Labour calls for Action at the G8

There is enough food in the world to feed everyone. But almost 1 billion people go hungry, and every year 2.3 million children die from malnutrition. We need radical change if we’re going to put a stop to this global injustice.

fast payday loans for every one

With the G8 around the corner, the UK once again has the opportunity to demonstrate its ability to show global leadership. Labour took action in 2005, brokering ambitious commitments on climate change, investment, debt relief and trade for development. If we are to tackle hunger we must use next month’s meeting to achieve a commitment by all the G8 countries to meet their aid targets, tackle tax havens and tax avoidance, and fight for greater transparency.

It is estimated that a world free from hunger would cost just over $50 billion dollars a year. By honouring existing commitments to fund agriculture and tackle malnutrition, G8 countries could support economic growth through investing in small-holder farmers, particularly women, and tackling child and maternal malnutrition.

We also need to address the structural causes of poverty and hunger if we are to achieve radical change. The OECD estimates that developing countries lose three times more to tax havens than they receive in aid each year. That is why we need to end tax secrecy so that companies can be held to account and corruption can be rooted out. Developing countries will never be able to lift themselves out of poverty if they cannot collect taxes to fund their own services.

Labour would also immediately sign up to the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), which would require governments to publish what they receive from extractive companies and the companies to publish what they pay to governments. Similarly, we would work to advance transparency initiatives in other sectors too. We cannot lecture other countries about increasing tax transparency if we are unable to take the lead ourselves.

This is why Labour is urging David Cameron to use the UK’s chairmanship of the G8 to replace his rhetoric on aid, tax and transparency with effective global action to move towards a world free from hunger.

Now is the time for action, and we can all play our part.

Sign up to campaign here:
action.labour.org.uk/G8-campaign

Posted in: Blog

A Fair Deal for your Local Pub

Help Save the Great British Pub.

The Fair Deal for your Local Pub website has been launched to help you respond to the Government’s consultation on the proposals to establish a Statutory Code and an independent adjudicator for the pubs sector to govern the relationship between large pub companies and their tenants. 

The Pubco Model

 

Is it right that publicans tied to big pub companies can pay above £110 for a barrel of beer, but independent publicans are able to purchase for less than £70?

Is it right that tied licensees are unable to make a reasonable living due to high rents on top of inflated beer prices?

Is it right that the unbalanced relationship between big property companies known as “pubcos” and their licensees is driving up prices in pubs, restricting investment in pubs and ultimately forcing pubs to close?

After nearly a decade of campaigning and failed self-regulation the Government is finally consulting on the unfair unbalanced relationship between pubcos and their licensees. Now is the time to speak up and get a Fair Deal for Your Local.

You have until 14th June to complete the survey and make your submission to the Government’s Consultation

www.fairdealforyourlocal.com

Posted in: Blog

The Other Care Crisis

The Government’s Care and Support Bill was a central plank of a rather thin Queen’s Speech, providing a legislative framework for adult social care in England. The key issues however, for social care reform are resources and eligibility. It is on these issues on which the success of the Bill will be judged.

Last year due to the Government’s squeeze on local authority budgets, the vast majority of Councils, had set their eligibility criteria at the higher substantial needs level. The Local Government Association pointed to the so called graph of doom with an increasing proportion of council’s budgets being spent on social care. This will leave councils of whatever political colour making cuts in either social care itself or local services such as libraries, road maintenance and leisure centres.

A report produced by the charity Scope has found that 4 in 10 disabled people who receive social care support say it does not meet their basic needs which include eating, washing, dressing and getting out of the house.

This comes on top of the pressure exerted by a £2bn funding gap in social care by central government. However, by simply focussing on the services that we currently have we risk neglecting things that become more important the older we get.

The Social Care and Support Bill goes only part way to addressing this problem, because what is really needed is a concentration, in the upcoming Spending Review, on securing long-term funding for social care services to underpin the Bill.

High quality social care cannot be delivered by an insecure, poorly paid, poorly trained workforce on zero hours contracts.

A ‘moderate’ national threshold is vital in this respect in creating a preventative care system. In doing this, as the British Red Cross has pointed out, there is a significant increase in return for commissioners from their investment. By preventing hospital stays, reducing levels of readmission and minimising the need for residential care, many needs can be met with appropriate support in the home – a safe and known environment.

Alongside this, by setting the threshold at moderate ensures that we can meet the needs of the majority of disabled people before they reach crisis point, thereby placing extra additional costs on other public services.

Eligibility is not just crucial for those who need care but also their carers. Over 2million people have had to give up work in order to care for a disabled relative, due to changes in criteria at a cost of £1.3bn per year. Taking lost earnings into account this figure rises to £5.3bn.

A properly funded care system alongside fair eligibility criteria based around ‘moderate’, not just ‘substantial’ needs, would mean fairer access and better services for everyone who relies upon care services. It is something that the Labour Party is fighting for through its new “Care Covenant”, through its commitment to whole person care.

Care is in crisis not just for the elderly but for working aged disabled people. This is an issue that could decide the outcome of the next general election. The political party which offers a bold solution with a properly resourced, properly integrated National Health & Care Service will in my view reap an electoral dividend not just from the elderly and disabled people who fear they will not be able to meet their care costs but from those who realise that in a civilised society this is the right thing to do.

Posted in: Blog

Easington MP Claims Government is “disconnected from reality”

Easington MP Grahame Morris has accused the Prime Minister of surrounding himself with people “disconnected from reality”, following comments made by Enterprise Advisor Lord Young that the recession was a good time to boost company profits because of cheap labour.

In a report to the Prime Minister Lord Young said,

“The rise in the number of businesses in recent years shows that a recession can be an excellent time to start a business,” adding that “factors of production such as premises and labour can be cheaper and higher quality, meaning that return on investment can be greater”.

Mr Morris has demanded to know why Lord Young continues to advise the Prime Minister after the Tory Peer was forced to resign in November 2010 for stating that the vast majority of people “have never had it so good” since the “so-called recession” began,  comments which Downing Street condemned as “offensive” and “inaccurate”.

Following Lord Young’s latest statement Grahame Morris MP for Easington said:

“Only the Tories can think it is right to exult the virtues of a low wage economy which places the emphasis on increasing profits at the detriment of working people.

The policies of austerity have destabilised jobs, seen the expansion of zero hour contracts, and saw real wages fall.

The Government promised to “make work pay” but since taking office unemployment has risen and real terms wages have fallen. In the North East wages have fallen by over £1000 per year, and the Government’s assault on tax credits is crippling the living standards of the lowest paid workers.”

Mr Morris added,

“The best time to start a business is in an economy which is growing, providing stable jobs and good wages to their employees allowing them to enjoy a higher standard of living with income to spend in the local economy, which creates sustainable jobs and growth.

The Prime Minister has surrounded himself with advisors disconnected from reality, who have no empathy or appreciation for the hardship and pain inflicted on thousands of families struggling due to the recession which is being prolonged by the Government’s policies of austerity.”

Posted in: Press Releases

Easington MP Accuses Government of Gambling with Public Safety.

Easington MP Grahame Morris has accused the Government of gambling with public safety, following the decision to contract out probation services to the private sector.

In a Commons statement, Justice Minister Chris Grayling announced that 70% of probation services will be outsourced to the private sector, with the public sector barred from bidding for the new payment-by-results contracts. The public sector will continue to manage the remaining 30% of offenders considered as high risk.

Following the announcement Grahame Morris MP said:

“The Government are gambling with the public’s safety. The Justice Secretary was the architect behind the payment-by-results Work Programme, which has been an abject failure in getting people into work.

It is bad enough when the Work Programme fails, someone doesn’t get a job, but a failure in justice would leave dangerous offenders in our community without support or monitoring.

Private operators such as G4S, who failed to deliver on their promises on the security at the Olympics, will be managing low and medium risk offenders including prolific burglars, drug users, and those convicted of domestic violence.

The Probation Service has an excellent performance record, with every Public Probation Trust judged to be showing either good or exceptional performance last year. The Government have no justification for risking public safety by privatising a service which is operating effectively.

I will oppose these ideologically driven changes that prioritise private sector profits over the rehabilitation of offenders, and most importantly, the health, safety and wellbeing of the public and the communities”

Posted in: Press Releases

Health and Social Care Debate

House of Commons
Monday 13th May
Queen’s Speech Debate: Health and Social Care

Grahame M. Morris (Easington) (Lab): I thought that, rather than speaking about Europe or votes for prisoners, I might make a couple of points about health and social care.

There are many provisions that I should have liked the Government to include in their legislative programme. For instance, I should have liked to see a commitment to extending freedom of information requests to private health care companies. I should also have liked to see a commitment to excluding health care from the scope of trade agreements as part of a broader exclusion of public services. I understand that the Prime Minister is involved in negotiations at this moment, and I hope that the trade agreement issue is on his agenda, because there is an increasing fear among Opposition Members that—in that context, and also as a result of the Health and Social Care Act 2012—our health care system is being prepared for privatisation, and the way is being cleared for the mass entry of United States health care multinationals to the UK market.

I am pleased that the Care Bill is to be introduced in the current Session. It will go some way towards helping those who are most in need of social care, as well as their carers, providing as it does the first ever legislative framework for social care. It is a much-needed first step in the right direction, which has been a long time coming. However, it raises a great many issues. As usual with this Government, we need to look beneath the veneer and establish whether an opportunity is being taken or missed, and whether we are taking one step forward and several steps back. It would certainly be a retrograde step to raise expectations only for them to be dashed as people discover that the proposals are really quite limited. We need to be honest about what is on offer.

Members often receive some shocking and surprising statistics in their mailbags, but some of the most surprising pieces of information that I have seen relate to social care. I must thank a range of organisations—including Scope, Age UK, the Alzheimer’s Society, the TUC, the British Medical Association, Barnardo’s and the European Federation of Public Service Unions—for supplying briefings to me and to other Members. It shames me, and I am sure it shames Members in all parts of the House, that in Britain in the 21st century four out of 10 disabled people who receive social care support say that it does not meet their needs. That was established recently by research on social care conducted by the disability charity Scope following the publication of a report by the Joint Committee on the draft Care and Support Bill, on which I served. It is feared that the current provisions, and some of those that are proposed, will not be sufficient.

Other Members have welcomed the Bill. However, it is hugely worrying that local government finance has been hollowed out. That will have major consequences. It has been said that local government allocations for social care are protected, but they are certainly not protected when it comes to provision for transport and other supplementary services that are of value to members of the group involved. Many organisations have pointed out that setting eligibility criteria for care at “moderate” is essential if this framework is to be effective. As the hon. Member for Bradford East (Mr Ward) pointed out, according to the findings of a survey by Scope, by 2012 84% of councils had set their eligibility criteria at the “substantial” threshold. That represents an increase of nearly a third since 2005. As a result, only 14% of people with “moderate” needs are now receiving care, and the findings of recent surveys suggest that the position will only get worse.

According to Marc Bush, head of research and public policy at Scope,

“if we take moderate level needs, there are 36,000 people within the system of working age who, if the reforms go through as they are currently set, would fall out of the care system…if you do not meet need early, people’s needs escalate and the costs escalate.”

Mr Bush’s evidence is in paragraph 186 of the Joint Committee’s report. Indeed, the Local Government Association has estimated that by 2019-20, 45% of council budgets will be spent on social care. Unless we increase substantially the amount of resources available—

Mrs Moon: There is pressure on people with illnesses and with disabilities if they do not get access to that social care, but should we not acknowledge the wider pressures on their families, who have to fill that gap all too often? That means taking time off from work and reducing the time spent on their leisure pursuits, thereby adding to family tensions.

Grahame M. Morris: That is an excellent point. The role of carers and families is absolutely critical; they are an army of unsung heroes.

We cannot build a quality care service based on driving down the terms and conditions of the people who deliver it. I am very concerned about the increase in the number of zero-hour contracts, through which staff are paid the bare minimum. Such contracts are increasingly being used by private care companies seeking flexibility when meeting short-term staffing needs, and they often lead to job insecurity and a lack of appreciation of workers. We are seeing the fragmentation of social care, driven by the pressure to cut costs, which only places obstacles in the way of quality and of integrating services. Contracting out and privatisation also make it more difficult to have joined-up services, and there is a real risk that local authorities will find it impossible to comply with their new duties.

We should be honest about what the Bill can achieve. It is a framework. It is paving legislation. It will not stop people having to sell their homes to pay for care. Under the existing deferred payment scheme, councils can loan money to people to cover their care costs, which has to be paid back by selling the family home after the elderly person has died. The Government propose something similar, but unlike the current system, interest is charged on the loan. The care Bill will not necessarily cap at £72,000 the costs elderly people actually pay for residential care. As has been said, hotel and other accommodation charges are not covered. Many elderly people in care homes will die long before they reach the cap that is being trumpeted as such a success. It certainly will not mean that pensioners get their care for free if they have income or assets worth up to £123,000. Elderly people will get free care only if they have income or assets under the lower means-tested threshold, which is not being increased and will be £17,000 in 2016.

More widely, the care Bill does nothing to address the funding crisis in social care or to help those who face a daily struggle to get the support they need right now. Elderly and disabled people are facing huge increases in home care charges, which are a stealth tax on the most vulnerable people in society. Few older people are getting their care for free, and more older and disabled people are being forced to pay for more vital services that help them to get up in the morning and get washed, dressed and fed.

We need a far bigger and bolder response to meet the needs of our ageing population: a genuinely integrated NHS and social care system which helps older people to stay healthy and live independently in their own homes for as long as possible. That would truly reinstate the idea of people being looked after from cradle to grave—a worthy extension of Aneurin Bevan’s legacy. Labour’s alternative is integrated, whole-person care, incorporating health, mental health and social care in a truly national health and social care service.

Posted in: Speeches

A Real Alternative to Austerity

I will be surprised if commentators provide a true appraisal of the Government’s record when the Queen’s Speech is delivered – worse on jobs, worse on growth and the biggest squeeze on living standards for a generation. The extent of the Government’s economic failure was highlighted when the Chancellor declared the “economy is healing” despite a near miss triple dip recession.

In the real world, little has improved. There are one million young people unemployed, and more people out of work since David Cameron became Prime Minister. In Easington, unemployment has increased by 800 and is at a level we have not seen since the mid-nineties.

Despite the Government’s promise to “make work pay” real wages are down by £1700 a year, and they have also cut tax credits by an average of £165 a year for seven million working households, tax credits which help over 7000 working families in East Durham on low incomes.

We need an alternative to austerity, and after three years it is clear that the Coalition Government have failed to deliver the change we need.  In an unprecedented move, Ed Miliband delivered an Alternative Queen’s Speech identifying six key policies needed to kick start the recovery.

A new Finance Bill would help make work pay by introducing a 10p tax rate, reversing the millionaire’s tax cut as well as protecting tax credits which help working families. Labour would put people back to work by implementing a Jobs Guarantee providing real jobs, and real opportunities for those looking for work.

A Consumer Bill would cap train fare rises to give relief to commuters, as well as breaking up the Big Six Energy Cartel which dominates the market, and pushed up prices by £300 since 2010, despite record profits.

There would also be a Banking Bill, with a British Investment Bank supporting those companies who invest, invent and employ people in the UK. A Housing Bill would see action taken against rogue landlords and extortionate fees in the private rented sector, and an Immigration Bill to put an end to employers exploiting migrant labour to illegally undercut wages.

The present Coalition policies of austerity are counterproductive; they cut wages, reduce benefits for both those in and out of work, and have made jobs less secure. This has drained demand out of the local economy damaging jobs and growth.

It is a vicious cycle which we must break. A stronger economy is a fairer economy which can only be delivered by protecting jobs and wages, giving people confidence to spend, and making life easier for working families.

Ed Miliband said “We need to recognise that the real wealth creators are not just a handful of millionaires but all of the people who do the hours, put in the shifts, get up early and go home late.”

Labour’s Alternative Queen’s Speech is a message of hope in at time of austerity that is failing to deliver for hard working families.

Posted in: Blog

Ed Miliband’s response to the Queen’s speech debate

Ed Miliband’s response to the Queen’s speech, which sets out the government’s legislative priorities is below:

I am sure the whole House will wish to join me in paying tribute to those who have died in Afghanistan since we last met.

Corporal William Thomas Savage and Fusilier Samuel Flint, both from The Royal Highland Fusiliers, 2nd Battalion, The Royal Regiment of Scotland.

And Private Robert Murray Hetherington from 51st Highland, 7th Battalion, The Royal Regiment of Scotland.

They died on patrol, serving our country and remind us all of the dangers our troops face day in day out across Afghanistan.

They showed the utmost courage and our thoughts are with their family and friends.

Let me also repeat from this side of the House that we support our mission in Afghanistan and also the timetable for withdrawal of our troops
who have given such extraordinary service to our country.

As is customary, I would like to pay tribute to those Members of this House who have died since the last Queen’s Speech.

Sir Stuart Bell was the son of a miner. He became a lawyer and then represented Middlesbrough for nearly 30 years. He was a kind decent man, passionate about Europe and served with distinction as a Church Commissioner.

For those members who want to read about his years in the House he also wrote an autobiography.

Tongue-in-cheek, it was called “Tony Really Loves Me”.

Mr Speaker, at times, I know exactly what he meant.

We have also lost Malcolm Wicks.

Malcolm was one of the deepest thinkers in this House, a brilliant Minister and one of the nicest people you could meet.

He faced his illness with the utmost bravery.

And right to the end he was passionate about his constituency, his politics, and his country.

Both Stuart and Malcolm are sorely missed by us all, as well as by their family and friends.

Let me turn to the proposer and seconder of the loyal address.

The proposer, the Honourable Member for Mid Worcestershire did so with great skill, wit and drew on the experience of his twenty years in this House.

The Honourable Member has decided to stand down from parliament.

He will be remembered, certainly by me, and I’m sure by others, for his courteousness and decency.

He is also to be congratulated for a campaign he has just launched, based on a long interest of his: to inspire more young people to take up careers in engineering and technology.

It has cross-party support and deserves to do so.

The Honourable Member has always been on the moderate, now the unfashionable, wing of the Conservative Party, working for Lord Walker and Sir Edward Heath before entering this House.

It was that voice of moderation that on Friday sought to find a third way as far as the Conservative response to UKIP is concerned.

He tweeted, and this is original Mr Speaker, “I hold clowns in high regard and respect their role…”

He shares a name with another prominent figure in public life.

The other Peter Luff.

The long-time chairman of the pro-European Movement.

So exasperated did the Honourable Member become by the attacks from angry Eurosceptics that he signed one letter:

“Peter Luff MP for Mid Worcestershire and NOT the Peter Luff who used to run the European Movement – he’s somebody else (and he’s) about two years older than me!”

Unfortunately the gist of the reply was:

‘Dear Peter, we are well aware of the existence of two Peter Luffs. And we don’t like either of you.’

Today, there could be no confusion as to his identity.

He performed his role uniquely well.

Let me turn to the seconder, the Honourable Member for Bristol West.

Despite being elected eight years ago, he will be pleased to hear that today, by tradition of the gracious speech, he occupies the role of young, rising star.

That is certainly his pedigree.

He was a councillor at 26, leader of the Liberal Democrats in Bristol aged 28.

He was the first openly gay Liberal Democrat MP, and he spoke incredibly movingly in the debate on same sex marriage earlier this year.

He was surely right when he said: “Equality is not something that can be delivered partially-equality is absolute.”

He has also, according to his website, chosen to use the power of Parliament to campaign on other important issues, including the use of consultants to avoid tax by multinational firms.

And it turns out he’s very well qualified to do this.

Because what was his job before entering this House?

He was a tax consultant to multinational firms.

To be fair, he has never been afraid to take on his opponents.

He was once confronted by angry protesting students outside his office before the top-up fees vote.

But he didn’t hide away, he took up the megaphone, looked the crowd directly in the face, and in true Liberal Democrat style, told them he hadn’t yet decided how he was going to vote.

Today, he spoke very well, and I am sure he will be pleased to hear that after listening to his speech I am happy to add my endorsement to his prospects for ministerial office.

And while I’m paying compliments Mr Speaker, I won’t let this day pass without paying a tribute to the most successful football manager the world has ever seen.

A great supporter of the Reds you might call him. Sir Alex Ferguson, phenomenally talented at his job, winner of thirteen championships, who can teach us all about team work and dedication.

That takes me to the question that must be asked about this Gracious Speech.

Whether it is equal to the scale of challenge our country faces?

Whether it matches the scale of disillusionment about the direction of the country we all heard during these county council elections?

The real lesson of UKIP’s vote, and the two-thirds of people who didn’t vote in these elections, is a deep sense that the country is not working for them.

They see a country where things are getting worse not better.

One million young people looking for work.

Low growth, falling wages and squeezed living standards.

So does the Government understand the difficulties the people of Britain face?

The signs aren’t good.

At the weekend they sent out the Foreign Secretary.

He told us that the elections had “sent a clear message to the Government”.

But his answer was, and I quote, “to shout louder” about their achievements.

In other words, it’s a version of the old tune:

The Government has a communications problem.

No Mr Speaker, the Government has a reality problem.

And all the twists and turns with UKIP:

Insulting them, ignoring them, imitating them won’t work while that remains the case.

This gracious speech was their chance to answer.

It should have contained:

Action to get our young people working again.

Action for real banking reform.

Action to get growth moving.

And action to genuinely confront the cost of living crisis.

But it fails on all counts.

The country has big problems, but this Queen’s Speech has no answers.

They may have legislated for five years in office, but they’re out of ideas after three.

Think of the young people we all met during this election campaign.

Imagine what they feel looking for a job in the Britain of 2013.

And think how their families feel when they can’t find one.

Britain cannot afford to waste their talents.

The Prime Minister promised change but things have got worse not better.

There are now four times more young people claiming benefits for more than a year than when the work programme was introduced.

And what does this gracious speech offer to those young people?

Absolutely nothing.

No change.

Where is the job guarantee for Britain’s young people?

And where are the rules tying government contracts to providing apprenticeships?

We will support the Government on High Speed Two.

But when the Government’s handing out the contracts to get this line built, why doesn’t it require companies to take on apprentices?

That would be good for young people.

Good for business.

And good for our country.

That is rights and responsibilities in action.

Next the banks.

We all meet many small businesses.

And we all hear the same story.

They put in the hours, they take the risks.

But the banks make life harder, not easier, for them.

The Prime Minister promised change but things have got worse not better.
Small businesses don’t need to be told that lending to businesses is falling month on month.

They know it.

It fell again by £4.8 billion in the three months to February.

And no one listening today will be given any hope that anything will be different now.

The Banking Commission called for a clear ultimatum to Britain’s banking system.

Change the culture, deliver for business, or we will break high street from casino banking across the board.

They called for an answer.

And what have we got:

Another fudge from the Chancellor, that the Banking Commission says does not go far enough.

And a Banking Bill that also fails to deliver a regional banking system that will deliver for British businesses, not rip them off.

On living standards, we all met so many people in this campaign struggling to get by.

At least now the Government acknowledges there’s a living standards crisis in this country.

But there is no real action to tackle it in the speech today.

The Prime Minister promised change but things have got worse not better.

The Government tries to tell people they’re better off.

But they know the reality: they’re worse off.

Wages down £1,700 since the election.

With tax and benefit changes hitting families by an average of £891.

There is one group that is better off.

The people sitting opposite on the Government front bench.

From the millionaires’ tax cut.

No wonder the Right Honorable Member for Haltemprice and Howden says this is a Government that looks “privileged and out of touch”.

He says: “Please please no more old Etonian advisers.”

I think he’s right.

It’s time for some diversity.

Let’s have someone from Harrow.

Now perhaps the Prime Minister will follow the advice of the Work and Pensions Secretary.

If wealthy pensioners are meant to be handing back their Winter Fuel Payments, why doesn’t he set an example and hand back the tax cut he’s given himself?

The Big Society in action.

For everyone else this speech has no answers.

No action on train fares, on payday loans, and on private pension charges.

And no real reform that breaks the dominance of the big six energy companies.

On housing we all know the difficulties families are facing, because for all the press notices from this Government, homes just aren’t being built.

The Prime Minister promised change but things have got worse not better.

Housing completions are now at their lowest level since the 1920s.

And since this lot came to power, 89,000 construction workers have lost their jobs.

No answers to Britain’s housing crisis.

Now on immigration, this clearly was an issue that many people raised during the campaign.

On the proposals they make, these are limited measures that they have announced before.

And they fail to tackle the issues of jobs and pay at the heart of people’s concerns:

Those employers who use cheap labour, through both illegal and legal migrants, to exploit and undercut workers already here.

By not paying the minimum wage.

Through recruitment agencies only using overseas labour.

And with slum landlords using overcrowded housing.

There is nothing on any of these measures in this Bill.

And why?

Because this Government’s whole economic approach is based on a race to the bottom in wages and conditions.

We will seek to amend the bill to take action to deal with these problems.

None of this will solve the growth crisis the country faces.

Even the Chancellor must recognize that having forecast six per cent growth over the last two and a half years, one per cent isn’t good enough.

When you look at what’s happening to our young people and our businesses, the squeeze on living standards, it is his failure that is the explanation.

Instead of fighting to stop the IMF telling him to change course, he should follow their advice and do so.

They’re not a Government with the answers for the British public in this Gracious Speech.

Instead as always they stand up for the wrong people.

From the people who brought you the millionaires’ tax cut, here’s the latest instalment.

This is what they used to say about cigarette packaging:

“It’s wrong that children are being attracted to smoke by glitzy designs on packets … children should be protected from the start.”

That was the previous Health Secretary.

Before they hired their new strategist.

The one whose company worked for big tobacco.

And now what’s happened?

They’ve dropped the bill.

This is what the Prime Minister used to say about lobbying: it was “the next big scandal waiting to happen”.

That was before the scandal happened.

To him.

Dinners for donors in Downing Street.

And now what’s happened?

They’ve dropped the bill.

And on the communications bill he had a chance to tackle powerful media monopolies.

That brought him Andy Coulson and Rebekah Brooks.

And now what’s happened?

What a surprise.

They’ve dropped the bill.

With such a short programme, he can hardly say there wasn’t room for these.

It’s not a timetabling problem.

It’s a problem of whose side he’s on.

He can’t provide the direction the country needs because he stands up for the wrong people.

And let me say to him, if his excuse is it’s because of the people behind him that he’s dropped these bills we’ll help him.

If he wants a bill on cigarette packaging – we’ll help him get it through.

If he wants a communications bill – we’ll help him get it through.

If he wants a bill on lobbying – we’ll help him.

He can’t provide the answers the country needs, because he’s lost control of his party.

Or as someone once said:

He’s in office but not in power.

What is his party spending their time talking about?

Not youth unemployment.

Not the NHS.

Not the living standards crisis we face.

But the one subject they’re obsessing about day in day out.

UKIP.

The Honourable Member for Wellingborough has characteristically led the charge.

It’s time to stop insulting UKIP he says.

Instead he wants an electoral pact with them.

The Honourable Member for Mid-Somerset has gone further.

He wants a coalition right now with UKIP.

Mr Speaker, they used to call them clowns.

Now they want to join the circus.

But I think his MPs forget something:

The whole point of the Prime Minister’s Europe speech in January was to ‘head off UKIP’.

Tory MPs were crowing that the UKIP fox had been shot.

It was job done.

Mission accomplished.

Only it wasn’t.

The lesson for the Prime Minister is you can’t out-Farage Farage

Banging on about Europe won’t convince the public.

And the people behind him will just keep coming back for more.

A Europe referendum tomorrow.

Drop same sex marriage.

The demands go on and on.

They will never be satisfied.

And every day he spends dealing with the problem behind him he’s not dealing with the problems facing the country.

No wonder this Queens speech has no answers.

Three wasted years.

Today another wasted chance.

A no answers Queen’s speech

From a tired and failing government.

Out of touch.

Out of ideas.

Standing up for the wrong people

And unable to bring the change this country needs.

Posted in: Speeches

The Wind Road Boys Coming To Easington


The Wind Road Boys, Easington Miners Welfare, Friday 10thMay, 7:30pm,

Free Entry

For one night only, an abridged version of the Wind Road Boys a new musical about mining, which celebrates our North East mining heritage, will be performed at the Easington Miners Welfare.

This full blown musical, with 14 anthem style songs, aims to keep our heritage alive.

A ‘wind road boy’ is another name for a’ trapper’.  A trapper was a child employed to work down the mines in complete darkness for up to 12 hours a day, every day.   The work was exclusively for boys who waited for the coal to be brought to and fro, and opened and shut doors to allow its passage.  This job was incredibly important as the opening and closing of doors prevented gases or firedamp from building up and causing explosions underground.  For this work they earned only a few pence.

The show premiered at Sunderland Empire on the 7th August 2012.  It had a huge impact.  As the cast finished their final number over 1000 people rose to their feet and proceeded to give a seven minute standing ovation.

The show will also be performed at the Gala Theatre in June. Further information about the show can be found at www.entercic.org/wrb

The production company, Enter CIC, provide free or low cost opportunities for young people living in mining communities. Any finance raised from the production will go directly back to providing more free tuition in artistic disciplines for more young people living in mining villages and communities.

Posted in: Blog

EASINGTON MP SUPPORTS CAMPAIGN TO STOP THE MS LOTTERY

Easington MP Grahame Morris is backing the MS Society’s ‘Stop the MS lottery’ campaign. A report by the charity has revealed major disparities in access to MS medicines, social care support, employment support and health professionals across the UK.

The MS Society surveyed more than 10,000 people with multiple sclerosis (MS) to inform the report. It asked what services they needed and to what extent these needs had been met over the previous 12 months.

The MS Society is now calling for an end to the MS lottery and will be campaigning to ensure people have fair access to the treatments and services they need, when they need them, wherever they live.

The charity wants every person with MS to have a personalised treatment, care and support plan, with two comprehensive reviews each year.

Grahame Morris MP said: “Too many people with MS are not getting access to the treatments, support and health professionals that would make a huge difference to their quality of life. I’m backing the MS Society’s campaign to Stop the MS lottery to ensure access is no longer based on luck but instead on genuine need.

“We need more organisations like East Durham Homes who were nominated for a MS Company Award recognising the support they provide to their employees. It is a pleasure to meet the Wood Family from Peterlee whose tireless work and campaigning has helped raise awareness and funds for the MS Society”

During the reception Mr Morris met Stuart and Sharon Wood, whose family won the 2011 MS Inspiration of the Year Award. Their daughter Lucy Wood was one of the youngest people in Britain to be diagnosed with MS when she was just five years old. Along with her mum Sharon, elder sister Katie, and dad Stuart who also has MS, they won the award in 2011 in recognition of their work and fundraising for the MS Society including fronting two appeals which raised an estimated £97,000 alone.

100,000 people live with multiple sclerosis in the UK. MS attacks at random and many of the symptoms are invisible to others. It affects almost three times as many women as men and people are usually diagnosed in their 20s or 30s; news that can be scary and heartbreaking.

“A lottery of treatment and care: MS services across the UK” was released to mark MS Week, which runs from 29 April – 5 May.

Visit www.mssociety.org.uk/mslottery to support the campaign.

Posted in: Press Releases