BLEAK 2012 IN PROSPECT BUT LABOUR OFFERS HOPE

Polly Toynbee wrote in today’s Guardian that in her political lifetime, she “has never seen a more callous or inept crew in charge.” I couldn’t agree more.

The New Year will see even more cuts and the prospect of the country lurching into another recession looms large.

The callous incompetence of this dreadful Tory-Lib Dem coalition makes a toxic governmental cocktail that is plunging Britain into a modern-day Dickensian era.

The rich kids in charge at the top of our Government have never wanted for anything in their lives. The pandered brats have grown into adult brutes dishing out misery on people less fortunate than themselves.

They lived their childhoods and adolescent years in a cocooned world where their whims were indulged and their privileged adult lives are a million miles from the rest of us.

And yet they continually spout their Orwellian mantra that “we’re all in it together”. What utter tosh!

Even Margaret Thatcher’s reign was not as cold-hearted as these Bullingdon bully boys and their obsequious quisling collaborators in the Lib Dems.

With almost 2,000 people losing their job every day and pitiless benefit cuts coming into effect, 2012 will be a bleak year indeed for the victims of Messrs Cameron, Osborne and Clegg.

That is why we must stand up for the role of "the state" in generating economic growth and regulating capitalism. The ‘state’ AKA ‘big government’ is despised by those advantaged Tory Ministers but it provides a lifeline to millions of ordinary people.

Let’s remember ‘big-government’ is doctors, nurses, teachers, park keepers, police, fire-fighters, tax collectors, social workers, street cleaners and others occupations that make our society a decent place to live.

Let’s remind people that Labour Governments use the state to improve life for most people. From lower crime to reducing NHS waiting lists and better chances for more children to improved security in old age.

Labour must offer hope in 2012 and with more local authorities likely to go Labour in May’s council elections, Labour in local government can act as a bulwark against Government excesses.

Mr Cameron might well have secured a short term bounce from his EU veto, but as the cuts bite even harder in 2012, the cruel Tory truth will emerge. That is why Labour must remain the standard-bearer for fairness in the New Year showing people there is a better and a fairer way forward.

TWO THIRDS SAY NO TO REPEAL OF HUNTING ACT

A poll commissioned by the League Against Cruel Sports has shown that a free vote on repeal of the Hunting Act is the least popular pledge on animal related issues by the Tory-Lib Dem coalition. YouGov polled 2,126 adults between 14th - 16th December

The results released today, the most popular day on the hunting calendar, show that just 6% of people ranked bringing forward a free vote on repeal, as the most important pledge among a selection of animal related commitments by the coalition Government.

Almost half of people asked (48%) rated it as the least important.

Targeting irresponsible owners of dangerous dogs was seen to be the most important action with nearly a third of people (32%) saying they believed this to be the top priority from a choice of animal welfare commitments.

The poll by YouGov found support for the Hunting Act remains consistently strong with 69% agreeing that the ban on hunting wild animals with dogs should remain in place. Just 22% said they disagreed with this while 9% said they didn’t know.

It comes as no surprise that the public has shown there is no appetite to waste parliamentary time on voting to repeal the Hunting Act. The figures speak for themselves and poll after poll show that the public support for the Hunting Act is overwhelmingly high.

The vast majority have absolutely no desire to see wild animals being legally abused, chased to exhaustion and then torn apart in our countryside.

The League recently published a report showing the extent of artificial fox earths being maintained in areas known to be used by hunts. An undercover operation has recorded undisputable evidence that individuals, believed to be from the hunting community are encouraging foxes in artificial earths.

League investigators have found evidence of earths which have been built or renovated since the passing of the Hunting Act where food and water is being supplied. The evidence has been passed to relevant local authority trading standards departments and where appropriate, the police where investigations are ongoing.

.

FEARS FOR BRITISH BUSINESS IN DERBY AS UK LOSES VITAL INFLUENCE AFTER EU SUMMIT

As the ramifications emerge from David Cameron’s decision to walk away from the negotiating table and use the UK’s veto at the recent European Council, it is increasingly clear that British business is now worried.

There is uncertainty for business looking to plan for the long-term. There are concerns over the impact on exports, on inward investment and whether global firms will put their operations in Britain. There are worries over our influence of the operation of the single market, the biggest market for British firms.

Business leaders have asked what it will mean for Britain’s economy. The CBI’s Director General John Cridland has said that we are in “uncharted territory” and has questioned whether, given the UK’s increasing isolation, whether we will “still be in a position to stop new financial regulations that come about as the eurozone becomes more integrated”.

These concerns have been echoed by the body representing British manufacturers, the EEF: “it's going to affect how we engage with our EU partners on a daily basis”. Sir Martin Sorrell, boss of FTSE 100 firm WPP, has said: “I’d prefer to be inside the tent not outside. Change is easier to achieve from within. It seems to be more about politics than economics.”

The Prime Minister claimed he used the UK’s veto to protect the financial services sector. However, no safeguards were won. Financial regulation is decided by qualified majority voting at European Councils - this was true before the Prime Minister’s veto, and afterwards - and the UK has never lost a vote in this area. But following recent events, the fear is that Britain’s ability to marshal a majority has been compromised and we will be shut out of discussions on financial services regulation. In short, our ability to defend financial services in the UK has been hampered, not enhanced.

The implementation of the Financial Transaction Tax – another ‘justification’ for the veto - wasn’t on the agenda of the Council meeting and in any case a Financial Transaction Tax could only have been implemented following a unanimous vote by all member states of the EU. This was true before the meeting and is true after. Again this questions the rationale of David Cameron’s decision.

But there are now real concerns being expressed by British businesses that firms will lose out following the UK’s loss of influence in the single market. They say Britain’s ability to attract inward investment could be weakened and global corporations could be less likely to set up operations or European headquarters in the UK in the future. Businesses are worried about the uncertainty that has been created.

On top of this, the Prime Minister’s decision has done nothing to tackle instability and the lack of growth in the Eurozone which, as our main export market, is crucial for our firms.

These are challenging times ahead for firms and that is why I‘m going out talking to local businesses, including larger firms with operations and offices in our area, to understand their concerns so I can press the Government on what this means for jobs and growth here in Derby.

STOP THIS ECONOMIC TAILSPIN BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE

HOW much longer is this Government going to pursue its catastrophic economic experiment that is having such a devastating impact on jobs and prosperity?

More families are facing Christmas without a job than at any time since the Conservative Party was last in power in the early 1990s.

Last month saw unemployment hitting a new high and the depressing fact is that there is no end to this misery in sight. In the last three months alone, for every job created in the private sector 13 jobs were lost in the public sector.

But what is so extraordinary is that the Government continues telling us that there is no alternative, even though its policies are going so spectacularly wrong.

Youth unemployment is up by 54,000 and now stands at 1,027,000. Long-term unemployment among people aged 50 plus has gone up by 21.3% since January and the number of unemployed women is the highest it has been since 1988.

The truth is the country is crying out for a different approach. Labour's five-point plan for jobs and growth offers a way for the Chancellor to halt the frightening economic tailspin the Government's policies have caused.

On Wednesday, the House of Commons debated a Labour motion urging the Government to reconsider its refusal to adopt our plan.

We argued getting people back to work was a better way to reduce the deficit and secure Britain's future economic prosperity.

But the combined voting strength of Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs meant that Labour's motion was defeated.

The five-point plan includes creating 100,000 jobs for young people and building 25,000affordable homes using funds raised from a tax on bank bonuses.

It also incorporates bringing forward long-term investment projects, temporarily reversing January's VAT rise and a one-year cut in VAT to 5% on home improvements.

These measures would generate jobs and growth, as would our proposal to give small firms, which take on extra workers, a one-year national insurance tax break.

But if the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats won't listen to Labour, they should at least take account of the considered view of the International Monetary Fund.

The IMF has said if the economy continues to stagnate the Government should slow the pace of cuts and tax rises.

However, it seems this Tory-led Government is determined to plunge us into a new Dickensian era. There are parallels with Charles Dickens novel 'A Christmas Carol' and George Osborne seems to be doing his best to emulate Ebenezer Scrooge.

People will remember Scrooge was a cold-hearted, tight-fisted and greedy man, who despised Christmas and all things which gave people happiness. The evidence of the last 18 months suggests that Scrooge would have certainly fitted the job description for a modern-day Tory Chancellor of the Exchequer.

But in the end, Scrooge did at least redeem himself by changing his ways and I hope Mr Osborne will do likewise. I have just sent him copy of 'A Christmas Carol' in the hope that he adopts the moral of this Dickensian tale. Time will tell if he does.

TORIES LIVING IN FANTASYLAND ABOUT EU TREATY

BUDGET CONTROL
Tory myth: “We didn’t sign the treaty because we do not want our tax and spending decisions to be made in Brussels.” (Michael Fallon 10 December 2011, BBC: “Michael Fallon.... said the UK did not want its tax and spending decisions to be made in Brussels”)

Truth: There was never a suggestion that countries outside the Eurozone be forced to follow tax and spending rules set by anyone. The Statement is signed by the Euro heads of state or government, and the provisions for a “fiscal stability union” explicitly apply only in the Euro area. The countries outside the Eurozone that have agreed to sign the treaty will not lose any fiscal policy control as a result of this treaty, and the summit statement commits them only to “indicate the possibility to take part in this process after consulting their Parliaments when appropriate”.


FINANCIAL TRANSACTION TAX
Tory myth: “We didn’t sign the treaty to prevent the other 26 EU countries from imposing a financial transaction tax on Britain” (Daily Telegraph, 9 December 2011, “Tories fear an enhanced euro group could try to impose a financial transactions tax on Britain”)

Truth: The EU summit changed nothing. We have always had a veto on new taxes that would apply in the UK, ever since we joined the European Economic Community nearly 40 years ago. We had a veto on Thursday and we have a veto now.


THE NEW TREATY AND EU INSTITUTIONS
Tory myth: “We didn’t sign the treaty to prevent the new treaty from being justiciable under EU institutions.” (George Osborne’s claim: "We've protected all these industries from the development of eurozone integration spilling over and affecting the non-euro members of the European Union.”)

Truth: Not signing the treaty has made no difference to whether or not the treaty will use EU institutions, and in particular whether the European Court of Justice will have jurisdiction and be able to build case law based on the treaty. Article 273 of the EU Treaty says “The Court of Justice shall have jurisdiction in any dispute between Member States which relates to the subject matter of the Treaties if the dispute is submitted to it under a special agreement between the parties.”


PROTECTING FINANCIAL SERVICES
Tory myth: “We didn’t sign the treaty to protect the City of London from destructive European regulation in the future.” (David Cameron, repeatedly)

Truth: There is not a single reference to financial services in the 16 paragraphs of the Euro heads of state conclusions published on Friday. Irrespective of that, by not signing the treaty, we have failed to secure a single safeguard for UK financial services going forward. We have no assurances about whether financial services will be discussed by the new monthly meetings of the 26 EU countries.


SINGLE MARKET AND MAJORITY VOTING
Tory myth: “We didn’t sign the treaty to protect the City of London against majority voting in the future.”

Truth: Financial services, like all other aspects of the single market (except tax), have always been decided by qualified majority voting. David Cameron’s proposals were not about the future treaty but about undermining the existing treaty: his proposal was to unpick the rules of the single market that have been in place since Margaret Thatcher’s Single European Act was passed 25 years ago.

David Cameron’s vision of the single market is incoherent. The single market is overwhelmingly in our national interest, and – as Lord Cockfield and Margaret Thatcher understood – it requires majority voting among the 27 countries to function properly. If every country could carve out protection for their chosen industry, there would be no common rules across the market in which 60% of our exporters do their business, and the single market would fall apart.

THE SELFISH CITY WON'T REPAY A NATIONAL SACRIFICE

The Independent published this excellent article on Saturday 10 December 2011 by Nicholas Faith


Let us hope that the City – and above all the hedge funds which contributed so generously to the Tory war chest – are happy.

For in the early hours of yesterday, David Cameron made it clear that the well-being of London's financial community was a vital element in Britain's economic well-being. So crucial, in fact, that it formed the key reason – or was it just a convenient excuse? – for the decision to ruin our relationship with the European Union, and above all with its dominant forces, France and Germany.

Cameron's veto of the EU treaty change needed to save the euro could prove an exceedingly expensive gamble, politically and economically for him – and indeed for the whole country. It also turns the spotlight on what the City can do in return for the Prime Minister's loyalty. In theory, it should lead the City to help the rest of a country that has taken such a risk on its behalf. But this would set a historic precedent in 2,000 years which, unfortunately, show that London has always been a selfish, insular place invariably independent from the rest of the country, looking abroad for its living, and perfectly capable of ignoring the wishes of successive governments up-river in distant Whitehall, let alone the needs of the wider economy by providing funds for industrial development.

The City's neglect is based on a fundamental inability to think long term, for the Square Mile has always been a home for traders rather than investors. The tradition of trade and finance has been reinforced by a steady stream of immigrants reaching back over the past two millennia. In Roman times, they came from as far as North Africa. Since then, the City has always flourished because of incomers, Dutch and Danes, Huguenots, Jews – and, today, as many as 300,000 young Frenchmen.
For centuries, the greed and short-sightedness of the City's denizens have made them a target: in the 18th century, Jonathan Swift described the jobbers as "traders waiting for shipwrecks in order to strip the dead". Alexander Pope was just as sharp: "There's London's voice, 'get money, get money'."

The industrial revolution emphasised that the rest of the country lacked any real business connection with London. In the 19th century, great manufacturing cities – Birmingham, Manchester, Middlesbrough – boomed thanks to local finance. The biggest absorbers of capital, the railways, were originally financed by Quakers in the north east and by what was called the "Liverpool interest". As soon as the City got involved, there was the usual pattern of recurrent financial crises. For most of London's company promoters were crooked. During the 19th century, the London markets became steadily less connected with commercial reality. As the great Nathan Meyer Rothschild put it: "I am no trader in goods." By the end of century, the City was investing money everywhere from US railroads to the railway networks of Argentina, often with disastrous results, rather than at home.

There has been one previous attempt to fill the historic finance gap left by the City's reluctance to rally round. In 1945, the newly elected Labour government founded the ICFC (Industrial and Commercial Finance Corporation), funded by the clearing banks. The corporation aroused intense hatred in the City; the clearers declared that it was unnecessary, while the merchant banks hated it because it undercut their fees. Nevertheless, it provided a lot of money to worthy industrial borrowers.

In the early 1970s, the City taught a previous Tory prime minister, Edward Heath, not to rely on it – indeed, demonstrated clearly the damage that it could do to British industry. The damage was the work of a horde of adolescent asset strippers whose antics – mostly in the form of insider trading – destroyed many "ordinary" companies which provided actual goods and services. The leader of the pack – Jim Slater of Slater Walker – put their attitude clearly: "Let's face it: none of us here are interested in management." Their antics infuriated Ted Heath – and contributed to his downfall. As Anthony Sampson pointed out, by the 1980s "the Square Mile of the City has become like an offshore island in the heart of the nation".

Not surprisingly, the Thatcher years led the ICFC astray. In 1987, the banks sold their shares. It was renamed 3i, floated on the stock market, abandoned its former role and mutated into just another private equity fund investing more abroad than at home. Its story shows clearly how the very success of the City in the past 30 years has merely accentuated its irrelevance to the vast majority of British businesses. The City's inhabitants simply became richer, greedier – and more arrogant – fleecing any business foolhardy enough to look to place its shares on the stock market, or simply for capital for investment purposes.

If history was anything to go by, the arrival of a Labour government in 1997 should have helped. Sadly, Gordon Brown took his personal reaction against Old Labour to an extreme degree. Worse, he was obsessed by the City, which he saw as the only possible saviour for the economy and Fred Goodwin of RBS as his beau ideal of a businessman, and we know what that led to. Not surprisingly, barely any manufacturing jobs were created in the West Midlands, traditionally the heartland of the country's manufacturing sector, during his decade at the country's economic helm.

It was only in January 2009 that the improbable figure of Peter Mandelson resuscitated the idea by allocating the pathetic sum of £75m to a new enterprise fund. In the past year, Messrs Cameron and Osborne, the sons of a leading stockbroker and a wallpaper manufacturer respectively, have provided financial help to Britain's small and medium-sized businesses in the form of £1.5bn grant to the regional growth fund. But this was only a pilot scheme which will require the City to put up far more money to salvage manufacturing.

In theory, this week's demonstration of the City's power should at least persuade it to change the habits of two millennia and make a positive contribution to the economic welfare of the majority of the country which provides the nine-tenths of British economic life for which the City is not responsible. There will be an early test of a possible new relationship as the Government tries to persuade investors to provide long-term finance for long-neglected crumbling infrastructure. But the City is such a short-termist community that it may well not show any such gratitude. In fact, its inhabitants may even resent Cameron's support. Just remember the old saying: "Why do you hate me? I have never tried to help you."

CAMERON SELLS BRITAIN SHORT ON EUROPE

By Ed Miliband

This is the most important European summit for a generation and its outcome is looking increasingly worrying for the UK.

We have warned consistently that an isolated David Cameron has been on the sidelines of Europe for months, out of touch abroad in the same way as he is out of touch at home.

He has been hamstrung by the divisions in his own party, imprisoned by the Eurosceptics and his failure to confront his party over the last five years.

There are simple lessons to learn from the Prime Minister's failure last night. If you get out of the deal-making room as he has done over the last year, you end up losing influence. Having no allies is a sign of weakness, not of strength

There are serious questions to answer.

We need an assurance that Mr Cameron has not allowed a deal to emerge that means 25 of the 27 will rewrite the rules of the European economy without the UK in the room.

Will the signatories to the new treaty be able to impose economic barriers to those in the EU but outside the new treaty?

Will this new treaty be run by the EU institutions, and be enforceable in EU courts?

Will the UK have a seat at the table when vital economic decisions are taken?

Have we now got the two speed Europe Britain has always opposed, but without any of the safeguards the Prime Minister promised to deliver?

And for all the talk of treaty change, where is the plan for growth and jobs that should have been the other focus of this EU summit?

The list of questions are long and the answers will affect the jobs and lives of all British people.

We should have ensured an agreement that reflected a simple principle: decisions affecting all 27 members of the European Union must be made by the 27.

There is clearly a case for deeper cooperation by the Eurozone countries, but at the heart of British foreign policy, at the heart of our commitment to the EU, must be a basic principle that the future of the single market and future European cooperation is shaped by all the countries who are part of it, not just those who share the single currency.

The lesson for the Prime Minister is that to treat Europe as merely an excuse for the failure of your economic policy, or a problem to be negotiated with your backbenchers, serves us ill.

It makes us marginal to the big decisions on Europe. It is no way to run a foreign policy. And it lets down our country.

PROSPECTS FOR CONSTRUCTION WEAKEN AS NEW ORDERS FALL

The prospects for a recovery in construction output has weakened still further. The latest new orders figures from the Office of National Statics for the third quarter showed a fall of more than 5% compared with the same quarter last year. New orders in the first nine months of 2011 are 14% lower than in the same period last year.

Commenting on these figures, the Construction Products Association Chief Executive, Michael Ankers said: “Although new orders have improved since the previous quarter, this is still the lowest figure for Q3 since 1980. As expected the fall is sharpest in public sector construction – education, health, and social housing - and although there is some pick up in orders for private sector commercial work, this is heavily focused in London and the south east and is not strong enough to compensate for the sharp decline in orders for public sector work.

“Last week’s Autumn Statement brought the prospect of increased investment in infrastructure but the government’s figures show that this will not have any significant impact until 2013 at the earliest. As a result, and in the light of today’s new orders figures, the industry needs to brace itself for an even sharper fall in output in 2012 than that already anticipated.”

CAMERON'S NHS PLANS WILL COST DERBY ALMOST £18 MILLION

The hidden cost of the Government’s wasteful NHS reorganisation in Derby has been exposed. New guidelines will force the local NHS to put aside £17,723,338 from their budget this year and next to pay for a costly NHS restructure that David Cameron repeatedly ruled out.

These shocking new figures show the Government’s reorganisation is costing the NHS even more than I first feared. It is scandalous that our local NHS is being forced to hold back millions of pounds for the Tory led Government’s reckless plans whilst thousands of nursing jobs are being axed.

Derby has already seen a 224% increase in the number of patients waiting longer than 18 weeks for treatment since Cameron became Prime Minister.

Before his plans are even fully through Parliament, David Cameron's reorganisation is hitting the NHS hard and costs are now topping £3.4bn across the country for the first time. Spending this amount on an unnecessary reorganisation is totally unjustifiable when every single penny should be focused on maintaining standards of care.

At the election Cameron ruled out top-down NHS reorganisations. But only weeks after entering Number 10, he ripped up his own words and ordered the biggest and most dangerous upheaval of the NHS since it began.

The financial request is buried in the Government’s new NHS 'Operating Framework' document and takes the nationwide cost of the NHS reorganisation above previous estimates of £2-3bn, with Primary Care Trusts now holding back £3.44bn over two years.

The Bill will break up the NHS and create an unfair postcode lottery. With no national standards, there will be widespread variation in the treatments available on the NHS. In some areas, people may have to go private to get services available for free elsewhere.

The Bill risks even more rises in waiting times and a two-tier NHS. It scraps the cap on hospitals treating private patients at the same time as watering down guarantees on NHS waiting times. This means local hospitals will be free to treat more private patients and make NHS patients wait longer.

The Bill turns the NHS into a full-blown commercial market, putting competition before patient care. It allows private companies to cherry-pick quick profits, potentially forcing local hospitals to go bust. Hospitals could even be fined for working together.

The Bill undermines the bond of trust between doctors and patients. It creates conflicts of interest where financial incentives could interfere with medical decisions. GPs could even get a bonus for rationing patient care.

This Bill is wasting money and creating bureaucracy. It is unforgivable to spend £3.5 billion across the country on a reckless re-organisation when the NHS needs every penny it can get for patient care. Nearly £1 billion is being wasted on pay-offs for managers, only for many of them to be re-employed as consultants.

Last Thursday evening leading doctors from the British Medical Association voted to call for an immediate halt to the Government’s costly and controversial Health Bill.

People in Derby didn’t vote for it and our doctors, nurses and patients have already expressed huge concerns at the plans. Yet Cameron is ploughing on with his Health Bill, ignoring public and professional opinion. The time has come for him to listen, put the NHS first and drop his dangerous Bill.

Labour is running a major national drive to unite the country in a call on the Government to drop its unwanted Health Bill I would urge people to add their name to the Government online petition by Dr Kailash Chand at epetitions.direct.gov.uk.

Labour’s Health team will be coming to Derby 19 January to help me launch a petition against these dreadful plans.