called the ‘cull the herd’ policy; A strategy of mitigation rather than suppression – failure to comply with World Health Organisation guidance to test, trace and isolate, and the refusal to lockdown and close borders when it may have prevented thousands of deaths; The Nightingale hospitals – white elephants that diverted resources from existing hospitals and care homes (the question of who profited from building these has yet to be asked); The disregard and indifference towards social care and care home residents and workers – unsurprising when the Tories have repeatedly failed to come up with any social care policy, let alone one that would integrate a sector dominated by private companies with the public NHS; The refusal to work with Europe – not just on research and procurement, but now on data collection with the Vote Leave data harvesters directly involved in Downing Street’s preferred contact-tracing app; Private companies involved at every level – Deloitte, G4S, Serco and Capita, for example, are all involved in one way or another with procurement and contact tracing – with data harvesting a binary choice between the US tech giants and AI firms linked to the Tories’ cronies; and The exposure of the health, wealth and race divides in our society – inequalities that have worsened over the past decade and that are now resulting in increased deaths in poor and multi-racial communities.
Now we must add messaging on easing the lockdown. So muddled that – as economic libertarianism has conflicted with public health – key members of the government have been unable to explain what we are all being advised to do.
Labour has a historically poor record of confronting the Tories on an ideological level, often letting them get away with pretending that they haven’t really got one. Labour failed to challenge austerity until 2015, for example. It tended to treat Brexit as a technical issue to do with trade and EU institutions, rather than internationalism and solidarity – and it was reluctant to call out its motivating mixture of deeply entrenched xenophobic bigotry, atlanticism and the demands of a faction of capital.
The opposition party’s response to the health crisis has similarly focused on immediate issues rather than challenging the ideological reasons underlying the Tories’ failure to protect the health and lives of all their citizens. This is largely understandable whilst we are in the midst of the pandemic. As one of those tagged with that horrible expression ‘extremely clinically vulnerable’, my most frequent criticism is why are we not all shouting louder and louder about the government’s catastrophic mismanagement of almost every single aspect of the crisis. But just as we must not lose sight of the bigger picture in the now, we also need to be looking at it for the future.
One of the most depressing features of the global response to the pandemic has been the lack of international solidarity. Britain has not been alone in pursuing its own beggar-thy-neighbour policies. Donald Trump’s xenophobia threatens the whole world. The global economy is in free fall and, because globalisation and technology have linked the world’s populations like never before, the coming depression will hit everyone.
By the time the pandemic is under control, millions of working people will have lost their homes and their livelihoods. Hunger and destitution will make many desperate. Add the climate crisis to the pandemic crisis, and humanity’s future is bleak if the most powerful countries continue to pursue what their strong-men leaders perceive as their own national interests, failing to learn the importance of international solidarity and what could be the real meaning and strength of globalisation.
If it is left to the Tories, the ‘new normal’ will be a return – with a few tweaks here and there – to the same old system of profit first, people last. To this will be added the spice of a no-deal Brexit at the end of the year. As many of us would love much of our lives to return to the way that they were just a few weeks ago, it is going to be hard to challenge the ‘Britain will bounce back’ concept.
However, we must do exactly that. Labour should seize the opportunity to articulate our values, challenge the Conservatives on an ideological level, and develop a new programme that really grasps the existential challenges the world faces. Our immediate demand has to be that workers neither in the developed north nor the global south pay for the pandemic through unemployment, tax rises and poorer public services. But we then need to go much further than that.
Our last manifesto was written for a different time and for a different economic situation. Some of its policies have shown themselves to be the most vital in the current situation. The much-mocked free broadband, nationalised railways and NHS investment are now on the agenda, as well as a universal basic income and a national care service. But our vision needs to be even greater than any of those.
Lockdown has shown both the vital role of the state and which aspects of our economy are essential. If we are serious about tackling the climate crisis, that information must be used to inform a new transformative and radical industrial strategy. One that goes beyond the Green New Deal and addresses new ways of working and living, a shift in the balance between the public and private sectors, and the pressing need to alter the whole basis of income and wealth distribution.
The world changed after the 1919 flu epidemic, and again following the World War Two. VE Day was not just about an end to the fighting in Europe and the Allies’ collective defeat of fascism. It was a day of celebration and comradeship that paved the way for one of the most transformative periods in this country’s history. This did not happen by accident: we came together, restructured our society and economy to fight the war, and rebuilt afterwards. ‘No going back to the way things were’ applies just as much today as it did in 1945.
Keir Starmer rightly says that we cannot go back to business as usual and that we must go forward with a vision of a better society. But what does that mean? And how do we turn the rhetoric into reality? Across the world, most communities have responded to the crisis with kindness, neighbourliness, sympathy and collectivity. We must all, across the labour movement, now make use of whatever downtime we have – and the way that we can now use technology to talk to each other, to brainstorm new, imaginative and progressive ways of living and organising society.
We must be ready to #BuildBackBetter for a future based on the collective ideas, understanding and experiences of our movement. For a future that rejects the Tories’ right-wing virus breeding ground of fragmented public services, greed and survival of the fittest. For one founded on genuine solidarity and socialism.


labourlist--2020-05-18--A message to you, Rishi

A message to you, Rishi

Jon Lansman is stepping aside as chair of Momentum , LabourList revealed over the weekend .
In a comment piece , the founder of the Corbynite organisation said he would continue in post until new members of Momentum ’ s national coordinating group are elected on June 30th , at which point he will “ hand over to a new leadership ” .
And those contests are being hard-fought .
The latest platform is ‘ Momentum Renewal ’ , which launched on Sunday with a statement exclusively published on LabourList .
Big names have signed up : several MPs including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Labour ’ s national executive committee ( NEC ) ; Tribune and Novara editors ; activists such as Grace Blakeley .
It will be interesting to see whether this approach is more successful than that of ‘ Forward Momentum ’ , which launched early last month .
Going for a grassroots vibe , FM focused on pushing the democratisation of Momentum and itself held open primaries to put together a slate of candidates ( to be announced today ) .
This has already led to controversy over whether members linked to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) should be allowed to stand , and so on .
Implementing democratic processes without creating further internal divisions is difficult .
Then again , FM activists might say a top-down approach only serves to temporarily cover up such disunity .
We ’ ll have more Momentum news over the coming days .
Its future is significant in forging the direction of Labour as a whole – particularly in terms of whether a united left slate can be established for the NEC .
Who sits on the ruling body is crucial , of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conference and its own elections , due to be held this summer .
Yet local parties have not had the chance to meet , nominate candidates , pass motions .
It will also debate the introduction of a single transferable vote ( STV ) system for NEC elections .
More on that soon .
The immigration bill returns to the Commons this afternoon .
Unfortunately for the Tories , a big political move against migrants in the UK has become trickier thanks to Covid .
Labour ’ s new Shadow Home Secretary has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” as the plan will “ make workers in the NHS and the care sector feel unwelcome in this country ” .
The proposed legislation “ creates a threat to our national interest ” , Nick Thomas-Symonds says .
But an 80-seat majority means it should pass easily .
And finally , we have a piece from Unite the Union assistant general secretary Steve Turner today .
It is a message for the Chancellor .
He is urging Rishi Sunak to again get ministers round the table with trade unions and employers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a post-Covid plan .
As Keir Starmer so often says , the country can ’ t go back to business as usual .

Jon Lansman is stepping aside as chair of Momentum, LabourList revealed over the weekend. In a comment piece, the founder of the Corbynite organisation said he would continue in post until new members of Momentum’s national coordinating group are elected on June 30th, at which point he will “hand over to a new leadership”. And those contests are being hard-fought.
The latest platform is ‘Momentum Renewal’, which launched on Sunday with a statement exclusively published on LabourList. Big names have signed up: several MPs including Ian Lavery and Jon Trickett; members of Labour’s national executive committee (NEC); Tribune and Novara editors; activists such as Grace Blakeley. It will be interesting to see whether this approach is more successful than that of ‘Forward Momentum’, which launched early last month.
Going for a grassroots vibe, FM focused on pushing the democratisation of Momentum and itself held open primaries to put together a slate of candidates (to be announced today). This has already led to controversy over whether members linked to the Alliance for Workers’ Liberty (AWL) should be allowed to stand, and so on. Implementing democratic processes without creating further internal divisions is difficult. Then again, FM activists might say a top-down approach only serves to temporarily cover up such disunity.
We’ll have more Momentum news over the coming days. Its future is significant in forging the direction of Labour as a whole – particularly in terms of whether a united left slate can be established for the NEC. Who sits on the ruling body is crucial, of course. Tomorrow the NEC will discuss conference and its own elections, due to be held this summer. Yet local parties have not had the chance to meet, nominate candidates, pass motions. It will also debate the introduction of a single transferable vote (STV) system for NEC elections. More on that soon.
The immigration bill returns to the Commons this afternoon. Unfortunately for the Tories, a big political move against migrants in the UK has become trickier thanks to Covid. Labour’s new Shadow Home Secretary has accused the government of “rank hypocrisy” as the plan will “make workers in the NHS and the care sector feel unwelcome in this country”. The proposed legislation “creates a threat to our national interest”, Nick Thomas-Symonds says. But an 80-seat majority means it should pass easily.
And finally, we have a piece from Unite the Union assistant general secretary Steve Turner today. It is a message for the Chancellor. He is urging Rishi Sunak to again get ministers round the table with trade unions and employers, this time with the aim of agreeing a post-Covid plan. As Keir Starmer so often says, the country can’t go back to business as usual.