Tag Archives: Lib Dem

low paid hit hardest over the Christmas and New Years


I would encourage all who is concerned about their fellow human beings to watch this Youtube and lets have a proper debate on how to influence policies at the top:

 

Hey folks a serious question to all of you how many people will be celebrating Christmas, New Years and singing the following song Jingle Bells and White Christmas this year when the coalition only Christmas presents to all us is cuts, cuts in local government services, all Government Departments, price increase from the big energy companies and pay day loans running all the way to the banks rubbing their hands quoting that people must have muggings written on their foreheads, long queues outside foodbanks and mobile companies chasing you up to pay unpaid bills as Christmas and New years is just around the corner.

legalloansharks-627x290Yet Stella Creasy is the Shadow Minister (Business, Innovation and Skills) has been active in campaigning for increased regulation of payday loans companies. In an article in The Guardian, she stated that six companies controlled lending to 90% of the seven million Britons who lacked a bank account or credit card. She claimed that the average cost of credit to these customers at 272% APR has led to cross-party support for a cap as in the rest of Europe and there has been a fourfold increase in payday loans since the start of the recession. In a debate in Parliament she noted the lack of competition in the market and asked for Government support to cap loans which exploited the poor, and in some cases reached 4000%. APR.

In 2012, a Wonga employee used company equipment to make offensive personal attacks on Creasy. Wonga made an “immediate and unreserved apology” after the attacks, and Creasy also requested that the firm promote a constituency event to help struggling families. According to the Guardian, a Wonga computer was used to edit the company entry using several accounts. Like many of we continue to ask the coalition do they see Stella Creasy as a threat to them as she has been very consistent in raising the issue of pay day loans which must having them on the run in Parliament.

osborne_georgeGeorge Osborne executed a hasty politically driven U-turn, surprising even coalition Liberal Democrat ministers, when he ended years of resistance and announced a legal cap on the overall cost of payday loans.

In a sign of the speed of the Treasury about-face and the secrecy surrounding the chancellor’s move, papers distributed on Friday for Monday’s inter-departmental ministerial meeting on consumer credit contained no reference to the policy shift.

Labour-Party-Red-Rose-logoLabour claimed the move showed the success of its cost of living agenda and revealed the Tories’ strategic confusion and weakness, including in Osborne’s own attitude to the role of the state in regulating markets.

Osborne may feel he has shot one of Labour’s foxes and done something to dispel the impression that the Conservatives do not represent the low-paid.

He presented the move as “a logical next step” to regulate a market left unregulated by the previous Labour government, adding that evidence in Australia showed caps on the overall cost of loans could be effective.

The chancellor said that there would be controls on charges, including arrangement and penalty fees, as well as on interest rates. “It will not just be an interest rate cap. You’ve got to cap the overall cost of credit.”

He said the move would “make sure that hardworking people get a fair deal from the financial system, whether it’s the banks or the payday lenders or the internet lenders”.

A possible catalyst for Osborne’s move was a renewed push from backbench Lib Dems to impose a cap using an amendment to the banking bill in the Lords this week. Earlier this month the Treasury had been given full ministerial responsibility for consumer credit, taking responsibility from the business department.

In another sign of the haste of the decision, the Treasury has yet to set out its alternative amendment.

Osborne said he would be imposing a legal duty on the Financial Conduct Authority to impose an overall cap on the cost of credit. The FCA already had the power to impose a cap, but now it would be forced to do so. The chancellor said it would be for the FCA to decide the specifics of how the cap would work.

Osborne made his decision even though the Competition Commission had just started an inquiry into the industry.

A Lib Dem source said: “The Lib Dems have been pushing for tougher action on payday lenders for well over a year – at every step of the way this has been met with strong resistance from Conservatives in the Treasury. It seems the Tories read the runes on this one and realised that increasingly the evidence and political tide were against them. Their change of heart is very welcome but none of this positive action would have happened without the Lib Dems in government.”

The Lib Dem backbencher Lord Starkey held discussions about his alternative amendment last week with the Lib Dem consumer affairs minister Jo Swinson and Treasury chief secretary Danny Alexander. Starkey was calling for a maximum cap on the size of a loan of £300and admitted that he was astonished by Osborne’s decision.

Australia has an interest rate limit of 4% per month, after a maximum up-front fee of 20%. However, even in Australia, borrowers can still face charges, and penalties for late payment are allowed to be as much as twice the loan amount.

The chancellor praised the shadow consumer affairs minister Stella Creasy for her campaign.

Creasy, the Labour MP for Walthamstow, who has campaigned against the payday lending industry’s practices, criticised the government for sending “confusing” signals to the regulator, and said the coalition was “playing catch-up” with Labour, who have said they would bring in a cap if they were handed power in 2015.

In an interview on Radio 4’s Today Programme, Creasy said that introducing a duty to cap at this stage would “leave in tatters the consultation announced a few weeks ago where ministers specifically ruled out the move to introduce a cap”.

Creasy said the regulator had told her it was not using its existing powers to cap interest rates in the sector because there was insufficient political will for it to do so.

Whilst it is alleged that three in four people on low wages in 2002 failed to escape from Britain’s “low pay trap” over the next 10 years, according to a report published today. Coupled by according to Resolution Foundation think-tank, 1.3 million (27 per cent) of the 4.7 million workers on low pay in 2002 remained in the bottom bracket for the next 10 years.

A further 2.2 million (46 per cent) moved in and out of low wages but failed to break free of them for good by the end of the decade.

The findings will fuel the growing concern about the lack of social mobility in the UK and the heated political debate about the “cost of  living crisis”.

In a Commons debate today, Labour will highlight figures showing that average earnings have fallen in real terms in every part of the UK since 2010.

Labour will claim that the Coalition has failed to meet the goals it set itself on living standards, economic growth and the deficit.

Only 800,000 (18 per cent) moved up the earnings ladder for a sustained period without slipping back into low pay.  A further 400,000 (9 per  cent) retired or left the labour market. Low pay was defined as two-thirds of median hourly earnings – £7.32 and £10.98 respectively at today’s prices.

Alex Hurrell, senior analyst at the foundation and author of the report, said: “For many people, low pay is not a first rung on the ladder – it’s a long-term or even permanent reality. Identifying those who are least likely to escape low pay is the first step in targeting policies to help them get on.”

Researchers found women were much more likely to be stuck on low pay than men.

Some 900,000 women (33 per cent) on low wages in 2012 had been there for the previous 10 years, compared to 400,000 men (21 per cent).

The North-east was the region where workers were most likely to be trapped on low earnings. One in three (34 per cent) in this category in 2012 had been there for  a decade.

The East Midlands, Yorkshire and Humberside and Wales (31 per cent) were the next worst affected. London and the South-east were the least affected, although 23 per cent of the low paid in 2012 had been stuck for 10 years.

Half of all the workers trapped for the decade were aged between 41 and 60, which means they spent up to 10 of their “peak earning years” on low pay. Some may remain stuck for their entire careers, the foundation said.

Public-sector workers were more likely to escape low pay than those in the private sector. Women, manual workers, administrators and staff of firms with fewer than 10 staff were least likely to escape.

The sectors where people were most likely to be stuck included retail, hospitality, sales, customer services, manufacturing and care. The foundation said more must be done to help workers progress.

Only one in six women (15 per cent) working in the retail sector in 2002 escaped low pay during the decade.

Gavin Kelly, the think-tank’s chief executive, said: “Living on low pay in 2013 is tough, but being stuck on it for years on end is harder still.

“This report shines a light on the persistent nature of low pay for millions of workers and shows that women, those in regions such as the North-east, the East Midlands and Wales, and people working in sectors like administration are far likelier to be stuck in low pay than others.

“It also highlights the large numbers who cycle in and out of low pay over time.

“Limited earnings mobility is a long-running problem in our economy which spans a number of decades and has occurred under governments of different complexions.”

Chris Leslie, the shadow Chief Treasury Secretary, said: “On every economic test David Cameron and George Osborne set themselves three years ago they have failed.

“Far from delivering rising living standards, working  people are now over £1,600  a year worse off under this Government.”

In the debate today, ministers will point out that the problems of low pay pre-date the Coalition coming to power in 2010 and will accuse the previous Labour government of failing to tackle it.

While in the House of Lords the government has been defeated in the House of Lords over its plans for reforming the banking system.

A Labour amendment to the Financial Services Bill, which would introduce a licensing system for senior bankers, was passed by five votes.

Earlier, ministers agreed to set up a panel of experts to review the effectiveness of regulatory changes.

This will examine whether plans to ring-fence bank retail operations from riskier investment arms are working.

The bill is designed to make a repeat of the 2008 financial crisis less likely by introducing tough internal safeguards to ensure losses in one part of a bank do not spread and threaten its collapse.

Critics say this so-called ring-fencing does not go far enough and want the regulators to have a reserve power to step in to force banks to separate their investment and retail operations.

“We don’t know whether this (ring-fencing) will work,” former Chancellor Lord Lawson said during Tuesday’s debate at report stage in the Lords.

“We don’t know whether there will be cultural contamination across the ring fence because that would be a very serious matter.”

Attempts to get the reserve power introduced into the bill were defeated by nine votes although ministers agreed to set up a body to determine whether the proposed arrangements were working.

But ministers were defeated over calls for a licensing regime specifying “minimum thresholds of competence” for senior bankers and adherence to a recognised code of conduct.

The measure, passed by 222 votes to 217, may be overturned by MPs when the bill returns to the Commons.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, who supported the proposal, said it was right that professional standards in banking were on a par with those for the law and medicine.

The Most Rev Justin Welby, a member of the Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards, told peers it was not always the most senior staff who could inflict the most serious damage.

“The expectations on senior managers must be high,” he said.

“However, it is also right that those who are not part of the senior management of the bank also have high standards.”

He told peers it was not always the most senior staff who could inflict the most serious damage.

“They could be a junior dealer, new in the business, who ignoring his internal limits deals in a way that does great damage both to customers and his employer.”

Government minister Lord Newby said the proposal would add to regulatory burden on banks “without introducing any real improvements in standards in the industry”.

He added: “There will be a regime of regulatory standards for employees encapsulated in enforceable banking standard rules.

“Firms will inevitably have a role in ensuring their staff comply with those standards and taking action if they do not, whilst the regulator will be able to take action if needed.

 

 

 

 

It’s alleged that LibDems could Split before 2015


BUEkCFSCIAA7eOS

Well folks if you have been following the LibDems Conference lately it comes as no surprise that Vince Cable quoted that the coalition could break up before five years is over.

Oh dear me has the Liberal Democrats gone short on memories of lately It’s not just the Tax Payers Alliance who have been left red with rage by Nick Clegg’s plan for free school meals for every four and five-year-old in Britain.

Here is a song worthwhile listening to See link below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KUDjRZ30SNo

Southwark’s Liberal Democrats are also red-faced, after a old leaflet campaign emerged accusing their Labour counterparts of “bad choices” for spending “millions for free food for the richest kids”.

anood-al-sameraiIn 2012 Cllr Anood Al-Samerai said she saw “no evidence to show that extending free school meals to every child will significantly reduce obesity.”

But the group did a u-turn earlier this month, perhaps after internal murmurings about plans for Clegg’s landmark pledge. Southwark Lib Dems sent out a press release just eight days ago, pledging to keep meals free.

Here’s Cllr Al-Samerai again. “Southwark Liberal Democrats are on the side of local parents who want the best for their children. That’s why we’ve pledged to protect universal free school meals if we win control of the council next year,” she said.

“With this embarrassing u-turn they have given no explanation why they have changed their mind leaving a huge credibility gap in their plans,” the Labour party said in a post on its website.

P9104876Cllr Peter John, Labour leader of Southwark Council, said he welcomed the Lib Dems “damascene conversion to Labour’s policy of free healthy school meals but frankly I don’t believe a word of it”.

“Locally the Lib Dems, are now adopting Labour policies in a desperate attempt to hang on but you cannot go from absolute opposition, to cast iron support overnight and expect to retain any credibility. The Lib Dems offer no alternative, and this desperate attempt to take popular Labour policies as their own shows what a sorry state they are in.”

71px-Simon_Hughes_and_John_Hemming_croppedSouthwark is the constituency of Lib Dem deputy leader Simon Hughes. The local Lib Dems have yet to respond to a request for comment.

Can anybody remind us why the LibDems are supporting the coalition given that they have cut Welfare Benefits let’s begin with:

A year ago, the Very Reverend Dr David Ison was leading Evensong at St Paul’s Cathedral when four women dressed in white chained themselves to the pulpit.

Marking the first anniversary of Occupy London’s eight-month encampment on the steps of the ­Cathedral, they called on the Church to “throw the money changers out of the temple”.

Fast forward a year, and an ­extraordinary thing is happening.

As the second ­anniversary of the Occupy protest at St Paul’s approaches, both sides are working together to highlight the toxic effects of the government’s welfare reforms.

One of the women once chained to the pulpit, Alison Playford, is speaking animatedly to Rev Ison, the Dean of St Paul’s.

“We always knew there was common ground between the Occupy movement and the Church on tackling poverty,” says Rev Ison.

“And we are all agreed that what is happening to people with disabilities has to stop now.”

In Parliament Square, a week on Saturday, September 28, Rev Ison – who only five months ago presided over Margaret Thatcher’s funeral at St Paul’s – will conduct a memorial ceremony for those who have seen their lives ­devastated by the Government “austerity” programme.

Playford, a 31-year-old actress, says: “Our campaign 10,000 Cuts and Counting refers to the 10,600 people who died during or within six weeks of being put through the Atos Work Capability Assessment between January and November 2011.

“For some of these people, the assessment contributed directly to their deaths and, for the rest, they were made to endure the indignity of stressful and humiliating tests during the final weeks of their lives.”

Rev Ison shakes his head. “10,000 people comes from the Department for Work and Pensions’ own figures. And we don’t yet know the figures for 2012-13. It has to stop.”

A joint campaign between St Paul’s, Occupy, Disabled People Against Cuts and the Wow Campaign, 10,000 Cuts and Counting, is a landmark moment in the growing battle against welfare cuts.

At the memorial service, disabled actors will read letters from people detailing their experiences of the Work Capability Assessment – many of them written to Michael Meacher, the Labour MP who has been most outspoken on WCA.

There will also be a carpet of white flowers.

“We want to show the breadth of people speaking out about this,” the Rev Ison says.

“It’s everyone from DPAC to the British Medical Association, which has said that Atos is not fit for purpose.

“We all want to know why people are being put through so much stress and worry.”

Andy Green, 38, from DPAC, says there is no time to waste. “People are suffering and dying every day,” he says.

“Yet the really stupid thing is that welfare spending has gone up, not down under the austerity campaign.”

The morning we met, the Prime Minister had welcomed yet more draconian measures to crack down on benefit fraud – jail sentences of up to 10 years.

“Where are the sentences being given out for defrauding bankers?” Rev Ison asks.

“There is more money being lost by DWP error in unclaimed benefits than by fraud,” Playford says.

“More money is being lost by corporate tax evaders by a football to a pea than by benefit fraud.”

After the memorial service on September 28, a delegation from the gathering will take the “Wow” – or War on Welfare – petition to Downing Street.

Put forward by actress Francesca Martinez, it has so far been signed by 52,000 people and calls for a New Deal for sick and disabled people.

The aim is to reach 100,000 signatures in the next three months – which could trigger a parliamentary debate.

“It’s a huge moment for Wow,” says Jane Bence, one of the campaigners behind the petition. “It’s wonderful to see people coming together from across the spectrum to say, ‘enough is enough’.”

Rev Ison says it is important to show people with disabilities and mental health problems that they aren’t alone.

“We need to show those who feel alone and picked off and despairing that they’re not on their own and there are a lot of people who want to see things change.”

In June last year, the St Paul’s ­occupation ended badly, in violent eviction.

It is a credit to the courage and ­resilience of both sides that they are now working together.

Through recent actions in Friern Barnet where Occupy helped local people re-open their library, and at the Balcombe fracking demos, protesters are finding new, effective ways of working side by side with communities. Meanwhile, as austerity deepens, the Church is finding its voice.

“It’s the role of the Church to build community in an era when people are very individualistic, and that’s what I see happening in the protest movement too,” Rev Ison says. “Caring for people should be right at the top of ­everyone’s agenda.”

He looks up towards the dome of St Paul’s. “We all need to ask ourselves, ‘would we want to be treated like that?’ Most of us will experience disability at some point in our lives. It’s not us and them. It’s us.”

What this happening this must be the worst nightmare somebody wake us all up remember the Libdem backed out of a coalition deal with Labour yet they have the cheek to say that Nick Clegg has said he is ready to work with Ed Miliband in a coalition if the voters install Labour as the largest party at the 2015 general election.

In his closing speech to the Liberal Democrat conference in Glasgow today, Mr Clegg will appeal to the public to give his party a share of power for another five years, saying they are just getting into their stride in government. “The absolute worst thing to do would be to give the keys to Number 10 to a single party government – Labour or the Conservatives,” he will say.

During a round of media interviews last night, the Deputy Prime Minister sought to kill growing speculation that he is preparing to form a second coalition with the Conservatives in 2015.

Asked if he could comfortably say “Bye bye David Cameron, hello Ed, I will be your deputy now”, he told the BBC: “I’ll tell you why I could, it isn’t about my personal preference, it isn’t about whether this person likes that person more, or whether they get on better with this person … It is about following the instructions, the instructions manual handed to us [by the voters].”

Mr Clegg said: “Of course I would serve in a Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition if that is clearly what the British people want and of course that it is possible to assemble [one].”

Asked if Mr Miliband would be a good prime minister, Mr Cameron replied: “I don’t know, it hasn’t happened yet. I don’t think you should judge people until they’ve been able to prove themselves. I personally think that the Labour Party and Ed Miliband himself have assumed that the general election is somehow going to be delivered to them on a plate simply by criticising the Coalition and the difficult decisions we’ve had to make – often unpopular decisions because we’ve had to clean up the mess they’ve left behind.”

He made clear he would not stand down as Liberal Democrat leader if Labour demanded that as the price of forming a coalition. “It’s not for them to hand-pick which individual Liberal Democrats they work with, in the same way as it’s not for me to hand-pick the Labour team,” he said.

In today’s speech, Mr Clegg will stress that he is ready to work with either Labour or the Tories in the national interest. He will say: “I don’t look at Ed Miliband and David Cameron and ask myself who I’d be most comfortable with, as if I was buying a new sofa.”

Mr Clegg will tell his party to “feel proud” of what it has achieved in office since 2010. “This recovery wouldn’t be happening without us. We have made sure the deficit is being cut at the right pace … Three years. We’re not even done yet. Can you imagine what we could do with five more?”

He will claim the sacrifices made by the British people would be put at risk if Labour or the Conservatives governed alone. “Labour would wreck the recovery. The Conservatives would give us the wrong kind of recovery. Only the Lib Dems can finish the job and finish it in a way that is fair,” he will say.

Mr Clegg will tell delegates that the Liberal Democrats have completed their journey from “the comforts of opposition” to a party of government. He will argue: “We’re no one’s little brother. We’re not trying to get back into government to fold into one of the other parties – we want to be there to anchor them to the liberal centre ground… bang in the middle. We’re not here to prop up the two-party system. We’re here to bring it down.”

In an unusually personal speech, the Deputy PM will admit he had a privileged background but insist that the upheavals faced by his parents and grandparents meant he was taught not to “ take things for granted”. He will say: “My Dutch mother had spent much of her childhood in a prisoner of war camp. My dad’s Russian mother had come to England after her family lost everything in the Russian Revolution… We were raised to believe that everyone deserves a chance because everyone’s fortunes can change, often through no fault of their own.”

Mr Clegg will stress that, since entering government, he has spent more time than anything else on improving social mobility through measures such as the pupil premium for disadvantaged children.

Intriguingly Nick Clegg has suffered a major blow as he prepares to put his leadership on the line today, with a poll revealing the deep unease about the direction of the Liberal Democrats among current and former supporters. More current Liberal Democrat supporters – those who would still vote for the party now –  believe the party has changed for the worse since the 2010 election (36 per cent) than think it has got better (20 per cent), according to a YouGov survey.

The survey found that 59 per cent of all those who voted Liberal Democrat at the last election believe the party has got worse in the three years since, with only 9 per cent saying it has got better. The results show Mr Clegg has a mountain to climb as he tries to woo back former supporters who have deserted the party since it joined the Coalition.

In a crunch debate at his party’s conference in Glasgow today, Mr Clegg will make a personal appeal to delegates to stick with the Coalition’s economic strategy and reject calls to depart from the Government’s austerity plans. The left-of-centre Social Liberal Forum (SLF) wants the Coalition to adopt a new “fiscal mandate” and to order the Bank of England to do more to boost growth and jobs. Mr Clegg’s allies claim this amounts to a call for higher public spending.

But his internal critics have accused him of “picking a fight with his own party”, when a compromise on economic policy could have been reached. They claim that Vince Cable, the Business Secretary, who has close links with the SLF, wanted such a deal. Last night Mr Cable was under pressure to back Mr Clegg rather than his natural allies in the increasingly fractious debate. His aides said he supported Mr Clegg’s economic statement but that he believed it could be improved.

Insiders said the crucial vote that follows the debate could be close, but predicted that Mr Clegg would win over wavering delegates by turning it into a “loyalty test”.

Prateek Buch, the SLF’s director, said: “The motion has to go further than current Coalition policy as [we] approach the next election, to demonstrate we are an independent party.”

Mr Clegg on Sunday sought to reassure his critics by promising to set out his “red lines” for possible coalition talks should the 2015 election result in another hung parliament. He suggested that cuts in taxes for the low-paid and higher taxes for the rich would be key Liberal Democrat demands in any potential agreement.

The Deputy Prime Minister said it was too early to spell out the party’s “die in a trench” issues, but they are likely to include a commitment to lifting the personal tax allowance to £12,500, taking all workers on the minimum wage out of income tax. This would build on the party’s flagship promise at the last election to raise the threshold to £10,000, which many Liberal Democrats regard as their proudest achievement in government.

A new tax on the wealthiest people – probably through a “mansion tax” on the owners of £2m-plus properties – will be another central Liberal Democrat commitment. The party is also examining the idea of a tax on the value of land on which houses are built.

Mr Clegg told BBC1’s Andrew Marr Show: “I strongly suspect, given that we have put so much effort and indeed  so much money into making the tax system fairer, tax fairness will of course be one of the signature tunes for the Liberal Democrats.”

He added: “In my view it is going to be more likely than not that in the future you’re going to get more coalitions. It is less likely that you’re going to get these slam-dunk results when one or the other of the two major parties always gets a majority.”

The YouGov poll, commissioned by the Labour Uncut blog, shows that a majority (53 per cent) of current Tory supporters believe their party has got better since the last election, with only 11 per cent saying it has got worse. Among Labour supporters, the figures are 46 per cent and 14 per cent respectively.

There is some good news in the survey for Mr Clegg. It found that Labour supporters are much more open to a Lib-Lab coalition that includes Mr Clegg than Ed Miliband appears to be. The Labour leader has said it would be difficult to reach a deal with the Liberal Democrats unless they change their leader.

Some 21 per cent of Labour supporters say the party should form a coalition with the Liberal Democrats even if Mr Clegg remains at the helm, while 33 per cent would back a deal only if he is replaced and 36 per cent want no deal with the Liberal Democrats no matter who leads the party. Eight-seven per cent of Labour supporters who want Mr Clegg replaced would allow him to stay on to form a government with Labour if the alternative was another Lib-Con coalition, while just 4 per cent of those people would rather see a repeat of the current Government than do any deal with Mr Clegg. This means that overall, 50 per cent of Labour supporters would back a Miliband-Clegg partnership to prevent another Con-Lib coalition, while 40 per cent would not.

YouGov interviewed a nationally representative sample of 1,593 adults between 30 August and 4 September.

Somehow I don’t believe that LibDems would see this happen on the grounds of that it’s to their advantage to remain in the coalition with the Conservatives. If there should be another coalition(god forbid) they want to hang on to power which would not be to Labour advantage nor do I advocate that Labour should go into coalition with the Conservatives either let me make it clear I would like to see a return of a Labour Government instead no ifs or buts.

Sure many Labour activists may have concerns with the party but at least we do our fight inside of the party instead of outside which brings about a healthy debates in which way how Labour can return to government but at the same Labour should not be complacent either. Next year Labour will be fielding candidates for European and Local Elections then in 2915 there will be two elections Local and General Elections which Labour must take the lead some will say that’s being optimistic. For myself I say it is achieved but it will take time.

Five years in opposition is a long time in government on 21 September Labour will be holding its conference and Ed Miliband will have to give an extra ordinary speech to the undecided voters, swingers, and Labour supporters to bring home the message why is Labour is in waiting to be the next government what are Labour alternatives to the economy, welfare, long time unemployment, high youth unemployment, crime prevention, public services, bedroom tax, Europe, HS2, truly affordable social housing, and the list goes on.

In regards to Europe there are many activists wants to know where Labour stands will it offer a referendum to hop in or out. Let’s be clear that Labour did very well in Europe where they did some hard negotiations to ensure Labour policies was enshrine in the European Parliament which benefit UK citizens for this reason many Labour activists including myself will be traveling across the UK to ensure we will get a Labour victory in European elections. For Labour activists who have some spare time on their hands contact your regional office for transport details or general information where your support is needed nearer the time.

We all aware that other political parties will be fielding their candidates but Labour should not take for granted that we will defeat all the parties be-aware of the our foes BNP and UKIP they will be spreading their Far Right Agenda to gain votes from the disillusion voters which Labour must try to win over to stand a chance to win both European and Local Elections in 2014 and again for Local and General Elections in 2015 which is a lot of grounds to cover.

The general feeling that our Labour activists are picking up the mood from the doorsteps is:

1) many on some form of benefits want to see an end to the bedroom tax, job creation, proper training which leads to qualifications which will lead to full time employment.

2) Low and Middle incomes want to see the Living Wages enshrine into law and more family friendly policies reintroduced such as SureStart which benefited those at the point of need.

3) The reintroduction of train to gain to obtain qualifications to stand a chance for full time employment which manufacturing industry recognizes.

4) There are some people who were forced to take redundancies owing to economic changes needs to feel valued and offered encouragement to gain employment and not forgotten by previous and present governments.

I’m sure many more can be done but it takes time. Recently I was on a campaign trail I was in discussion with a person who told me of their predicament. This person ran their own business with two other partners for 23 years and decided to return to collage after losing their job to better themselves to stand a chance to gain some well-earned qualifications to learn new skills only to be informed by three collages that the person was over qualified and the price range was out of reach to the person in concern.

All the person wanted to do was to convert their expertise in management that he or she learned over the years for them to turn it into a qualification which would be of beneficial to any campaniles to employ them.

Since the formation of this coalition many have witnessed first-hand at the amount of cut backs and hardships yet many people who are very low and middle incomes have to queue up at food banks to help make ends meet.  Instead of this coalition offer assistance they constantly are told “We’re all in it together and it’s Labour fault well the record has been worn out with scratches that the many has no confidence with this coalition they want to see a change of government.

Liberal Democrats Voted against their own policy(Mansion Tax)


 

photo(2)My thoughts on Mansion Tax:

Yesterday members of parliament voted on Mansion Tax proposed by Labour Party. Why am I not surprised that the cockroach party( Liberal Democrats) voted with their coalition partners(Conservatives) against the motion which is very simple they could not afford to a split with their bed partners and cause a massive division in its ranks as the Cockroach chief whip had went around informing them not to vote with Labour.

Although the Mansion Tax was the idea of the cockroach party policy Labour wanted to put them on the spot which played into the Labour party hands which they could turn around to say to the public the cockroach party voted against their own policy which then puts them in a position to say to the cockroach party supporters that they cannot be trusted in 2015.

The interesting part is if the cockroach party went with Labour Party on this one then this would allow the 10p rate come into the backdoor of the mansion tax to help low paid with their income tax.

 

conservative-liberal-democrat-logo-468965850I can remember when the Labour group in Birmingham West Midlands were in opposition the group put forward a motion on a local issue like wheelie bins the Birmingham coalition voted against it as that would have split the Birmingham Cockroach Party with the Nasty Party(Conservatives Party) that is one example there were other example but I chose to use the wheelie bins

See article below:

MPs have rejected Labour calls for a “mansion tax” on properties worth more than £2m to be introduced before the next general election.

Conservative and Lib Dem MPs joined forces to defeat the move by 63 votes after a Commons debate.

The Lib Dems, who support the principle of such a tax, said Labour were simply trying to exploit coalition differences over the issue in an “infantile” move.

But Labour accused the Lib Dems of “suppressing their principles”.

Labour recently adopted the idea of a mansion tax, first put forward by the Lib Dems in opposition but opposed by the Tories, saying it would pay for the reinstatement of the 10 pence income tax band scrapped by Gordon Brown in 2009.

Labour urged the Lib Dems to back it in a Commons vote, but its motion calling for a mansion tax to be introduced at the earliest opportunity to “fund a tax cut for millions of people on middle and low incomes” was defeated by 304 votes to 241.

A subsequent amendment put forward by David Cameron and Nick Clegg in which the coalition partners put on record their different positions on the issue but stated their agreement on other tax matters and achievements in office was approved by 55 votes.

Lib Dem housing minister Don Foster said this enabled the party’s MPs to “reiterate their support” for the idea without putting the coalition’s future at risk.

Labour, he argued, was “trying to drive a wedge” between the coalition partners in an “infantile” and “cynical” manner. “Both parties know where they stand (on the mansion tax) and the public is also clear,” he said.

Making his party’s case, Shadow Treasury Minister Chris Leslie said the mansion tax would narrow what he said was a growing gap between low and middle income workers and the “top 1%”, who were set to benefit from an income tax cut while others were “squeezed”.

‘Clinging to power’

Mr Leslie said it would be “astonishing” if the party did not endorse a policy from its 2010 manifesto and suggested it would demonstrate that they were “suppressing their principles in a bid to cling onto power”.

The Lib Dems originally announced the policy at their 2009 party conference but were quickly forced to rethink the threshold for properties that would be covered, raising it from £1m to £2m, amid concerns about the number of people who would be affected.

Chancellor George Osborne and other leading Conservatives have long opposed the idea and it has never become coalition policy. However, it remains Lib Dem policy and retains support among activists and MPs.

The Lib Dems said on Monday they would not be voting with Labour and would instead back an amendment stating that “the part of the coalition led by the deputy prime minister (Nick Clegg)” advocates the idea, while “the part of the coalition led by the prime minister does not”.

The amendment, also backed by Conservative MPs, set out the areas of tax policy that the two parties agree, such as their goal of raising the threshold at which people start to pay income tax to £10,000 by the end of the current Parliament.

‘Pathetic’

According to Labour, there are about 70,000 homes currently worth more than £2m – half of which are second homes. Although the party acknowledges the detail of the policy will have to be worked out, it believes it could raise an estimated £2bn.

Speaking in Tuesday’s debate, Lib Dem MP Stephen Williams said he agreed property wealth in the UK was “woefully under-taxed” but he said Labour were wrong to link the mansion tax to the re-introduction of the 10p tax band, describing it as a “completely ineffective” measure.

Conservative Treasury minister David Gauke said Labour had done “little or nothing” to increase taxes on expensive property transactions while in government but had now “converted” to the idea for “transparently political purposes”.

“It is pathetic, it is insincere and lacks any sense of credibility,” he told MPs.

Labour had not committed to including the policy in its next manifesto, he suggested, and he contrasted the coalition’s move to lift the starting point at which people begin paying tax with Labour’s decision to scrap the 10p tax band.

In last year’s Budget, the coalition raised stamp duty on sales of properties worth more than £2m to 7% and increased the levy on properties bought via a company to 15%. However, the Lib Dems say they want to do more to shift the burden on tax away from work to assets.

 

All eyes will be at the Eastleigh Byelections


labour1All eyes will be focus in Eastleigh Byelection so far there has been visits from leaders of the three main political parties to boost their support for their candidates. There is no doubt the political temperature will continue to increase.

There has been more than a large presence of the Liberal Democrats (Fibdems)  mobs  has called in from other parts of the UK to support their candidate. The question is will they hold on to their seat and does the Conservatives do their candidate and any justice by sending in Boris Johnson to help their candidate?

photo(2)No doubt there will be a winner and a loser in this coming byelection there has been calls across the UK for Labour members to come down to  across the country will descend to support our Labour candidate John O’Farrel.  I wish John the success that is needed to win the seat.

I understand from friends of mine that lives and work in Eastleigh that it’s a Fibdems control so it’s natural for them to defend the seat . On the other side of the coin I would love to see Conservatives and Fibdems do battle against each other as they are in bed together as the coalition partner in crime. It’s like having two dragons in the same room that spark fireworks against each other in the doorstep.

The message I’m receiving is Labour is getting their message on the doorstep which is positive and look forward to see a Labour victory at the ballot box if you do have some spare time do come down to help you can contact John O’Farrel campaign team at 69 Leigh Road Eastleigh Hampshire SO50 9DF

See article below:

Boris Johnson joined the Eastleigh by-election battle, declaring “it is a Conservative’s constitutional duty to kick the Liberal Democrats”.

The mayor of London is the latest senior politician to visit ahead of next week’s vote.

Mr Johnson met Conservative candidate Maria Hutchings and joined her going door-to-door to meet constituents.

Lib Dem schools minister David Laws said the forthcoming vote is serious and is “not about Boris Johnson”.

During his visit to the Hampshire constituency, Mr Johnson described his party’s coalition partners as the “Fib Dems” and called them “great big wobbling jellies of indecision”.

But Mr Laws said: “It’s about choosing somebody who’s the right champion for Eastleigh in the future.

“It’s not about Boris Johnson; it’s about Mike Thornton and the other candidates.”

Labour candidate John O’Farrell was also campaigning in Eastleigh, while UKIP announced that two former Lib Dem councillors have joined the party.

The full list of candidates in alphabetical order is:

  • COLIN BEX – Wessex regionalists
  • DAVID BISHOP – Elvis Loves Pets Party
  • JIM DUGGAN – Peace Party
  • RAY HALL – Beer, Baccy and Crumpet Party
  • HOWLING LAUD HOPE – Monster Raving Loony William Hill Party
  • MARIA HUTCHINGS – Conservative
  • DIANE JAMES – UK Independence Party
  • DR IAIN MACLENNAN – National Health Action Party
  • KEVIN MILBURN – Christian Party “Proclaiming Christ’s Lordship”
  • JOHN O’FARRELL – Labour
  • DARREN PROCTER – Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition
  • DANNY STUPPLE – Independent
  • MIKE THORNTON – Liberal Democrats
  • MICHAEL WALTERS – The English Democrats – “Putting England First!”