Has anybody noticed of lately when the leader of the pack is not around during the day many of its siblings comes out to play at night, they cause havoc by tuning up to undermine its leader of the pack.
Well no sooner as Ed Miliband goes on his holidays all havoc lets loose various quotes comes out to play some Labour MPs will argue that’s healthy debate whilst many others will keep quite as silent rivers run very deep.
Now is the time to looks toward Labour Party Conference to see if Ed Miliband is giving a good talk but can he walk, the walk is what many party activists want to know to convince our Labour Supporters to vote.
Here is a flavor of what members are calling for in Labour manifesto which will be debated at Conference:
A Repeal of the NHS Bill (evidence here).
Commitment to build 125,000+ homes (evidence here).
Private Rent Regulation (evidence here).
Living Wage for Public Sector Workers & shame private sector into following suit. (evidence here).
A minimum 33-40% cut in tuition fees (evidence here).
Rail price regulation limiting fare increases to 1% (evidence here).
50p rate of tax for Rich (evidence here).
Repeat the Bankers’ Bonus Tax (evidence here).
Reversal of #BedroomTax (evidence here line 25).
Workfare Scrapped & replaced with ‘compulsory’ Jobs Guarantee (evidence here).
Support for Clean Coal Technology and Mining Communities (evidence here).
Former Chef Whip Graham Stringer and Shadow Health Minister Andy Burnham and other Labour Parliamentarians has echoed some of the concerns in the wider labour movement which I have to give them credit for saying it which I fully endorse as it brings with it a healthy debates. However, I would like to put the question to all my critics if you were in opposition how many would release an early manifesto then have to retract it?
Firstly, in 2014 should see a clear indication as to where Labour Party will be heading in regards to winning back the voters to vote Labour. They will need to get rid some of the baggage that is really holding voters back from coming out to vote because of all the infighting from certain MPs to jockeying for positions which is true with all the political parties.
Secondly, the reason why I don’t take some opinion polls seriously is simple it has a trend to go up and down. One minute it says Labour will not win then the pollster often comes up with the results that the press pays them for which is the same is true with all the political parties who hires pollster to predicts the outcome of elections.
Thirdly, this no way speaking against the leadership of Labour Party if it is to win the 2015 elections there must be very clear policies which voters can comprehend and activists can help convince why Labour is in a position to gain the trust of the voters.
Yet there are some who continue to say that Labour should continue to apologize for the past mistakes. Well I have to say that Labour has done a lot of apologizing now they must move on how they will tackle the economy, being down high employment and create jobs, social housing, invest in public services, NHS, transport, European Union, immigration, international relations, and local services. Here is one of the issues that Labour must tackle and put right when they get back into office:
Welfare cuts that are meant to get the jobless back to work are driving down the living standards of hundreds of thousands of people who are in no position to find a job, an assessment of the Coalition’s welfare reforms says today.
Researchers, who have used data to forecast what will happen to the 1.18 million households where no one works, have calculated that 155,000 (roughly one in eight) can mitigate the effect of the cuts by finding work near their home, while another 115,000 will have the opportunity to move to more affordable housing. The rest – more than three-quarters of the total – will simply see their incomes drop, according to an independent study carried out for the Local Government Association by the Centre for Economic and Social Inclusion.
The effects will be felt all over the country, with fears that, were councils to make up the shortfall in benefit expenditure, it could force them to cut spending on roads, refuse collections and care for the elderly. The planned cuts in housing benefit are most likely to affect the South, where housing costs are higher.
The study calculates that most families on benefits will receive £1,615 a year less than they would have done under the old system – except in London, where high housing costs will reduce the incomes of households on benefit by £1,965 a year. In Westminster, in the heart of London, the average loss will exceed £5,000 a year.
Government ministers have been keen to stress that social security reforms are not supposed simply to be a cost-cutting exercise. They are also meant to encourage people to find work, for example by eliminating anomalies that mean that some people are actually better off at home claiming benefits than if they were in low-paid jobs.
“Welfare reform is about much more than saving money, vital though that is,” the Chancellor, George Osborne, told MPs in June, when he set out this year’s Spending Review.
“It is about reducing dependency and changing people’s lives for the better … Where is the fairness in condemning people to a life on benefits because the system will not help them to get back into work?” However, researchers examined the potential impact of the reforms in areas covered by 325 local councils, and found that, in 314 of them, most of the savings would come from reducing benefits paid to households where somebody works – especially in the North, where wages are lower than the South.
Sharon Taylor, chairman of the LGA’s finance panel, warned councils would be forced to raid other budgets, which were already being squeezed, in order to help tenants suffering as a result of housing benefit changes. “Demand for discretionary housing payments will significantly outstrip the money the Government has made available to councils to mitigate the changes. Local services have already taken the biggest cuts in the public sector and it would be wrong if councils had to reduce spending on other services such as caring for the vulnerable and fixing the roads to meet the new costs brought about by these changes to national policy.”
Overall, the social security reforms will save taxpayers £11.8bn in 2015-16, but it is reckoned that 59 per cent of that will come out of 530,000 households where there is someone working, compared with 41 per cent coming from 1.18 million households where no one works. Almost half of the total savings, £5.3bn, will come from a tightening up of tax credits.
The parts of England where the reforms will hit hardest are the North-east, Lancashire, the central North-west, Birmingham, parts of London and coastal towns such as Great Yarmouth, Scarborough, Plymouth and Torbay.
Councils will be able to make discretionary payments towards the housing costs of families affected, but the £155m that the Government has made available represents just £1 for every £7 that tenants have lost.
Ms Taylor added: “In many areas welfare reform is not encouraging people into work because the jobs simply don’t exist, while the opportunities for people to downsize their homes to cope with reductions in benefits are severely limited by a lack of affordable accommodation. Unless more is done to create new jobs and homes, households will be pushed into financial hardship and we will see a huge rise in the number of people going to their councils asking for help to make ends meet.”
The TUC’s general secretary, Frances O’Grady, said: “The Government has tried to sell its welfare reforms on the back of mistruths and nasty stereotypes. However, this research exposes what a devastating impact its policies are having on communities throughout the country.
“Ministers are not cracking down on cheats as they claim, but destroying the safety net that our welfare state is meant to provide for those who fall on hard times through no fault of their own. The Government’s attack on social security provision is not only hurting those unable to find work. Millions of working families are seeing an even bigger reduction in their financial support. Rather than addressing the shortage of jobs and affordable housing that are blighting many areas, ministers are slashing local authority budgets and expecting councils to deal with the fallout from their reforms.”
A DWP spokesperson said: “Crucially this research, as the LGA itself acknowledges, doesn’t take into account the combined impacts of the Government’s reforms, including the raising of the personal income tax threshold, and the benefits of Universal Credit which will make 3 million households better off.
“The fact remains that the benefits bill has become unsustainable and it’s only right we take action to bring it under control, but we are bringing in all our reforms in ways that protect pensioners, vulnerable and disabled people.”
Welfare reform: The changes
Most benefits now paid to welfare claimants are being phased out.
Six of the main ones, including the jobseeker’s allowance, income support, tax credits and housing benefit are to be merged into one, called universal credit, which will be paid monthly into a bank account.
Disability living allowance is being abolished for all adults under 65, and replaced with a personal independence payment. Claimants will not be assessed on how serious their condition is but on how it affects them.
There is also to be a cap on the total amount of benefits that can be paid to one family, equal to the average wage for working families, or £26,000 for a couple or single parent with a child, which will apply equally everywhere, regardless of the cost of housing.
The so-called “bedroom tax” applies to tenants living in homes with more bedrooms than the Government thinks are necessary – with children under 16 of the same gender and all children under 10 expected to share.
This is not strictly a tax, but a cut in benefits. One “extra” room will cost the tenant 14 per cent of their housing benefit. Two or more will cost 25 per cent.
Introducing the changes in March last year, the Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith said: “Universal credit will mean work will pay for the first time, helping to lift people out of the endless cycle of benefits, whilst those who need our support will know they will get it.”
All must be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time bound.
I would be very concerned with the mantra of the Big Society should help the Conservatives win the elections from next year onwards or the worst that could happen if the coalition decides to call an early general election which team Labour should be ready at a moment’s short notice.
here are many people who want to know if the year 2015 be a landslide victory for Labour the answer from me is it can be achieved if we all do our part by contacting as many of your friends relatives and colleagues to continue to vote for Labour from 2014 the manifesto will be ready for people to read via Labour website.
I keep referring to the phrase “pick sense out of nonsense” to all my opponents as they lack the comprehension as to why I will continue to promote a Labour Government this for the simple fact I have more faith in Labour than a coalition that will bring down this country to its knees. Already the many has seen the increase attacks on our welfare state, lack of social housing, boom and bust which happen on the coalition watch and they cannot continue to play the blame game as the record has become much scratched and they need to change their tune.
Teresa May has been lining herself up with the right wing of the Conservatives for a leadership contest with David Cameron should he lost the 2015 elections it’s no wonder why she has been accused of a “cover-up” after she used legal powers to keep parts of a critical inspection into UK border controls secret.
Fifteen sections of the report into controls between France and the UK have been redacted – including part of a passage revealing staff and managers fear resources in Calais are stretched – for national security reasons.
But politicians and campaigners have accused Mrs May of hiding “her own failings” exposed in the report by chief inspector of borders and immigration John Vine.
Chris Bryant, shadow immigration minister, said: “Yet again the Government refuses to be straight with the British people about immigration and our borders.
“This cover-up and the failure at our borders provide yet more dents in this Government’s much-tarnished credibility.
“What possible reason can there be for redacting elements of a report by a highly-respected independent inspector?
“If Theresa May thinks Mr Vine’s report would imperil national security or provide ammunition for illegal migrants, she should share the full report with the Home Affairs Select Committee and ourselves and explain why the full report cannot be published without masses of redactions.
“This is a cover-up to hide her own failings.”
In unredacted sections of the report, Mr Vine warns that thousands of illegal immigrants attempting to sneak into the UK through France have not been fingerprinted by border officials for nearly four years.
In addition, it reveals that Border Force – the Home Office law enforcement wing stationed at ports and airports – is fining drivers and firms guilty of bringing in illegal immigrants at way below the maximum allowed by law.
Mr Vine reveals that border staff remain concerned over the effect of the so-called Lille loophole, which effectively exempts some passengers who travel to Britain via Lille, in France, on Eurostar trains boarded in Brussels, Belgium, from UK Border Force immigration checks.
But this section is also among those partly-redacted by the Home Secretary.
Keith Vaz, chair of the Home Affairs Select Committee, said: “I am concerned that the Home Secretary has decided to redact part of the findings related to the ‘Lille Loophole’, despite John Vine finding that some were still able to reach Britain using this method.
“The committee has been assured in the past that the loophole would be closed. The withholding of information prevents us from properly holding the Border Force to account.”
Ukip leader Nigel Farage said: “It is extremely concerning that a report into the operations of our border security is being censored by the Home Office.
“We have to ask what on earth are they hiding?”
He added: “The simple fact is that the UK Border Agency is having enormous problems, not of its own making, but of its political masters, who then choose to redact the report.”
Alp Mehmet, vice-chairman of campaigners Migration Watch UK, said: “Security concerns may have led to some of the redactions in the report but it is difficult to see this as the reason for all of them.
“Transparency has to be the best policy, if only to show that the Home Office has nothing to hide.”
So-called juxtaposed controls were first set up in 1994 to speed up entry and exit procedures on the Channel Tunnel route and were later introduced on the Eurostar route in 2001 and at the ferry ports in northern France in 2003 to counter the significant number of undocumented people arriving in the UK.
In the 12-month period from September 2011 to August 2012, more than 8,000 illegal immigrants were caught and stopped from entering the UK in vehicles and other containers at juxtaposed controls at Calais, Coquelles and Dunkirk.
In January 2010, border officials ceased processing – fingerprinting and photographing – illegal immigrants caught in at Calais due to problems with the availability of cells to hold them in. This was also later stopped at Coquelles.
Fingerprinting and photographing immigrants caught hiding in the backs of lorries and other vehicles could prove crucial in testing the quality of their asylum claims if they arrive in the UK in subsequent attempts, Mr Vine said.
The chief inspector said there was “considerable room for improvement in complying with guidance and procedures”.
Mr Vine added: “I also find it surprising that people found attempting to enter the UK concealed in freight vehicles are no longer fingerprinted by Border Force at Calais or Coquelles.
“Gathering biometric information such as fingerprints could assist the decision-making process if these individuals were ultimately successful in reaching the UK and went on to claim asylum.”
Mr Vine found the Civil Penalty Scheme, which fines hauliers and drivers who allow illegal immigrants to enter the UK, was not being used to its full potential.
Although the maximum penalty that Border Force could set was £4,000 per illegal immigrant found – £2,000 to the driver and £2,000 to the carrier – the inspector found that none of the fines imposed were “remotely close” to this maximum.
A Home Office spokesman said: “In accordance with the UK Borders Act 2007 the Home Secretary, in consultation with the independent chief inspector, is required to redact any material which, if published, would be prejudicial to the interests of national security.
“These take the form of visible redactions in the report laid before Parliament.”
Commenting on the public findings, he said: “This report shows Border Force, through excellent working relationships with the French and Belgian authorities, continues to prevent those with no right to enter the UK from doing so.
“John Vine acknowledges the high level of security checks and the courteous and professional approach of Border Force staff.
“Border Force has already addressed many of the issues raised in this inspection and will look at all the recommendations in detail as part of our continuing drive to improve performance.”
Immigration minister Mark Harper acknowledged it was useful to take fingerprints of people who try to sneak into the UK illegally but said border officers have to strike a balance with carrying out other tasks.
He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “It would be useful but equally it consumes a large amount of time for our officers to do that when they could be using that time to carry out other tasks to secure the border and it’s a balance, and the decision that was taken in 2010 was to work very closely with our French colleagues for them to process people trying to enter the United Kingdom illegally.
“But as I’ve said we’ve accepted that it would be appropriate to review our approach and that review will be completed by the end of the year.”
Mr Harper said Mrs May uses her power to redact reports in the name of national security sparingly.
He said: “I think if you look at the history of the reports that the chief inspector’s produced I think it would be fair to say that a number of them have previously been very critical for example of the UK Border Agency, in some cases very critical.
“In those cases the Home Secretary has not used her powers to redact any of those reports, she uses those powers in cases where there are pieces of operational information which she judges disclosing would be not helpful for national security and she uses those powers sparingly but she uses them when they are necessary.”
Thirdly, if Labour doesn’t come up with the goods then they too stand to be casted back into the wilderness until they can come up with a decent manifesto there are many in Labour would like to emulate what Tony Blair achieve but for that to happen they need to learn the lesson of the past from both Blair and Brown leadership and hopefully we see a new brand in Milibandism.
I still maintain that our enemy is the Conservatives check out this
That’s what the papers say, with Labour’s trade union spats, an improving economy, and Abu Qatada’s deportation all cited in evidence.
On Tuesday, the Daily Telegraph even reported senior Tories’ confidence that they were on a ‘glide path’ to victory.
And Ladbrokes said 70% of election bets in the past fortnight had been for the Conservatives.
Is it really so simple? Not according to respected polling experts at the University of Nottingham, who believe the true picture is different to the “Westminster Village narrative”.
A blog post by academics Robert Ford, Will Jennings and Mark Pickup scoffs at suggestions that Labour’s poll lead is collapsing, saying its support is up half a point on the previous month, to 38.1%.
Ladbrokes have Labour as 5/4 favourites for a majority, with the Tories 3/1, and a hung Parliament at 13/8.
Meanwhile, with MPs away for the summer, Westminster’s pundits are busy speculating on the outcome of the 2015 poll.
A Twitter tussle between Huffington Post UK’s very own political director Mehdi Hasan and Telegraph blogger Dan Hodges tempted political heavyweights at the Sun and the Daily Mail into pledging money on the result, while former Tory MP Paul Goodman, executive editor of the influential ConservativeHome website, said he did not think Cameron could secure an outright majority. Even Lord Ashcroft, the former Tory donor and deputy chair weighed in, as did CCHQ’s Ric Holden.
Voters are barely aware of the union baron, they say:
The mistake journalists make in doing this is to assume that the average voter pays attention to the same issues they do. The union row which so excited the Westminster Village barely registered with voters. Less than a fifth of the members of McLusky’s own union could recognise the man at the centre of the row (many thought he was Sir Alex Ferguson)…It is therefore no surprise to anyone except the political media to see that Labour’s poll share has not budged at all in the wake of these supposedly toxic feuds.