BORIS JOHNSON JEOPARDISES FIRE SAFETY IN LONDON

London Mayor, Boris Johnson, has overruled the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority who said his cuts programme went too far.

Johnson is insisting that 12 fire stations must close, 18 engines must be decommissioned and 520 firefighter posts must be slashed in the capital.

These cuts are a reckless, but the Mayor of London is implementing them without a whisper of dissent. Meanwhile the Tory Fire Minister is away with the fairies. In the parallel universe where he lives, he says he’s “been clear” that cuts “should be made without adversely affecting the frontline services.”

I thought a more absurd comment about the impact of the cuts on the fire and rescue service would be impossible, but Boris Johnson has managed it. He says: “This must and will be about improving London’s fire service”. http://tinyurl.com/acwqur2

With doublespeak like that, Johnson ought to rename City Hall as the ‘Ministry of Truth’.

The FBU’s regional secretary said: “The mayor is jeopardising the safety of millions of Londoners”.  This is something that is happening throughout the country courtesy of this Tory-Lib Dem Government.

HALF A MILLION WOMEN LOSE OUT ON STATE PENSION REFORMS

House of Commons Library research released by Labour reveals the true cost of last week’s pension reforms to 1200 women in Derby who are set to lose out.


Women born between April 1952 and July 1953 will retire before 2017 and will not be eligible for the single tier pension. For example, a woman born in October 1952 will retire at age 63 in 2015. This means that she will draw the basic weekly pension of £107.45 (in today’s prices) when she retires.

The news comes after the Government claimed that "we have to be absolutely transparent [about who will lose]” yet he failed to make clear the full consequences of the planned reforms.

The unravelling of this latest Pensions announcement is the second time this government has been caught trying to hide the full impact of its changes for pensioners following the Granny Tax.

Ministers have been caught red-handed hiding the truth on pensions reforms. This government’s pensions changes have hit working women in Derby time and again and these reforms are no different. There are 430,500 women across the country and well over 1,200 Derby who will be nearly £2,000 worse off compared to men. But instead of being honest with the women that will lose out, this government tried to bury the truth.

Once again Ministers have been caught with their hands in pensioners pockets – it’s about time this government had the decency to be honest about who will lose out under their plans.

PATHETIC AND WEAK TORIES AND LIB DEMS ABONDON DERBY

I WONDER if there has ever been a local campaign to lobby Government that has prompted personal interventions from both the Prime Minister and his Deputy.  Yet that is exactly what the Fair Deal for Derby campaign, which highlights the disproportionate cuts affecting the city, has achieved.

The thousands of people who signed the petition demanding that the city be given a fair deal should feel proud of standing up for Derby.

Unfortunately, Derby’s Conservative and Liberal Democrat groups have taken a different view. 
Perhaps they think it is fair that Derby taxpayers have been hit by cuts equating to £75 per head, while in more affluent areas the cut is less than £10.  They claim the campaign, and in particular the commendable role Derby City Council has played in it, has been wasteful and ineffective.

How wasteful can it be to properly consult Derby’s residents over a budget bounded by the most devastating regime of public service cuts in living memory?  The Labour-led council has shown great courage by laying its cards on the table and telling the public: “This is the impact of the Government’s cuts to our funding – something has got to give.”  As for ineffective? I’ve never heard such nonsense.

The truth is that it is precisely because of the effectiveness of Fair Deal for Derby that the Tories and Lib Dems have withdrawn their support.  It is no coincidence that Tory leader Philip Hickson made his announcement days after David Cameron visited the city and was asked about it directly by this very newspaper.

But while Mr Hickson was still busy making his excuses, his Lib Dem counterpart Hilary Jones failed miserably to mask the reasons behind her party’s decision.  Instead, she openly admitted that her party “decided” to withdraw its funding after she met with Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg.

How pathetic. How weak. How predictable!

Derby’s Tories and Lib Dems have clearly put national party politics before local responsibility. 
If they didn’t want to support the Fair Deal for Derby campaign, why didn’t they say so when it was debated by Derby City Council only a few months ago?

The fact is neither the Tories nor Lib Dems ever really supported the campaign, they just felt obliged to publicly back it for fear of recriminations if they didn’t.  I’m not aware of a single Tory or Lib Dem councillor among the thousands who signed the petition. I’m quite certain none of them joined myself or others in canvassing for support, even when it did have cross-party backing. Indeed on one occasion, a prominent Conservative Councillor refused to sign when I was collecting signatures for the petition in East Street.

At least now they’ve nailed their colours firmly to the mast. A fair deal for Derby? It’s simply not on their agenda or in their vocabulary.  Mr Hickson and Mrs Jones would do well to remember it was not their allies in Westminster who elected them, but the people of Derby.

A THIRD OF BUILDING FIRMS MAY HAVE TO AXE STAFF

THE decline in the construction industry is continuing apace as the Tory-Lib Dem Government’s austerity experiment continues to fail. Now the Federation of Master Builders (FMB) has warned that a third of all small to medium-sized building firms fear they will have to reduce staffing levels this year.

The pessimistic outlook for the building industry comes from the FMB’s latest State of Trade Survey. These showed that builders’ workloads decreased last year and are expected to keep falling, at least for the first half of 2013. Many firms said they may have to introduce price rises as overheads continue to eat into profit margins and the likelihood of lay-offs looms large.

The FMB are calling for a reduction in VAT on building work to make homes more energy-efficient to help provide an immediate boost for small builders. This would boost the economy, helping householders save money on their fuel bills and reduce carbon emissions.

Overall the FMB’s latest State of Trade Survey results showed:

 Workloads continued to decrease in all sectors: The pace of contraction slowed down in the housing sectors, but the opposite was true for non-residential parts of the industry.

 The composite indicator continues its downward trend across all regions and devolved nations: Across the board all 12 regions and devolved nations experienced negative indicators; with just three (Wales, Northern Ireland and London) seeing their rate of decline slowing down. The downward trend was particularly pronounced in Scotland, the North of England, the East Midlands and the South West.

 Output prices, wages and salaries and material costs are all expected to go up in the coming six months: Although in the case of output prices and wages and salaries the vast majority of firms stated no change at 60 per cent and 77 per cent respectively.

 SME employment continued to decline in Q4: The overall expected employment levels are predicted to fall at a slower rate over the next six months and specialist builders reported a positive balance for first time since the first quarter of 2011.

Brian Berry, the FMB’s Chief Executive, said: “The construction industry is on a knife-edge. If the Government does not act swiftly and decisively to support SME builders – the backbone of the British construction industry – then we will undoubtedly see more firms going to the wall and job losses across the board in 2013.”

WHOLE PERSON CARE IS ESSENTIAL

YESTERDAY Labour’s Shadow Health Secretary Andy Burnham set out how Labour would deliver better health and care in an era when money remains tight. This is in contrast to the Tory-led Government’s decision to spend billions on an unnecessary top-down re-organisation of the NHS and cut thousands of nursing posts.


Labour’s vision is an NHS committed to ‘whole-person care’, bringing together physical health, mental health and social care into a single service to meet our care needs.

There is a huge sustainability challenge in an era where there’s less money around. But the Tories and their Lib Dem allies are choosing to spend billions on an unnecessary and damaging top-down re-organisation of the NHS.

There are now 3 million people over 80 and this will nearly double by 2030. But under the Tories we are seeing the social care system collapsing, with rising charges for families and an ever-greater burden on the NHS.

There are also increasing numbers of people with complex needs, mental health problems, or long-term conditions. Conditions, such as diabetes and asthma, are set to rise from 15 million today to 18 million by 2025. But the Tories’ marketisation is fragmenting care, not integrating it.

At the moment, we have 3 fragmented systems dealing with different aspects of health & care: physical health in acute hospitals; mental health often in separate services on the fringes of the NHS; and social care in council-run services.

This has two big problems.

Firstly it’s a system that works for Whitehall, but not for people.

Older people being passed from pillar to post by different professionals and different points of contact. People in hospitals or A&E with mental health problems find themselves in a system that is only treating their knee or their liver. A quarter of all patients admitted to hospital with a physical illness also have a mental health condition that, in most cases, is not treated while the patient is in hospital. Furthermore, people with mental health problems often find their physical health neglected. Those with serious mental health problems die on average 15 years earlier than everyone else.

Secondly, it’s wasting billions and we end up paying for failure.

People with physical illnesses can find themselves struggling with undiagnosed mental health problems. Untreated mental illness costs the NHS around £10 billion each year. When care services are cut by local authorities the NHS ends up picking up the pieces – even though it is far more expensive to treat someone in hospital.

I’ve always believed that rather than paying for failure, with payments for people coming through the hospital door, it would be better to prevent them needing hospital treatment in the first place

Where local council care services are inadequate, people can’t be discharged from hospital because when help is not there at home. This is costing the NHS £4 million a week.

That is why I am delighted that Andy Burnham has set out Labour’s alternative solution – ‘whole-person care’. This is a radical shift to bring our health & care services into the 21st Century. Instead of three separate services treating different bits of a person, Andy is proposing a single service to meet a person’s care needs.

This will have real benefits compared to the Tories’ plans for increased fragmentation, which include:

1. not paying for failure, but preventing people becoming ill and keeping them out of hospital.

2. not dismantling the NHS but joining up services to create a single point of contact to coordinate all your care needs.

3. more care provided in people’s own home – offering more choice & control about how and where people are treated.

4. giving mental health as much priority as physical health.

5. new rights in the NHS constitution, providing clear national entitlements for care, ending the postcode lottery, and the right to therapies for mental health problems.

This means the full integration of health and social care, as well as breaking down the barriers between physical and mental health services. Some of the ideas that Labour want to consult on are...

• A single pooled budget – combining the £104bn budget for health and the £15bn budget for social care into a single £119bn budget [illustrative figures for the year 2011/12].

• NHS professionals like GPs, doctors and nurses to play a greater role in coordinating the provision of social care services, and joining them up with other health services.

• More joined-up commissioning of health and care services at local level, with NHS and local-authority commissioners working in partnership.

• A ‘year-of-care’ payment system for those with long-term or complex needs (to replace the current Payment by Results tariff), shifting the incentive to prevention rather than just treatment when things have gone wrong.

This is a perfect illustration of the ‘One Nation’ policy prospectus that Ed Miliband launched in his conference speech last year. In the next two years Labour intends to develop and explain that there is an alternative progressive approach to the politics of austerity and despair being offered by the Conservatives and their Liberal democrat collaborators.

WE MUST REMEMBER TO PREVENT THE HORRORS OF THE HOLOCAUST HAPPENING AGAIN

It is Holocaust Memorial Day on Sunday and the House of Commons held a debate on the issue on Thursday 24 January 2013.  I was given the privilege of winding up the debate on behalf of the Official Opposition.  This is my speech. The full debate can be viewed here.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmhansrd/cm130124/debtext/130124-0003.htm#13012438001799

"I congratulate the hon. Member for Weaver Vale (Graham Evans) on securing this important debate, the most spellbinding that I have been party to in my short period—two and half years—in the House. We have heard incredibly powerful contributions from Members on both sides of the Chamber. I shall say a few words about each of them in turn, if I may.

"My hon. Friend the Member for Leeds North East (Fabian Hamilton) made a moving contribution about his experience, and the experiences of his family and constituents who were holocaust survivors. It must have taken a lot for him to share those experiences, given that they were so close to home.

"My hon. Friend the Member for Liverpool, Riverside (Mrs Ellman) talked about the importance of communicating what happened and the need for ongoing vigilance. She cited examples of Islamophobia and anti-Semitism, which is, incredibly, still going on today, and the need to continue to guard against it. The hon. Member for Ealing Central and Acton (Angie Bray) reminded us of the role that this country played in offering refuge to people fleeing the Nazis, and in defeating the Nazi tyranny that led to the many horrors that we have heard about this afternoon. She stressed the importance of education and ensuring that we, as a nation and a society, continue to remember what happened.

"The hon. Member for Beckenham (Bob Stewart) spoke incredibly powerfully about his time at Belsen, and about seeing the mounds that were mass graves. He spoke about his period in Bosnia, where he saw thousands of victims and witnessed appalling atrocities. I pay tribute to him for sharing his experiences today. He spoke very movingly and powerfully about what he witnessed.

"The hon. Member for Pendle (Andrew Stephenson) spoke about his experiences visiting concentration camps, and about working with the victims and survivors of the horrors in Srebrenica. The hon. Member for New Forest East (Dr Lewis) talked about the impact on young people of visiting the scene of Nazi atrocities. He took an important principled stand in resigning his membership of the Oxford Union when it gave the fascist David Irving a platform from which to spread his vile ideology.

"The hon. Member for Rugby (Mark Pawsey) spoke about the genocide in Rwanda. It is incredible, really, that after the horrors of the holocaust in Nazi Germany, a genocide on such a scale could be repeated in relatively recent times. He talked movingly about speaking to survivors of the genocide in Rwanda.

"The hon. Member for Eastbourne (Stephen Lloyd) spoke very thoughtfully and thought-provokingly. He said it was essential for this place to guard against the normalisation of the horrors of genocide, and for us to remember that monsters are few. For atrocities to be perpetrated on the scale that they were, the acquiescence of functionaries is required. He also said it could happen again—it could happen here. It is worth reminding ourselves that Nazi Germany, which has been the focus of much of the debate this afternoon, was a sophisticated western civilisation when the Nazis came to power. Who would have thought that a “sophisticated” nation could perpetrate such horrors? Yet it happened. I pay tribute to the hon. Member for Eastbourne for reminding us that it was not due simply to some monsters over there. It can happen anywhere, and we must guard against the normalisation of the horrors of genocide.

"Finally, the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) spoke about how he heard at first hand from his friends in the Jewish community with whom he grew up about their parents’ experiences. He spoke about the incomprehensibility of what happened, and I share his view. To me, to all of us in the Chamber and to any decent-minded person, it is utterly incomprehensible that such horrors could be perpetrated. Again, the hon. Gentleman spoke about the importance of education to ensure that those horrors are not repeated in the future.

"I pay tribute to the 294 Members who have signed the Book of Commitment relating to the holocaust. It is an important statement of intent that almost half the Members of the House have signed that.

"It is a triumph for democracy that, for the past six years, the House has hosted this debate, and it is a triumph for decency that Holocaust memorial day continues to attract significant interest since it was first launched 12 years ago this Sunday. Perhaps the most famous line of remembrance comes from Laurence Binyon’s poem, “For the Fallen”—“We will remember them.” Those words, captured most famously in the “Ode of Remembrance”, were written in the year that the first world war ended. That was about 25 years before the unspeakable horrors that took place in Nazi Germany, but they remain just as relevant today because today is about remembering the millions who suffered those barbaric deaths—the innocent children who must have followed their parents and grandparents, perhaps naive in their anticipation, but innately sensing that something dreadful was about to happen, and the knowing parents, so many of whom must have endured the unimaginable agony of foreseeing the most horrific fate that awaited them, as first their captors extinguished their hope, then extinguished their dignity and finally extinguished their lives.

"But today, and every day since the true scale of the holocaust became apparent, has also been about learning. For if society cannot learn from the wrongs of the past, what hope does it have? That is why I echo the sentiments that we have heard from most Members applauding the work of the Holocaust Educational Trust. The work of that organisation is most worthy, not just because of the vitally important issue at its heart, but because of the extraordinary way in which the message is delivered. The strapline on the trust’s logo states: “Reaching Generations”.

"Let us think about those words for a moment: “Reaching Generations”. It sounds aspirational, but the incredible thing about this most awful story is that it has reached generations. The contributions from a number of Members, including my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds North East, and the intervention from my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham South (Lilian Greenwood), who is not in her place, made that point. Ask virtually any child over the age of, say, 10 and many below that age, and they can most likely tell you more than a little about the holocaust. It remains relevant for our children in the same way as it is relevant for us, for our parents and for their parents before them. Was it the lowest ebb known in world history? Very possibly.

"But we must not be complacent. Just because society knows what happened before is no reason to believe that it is not capable of repeating those wrongs in the future. We need look no further than the atrocities in Rwanda, Bosnia and Cambodia for proof of that. The painful truth is that we must keep remembering. We must keep learning, too, because the truth is that the dreadful crimes of the late 1930s and the 1940s were not restricted to Nazi concentration camps. Historical evidence suggests that in some areas there was collaboration, and in others there was just abstention.

"Some people try to excuse the Nazi soldiers who enacted those awful crimes because they were just following orders. They might apply the same logic to the ordinary citizens who simply accepted it as part of their society, or the other nations outside Germany that simply turned a blind eye because a war was on, a point made by the hon. Member for Finchley and Golders Green (Mike Freer). None of them is a valid excuse—an explanation, perhaps, but not an excuse. The moment we start excusing those who contributed to this—arguably the greatest atrocity for which the human race has been responsible—is the moment we lose sight of why we remember.

"Even today, global society has not learnt all the lessons it should have learnt from the past. Let us think about three of the groups the Nazis targeted: people targeted because of their ethnicity, because of their disability, and because of their sexuality. Have we solved the problem of discrimination based on ethnicity? Have we ended discrimination based on disability? Have we got rid of discrimination based on sexuality? We have come a long way on all three, but the answer to each is, unfortunately, no.

"The great worry is that in some areas discrimination is increasing. A black footballer might now be much less likely to be abused from a football terrace than he was 30 years ago, but incidents of Islamophobia, for example, are on the increase. That is why our job here today is not simply to agree that the monstrous acts that took place in Nazi Germany must never be repeated; we must be vigilant in preventing the circumstances that enable fascist ideology to grow.

"There are not many issues that this House agrees on, but reaching consensus on this issue is the easy part. We should not simply pat each other on the back for agreeing on something on which it would be impossible to disagree and then move on to the next business. The hard part is providing the leadership when we go back to our constituencies, our communities, our towns and cities, our friends and neighbours, our colleagues, customers and clients, showing the leadership that proves that society can learn from its mistakes, that it can move on from its troubled past, but that it will always remember.

"It is becoming even more important that we remember because the austerity that is currently gripping European nations has given a foothold for fascist extremists to peddle their insidious doctrine. The hon. Member for Harrow East touched on that when he talked about the circumstances that led to the rise of the Nazis in Germany after the treaty of Versailles. We must never make those mistakes again. We must remember to take steps to tackle the circumstances that provide a breeding ground for fascist and Nazi ideology.

"Reaching generations is what the Holocaust Educational Trust seeks to do. It is what we should all seek to do. I take my hat off to the many voluntary organisations, community groups and local authorities that are supporting events in their areas to mark Holocaust memorial day. I know that is happening in my home city and constituency of Derby North, and I am sure that the same is true for every Member here today. I urge everyone in the Chamber and beyond to go back to their constituencies, write to those organisations, congratulate them on the work they have done and pledge their support now and for the future. Holocaust memorial day is vital to ensure that we remember and that we learn, and all of us in this place have a vital role to play in supporting that goal."

VOTES AT 16?

LABOUR will be will be supporting the motion in the House of Commons today calling for the age at which people can vote in UK elections to be reduced to 16.

We should recognise the importance of raising the participation of young people in politics. Allowing 16 and 17 year olds to vote has a role to play in increasing involvement in the political process.

Low turn-out of younger people at elections might be addressed by engaging them earlier in the political process.

I wonder if the Tories and Lib Dems would have been so keen to scrap the Education Maintenance Allowance if those affected could vote.

At the moment, from the age of 16 young people can give full consent to medical treatment, leave school and enter work or training, pay income tax and National Insurance, obtain tax credits and welfare benefits in their own right, consent to sexual relationships, get married or enter a civil partnership, change their name by deed poll, become a director of a company and join the armed forces.

I see no reason to add ‘vote’ to that list

A ‘ONE NATION’ HOUSING STRATEGY FOR THE PRIVATE RENTED SECTOR IS ESSENTIAL

Here is my speech in the House of Commons today on the private rented sector.

"We have had a well-informed and excellent debate this afternoon, with contributions from 17 hon. Members. We have heard about issues ranging from the rent differential between the private rented sector and the social housing sector to the impact on the housing benefit bill; about poor, sometimes shocking standards in the private rented sector; and we have heard descriptions of the activities of rogue landlords and the exploitative activities of some of these fly-by-night management and letting agencies.

"Members have cited the inadequate supply of council housing, and we also heard about the innovative action that some local authorities are taking to address the problems that we heard about this afternoon. Some Members on both sides of the House talked about the need for family-friendly tenancies and the need for institutional investment. We heard about the European model of the private rented sector and how that might have some application in this country. Some Members spoke about the need for more regulation; others spoke about the need for less regulation. Everybody on both sides of the Chamber agreed that there is a desperate need to raise standards.

"Different solutions would, I guess, be proposed from one side of the Chamber or the other, but it is clear to me that there is a consensus across the Chamber that we are living through the worst housing crisis in a generation. The English housing survey suggests that two thirds of all newly formed households now enter the private rented sector. Projections for the next 10 to 15 years suggest that more than a million young people will be permanently locked out of home ownership, and more than a quarter of low to middle-income families will be living in private rented accommodation that they can ill afford.

"A recent YouGov survey suggests that 1.4 million people are falling behind on their rent or mortgage payments, 44% are struggling to pay their rent or mortgage, more than a million have had to resort to payday loans, 2.8 million have used an unauthorised overdraft, and 10% of those have to do so every month. To cap it all, families struggling to make ends meet are having their tax credits slashed and their housing benefits squeezed.

"The dysfunctional mortgage market is making matters worse. Home ownership is now beyond large numbers of people who would previously have aspired to own their own home. This is contributing to the surge in the number of private tenancies, which is the highest it has been for 50 years or more. Most of those people are paying considerably more than they would if they were buying their accommodation with a mortgage. It is not surprising, therefore, that private rented sector rents have risen twice as fast as wages in the past 10 years. That explains that phenomenon.

"Many are living in substandard housing, as we heard during the debate. That is why we need a one nation housing strategy for the private rented sector—a one nation housing strategy that recognises this shift in tenure patterns, a one nation housing strategy that does not leave millions of our fellow citizens subject to insecurity and exploitation, and a one nation housing strategy that tackles the unscrupulous landlords who make so many people’s lives a misery. Of course many landlords are perfectly reputable, but there are a significant minority of rogue landlords who should be driven out of the market. The motion before the House tonight would go some way to achieving that goal.

"With 37% of the private rented sector falling below the decent homes standard, the time for action is now. With 4,000 unregulated lettings agencies up and down the country, a laissez-faire approach is unacceptable. A citizens advice bureau survey found that 73% of tenants are dissatisfied with their lettings agency. I therefore do not agree with the Housing Minister when he suggested that self-regulation was the way forward.

"Meanwhile, rent levels in the private rented sector are soaring and the housing benefit bill is ballooning. Recent research by the House of Commons Library has shown that more than £9 billion or 40% of the £22.7 billion spent on housing benefit each year goes to private landlords. Council housing accounts for £5.6 billion and housing associations £7.9 billion.

"When the present Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury, the right hon. Member for North West Hampshire (Sir George Young), was Housing Minister in 1991, he said:

'Housing benefit will underpin market rents—we have made that absolutely clear. If people cannot afford to pay that market rent, housing benefit will take the strain.'—[Official Report, 30 January 1991; Vol. 184, c. 940.]

"Housing benefit certainly has taken the strain in the intervening years, but at what cost? I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman did not mean to create a Mary Shelley monster when he made that public policy pronouncement. Is it now fair to penalise the victims of that policy failure by imposing restrictions on tenants? It is hardly their fault that private sector rents have gone through the roof.

"We need a one nation housing strategy, not some kind of abstract housing policy that has unintended consequences. We need a one nation housing strategy to right a social wrong that is leaving millions of our citizens in a precarious situation, including more than 1 million families with children. The introduction of a national register of private landlords would be a good start, and empowering local councils to drive up standards would be welcomed by tenants and landlords alike.

"Good landlords have nothing to fear and everything to gain from the proposals in our motion. Promoting long-term tenancies and predictable rents would provide reassurance for tenants and certainty for landlords. It would involve a simple step that would have a significant impact. Tenants would be shielded from irresponsible operators, and decent landlords and agents would avoid being tarred with the same brush as the unscrupulous minority. By introducing consistency in fees and charges across the sector, we would ensure that everybody knew where they stood from the outset.
"As my hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Erdington (Jack Dromey) said, we simply cannot have two nations—those who own their homes and those who rent. That is why I urge Members to oppose the amendment and to support our motion."

You can read the full debate here: http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/hansard/commons/todays-commons-debates/read/unknown/676/

FAIRNESS FOR THOSE WHO RENT THEIR HOMES

The lack of decent, affordable housing in Derby and around the country is a huge issue – and yet the Tory-Lib Dem Government has cut the budget for building new affordable homes by 60 per cent.

There has been a massive increase in the number of people who rent their homes privately, including more than one million families with children. Rents are rising, pushing up the housing benefit, in spite of the appalling cuts being inflicted on low income households by this callous coalition.

There has also been a rise in problems with renting. Whilst estate agents can be banned for bad practice, lettings agents are not subject to the same complaints and redress procedures.

Labour will introduce a national register of landlords and grant local authorities greater powers to root out and strike off rogue landlords. This would make it easier for local authorities to tackle rogue landlords found to have broken the rules.

We would also provide a system for people to get redress when a lettings agent has ripped them off, just like we have for estate agents.

THE "GREENEST GOVERNMENT EVER" CLOSES SUPPORT FOR HOUSEHOLD ENERGY EFFICIENCY

There was more evidence this week that ordinary families are paying the price of Tory failure as "Warm Front", its programme for household energy efficiency support, is closed down before even half the budget is spent.

The scheme to date has been mired in chaos with thousands turned down for help, more left waiting to hear whether they qualify, as well as a massive backlog.

Labour’s debate in the Commons this week revealed a Government that is both incompetent and unfair expecting ordinary families and the environment to pay because of their failure to get a grip.

At a time when millions of families face a cost of living crisis, with energy bills soaring - up by nearly £300 since 2010 - the Government needs to step in and find ways of helping people cut their energy bills and the most sustainable way to do that is through energy efficiency.

With the Tory tax cut for millionaires due in April, Labour will be pushing for "Warm Front" to be extended until its full budget for this year has been spent.

PRIME MINISTER'S EUROPEAN OBSESSION RISKS ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY

Like all local people in Derby I am worried about the state of our economy. People are worried about their jobs and our high streets are in crisis. Our economy is stagnating, unemployment is too high and we’ve the way this Government has bungled the Thameslink contract that should have come to Derby’s Bombardier.

That’s why I am so concerned that because the Prime Minister is too weak to control his own party on Europe, he risks creating years of economic uncertainty that will put investment and jobs at risk – just at the time when we need them most.

Of course, I know that there are many differing views on the European Union and I hear them from my constituents. I am clear that the EU needs to change and work better for people in here in Britain. But the real tragedy of David Cameron’s stance is that his party won’t let him address the need for change in the EU in a sensible and pragmatic way.

David Cameron says he wants to be in the EU but for many in his party, getting David Cameron to commit now to an in/out referendum is not about consent, but about exit. Sadly it seems we have a British Prime Minister sleepwalking towards exit, knowing he is letting down the national interest, but too weak to do anything about it.

Labour’s approach is that to get the best deal for Britain we need to be round the table with our allies in Europe, not shouting from the sidelines with one foot already out of the door. It simply doesn’t make sense to leave the largest trading bloc in the world and give up the ability to influence the rules of the market where almost half of all UK exports end up.

Business leaders from across the country are clear that leaving the EU would be bad for jobs and bad for our economy. In an open letter earlier this month, the heads of some of the UK’s largest companies warned of the damaging uncertainty the announcement of a referendum would do. It will scare off investment and the companies that bring jobs here at the very time we need them most.

European unity is not – and must not – be about never ending union towards common federal government or the merging of national identities into a United States of Europe. Instead, Labour’s vision of Europe is a flexible Europe with a common political framework that can permanently accommodate varying levels of integration amongst Member States.

There is so much that we can do to make Europe work for us – from tackling cross-border crime and making sure that murderers and paedophiles who have committed crimes in the UK don’t escape justice for technical reasons of being outside the EU.

But Labour are clear Europe needs to change – and that is why we are calling for reforms that will help make the EU more focused on promoting jobs and growth – like reducing and reforming the EU Budget and having a European Commissioner with sole responsibility for promoting Growth in the EU. And yes that would mean here in Derby we can better deal, more funds to create more jobs and build a better local economy.

We will also have to deal with how we can encourage Britons to go and work in Europe if that is what they want to do, but also make sure that we manage much better when others come to our country, and what benefits they are entitled to when they do.

So as Labour, we will make the hard headed, patriotic case, founded on the national interest, both for Britain in Europe, and for change in Europe. When there is so much for us to do to get Britain back on its feet again, allowing ourselves to pushed away from our main tasks at hand would be taking a reckless gamble with our country’s future.

Clearly David Cameron is a Prime Minister imprisoned by party interest, so it falls to Labour to stand up for the national interest.

WHY IS THE TRANSPORT SECRETARY SIMULTANEOUSLY SHAFTING BOMBARDIER’S WORKFORCE AND BRITISH TAXPAYERS?

The Transport Secretary, Patrick McLoughlin, has told my local paper, the Derby Telegraph, that Bombardier has a future here. I hope he is right. You can read his interview here: http://tinyurl.com/bjmc9fr

But he said “there will be no handouts” for Bombardier even though nobody has ever asked for one. However, the Thameslink contract is being taken forward as a Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and recent analysis has shown that these rail PFIs create an excessive financial burden. And yet Mr McLoughlin seems prepared to spends hundreds of millions of pounds over the odds, on what effectively amounts to a handout, to support German rather than British manufacturing.

The previous Labour Transport Secretary, Andrew Adonis, commissioned Sir Andrew Foster to review the Intercity Express Programme (IEP) for which Bombardier had provisionally lost out to Hitachi. This contract had also been commissioned as a PFI. http://tinyurl.com/c4nv2wr . The report was published after the General Election and raised serious questions about the IEP’s value for money. But the then Secretary of State for Transport, Philip Hammond, ignored the concerns about excessive costs as did his successor, Justine Greening, who eventually signed it off last year.

Why are Tory ministers applying these double standards? They insist the austerity programme is essential. They say the diminished living standards most people are experiencing are necessary. They argue that the cuts to our cherished public services are worth it. And they urge us to believe that the shameful squeeze on social security payments are sacrifices Britain’s poorest people must make. But when it comes to procuring new trains from foreign companies, it seems these selfsame ministers are prepared to cheerfully spend public money like water.

Mr Mcloughlin told the Derby Telegraph that if he started the procurement process again it “would take a huge amount of time that wouldn't help Bombardier.” But that is simply not true. Experts agree that a new procurement process could be concluded in a matter of months and save the taxpayer hundreds of millions of pounds in the process. Moreover, Bombardier would then be able to compete for the Thameslink contract on a level playing field.

Mr Mcloughlin is a Derbyshire MP, with constituents who work at Bombardier. He knows how important this industry is to Derbyshire and to Britain. The existing tender documentation makes it clear that he is under no obligation to proceed with Siemens. You can read the Invitation to Tender document here: http://tinyurl.com/4yoys6j.

Precisely why Patrick McLoughlin is seemingly willing to shaft Derby’s Bombardier workers and British taxpayers in favour of German workers and German taxpayers is rather mysterious. Maybe we’ll find out in 30 years when the cabinet papers are released. By which time, the British train making industry might only be a distant memory.

Of course it wouldn’t be the first time a Tory Government has destroyed home grown industrial capacity, they’ve actually got form for this. Just look at what they did in the 1980s to British Steel, British Coal and British car manufacturing to name but three. The result was hundreds of thousands of job losses and a huge upsurge in the importation of products we used to produce here.

I’M STANDING UP FOR STRUGGLING PUBS

Labour used its first Opposition Day Debate of 2013 to hold the Tory-led Government to account for failing to back pubs across Britain.  You can read the full debate here http://tinyurl.com/bh95qtz  

Local Chesterfield MP, Toby Perkins, led the debate to great effect. I backed Toby’s calls to protect local pubs, which means new rules to stem the tide of closures and a fairer relationship between the big pub companies and landlords.

This week, following Labour’s campaign the Tory-Lib Dem Government has finally caved in, announcing it will support some of Labour’s ideas to protect these vital community assets.

Unfortunately, the Government’s foot dragging means that pubs have been closing at too quick a rate – 18 are now closing every week.  These Tories and Lib Dem continue to show how out of touch they are by refusing to back all Labour proposals.  So, in the weeks to come, Labour will continue to keep up the pressure – campaigning to save Britain’s pubs.

THE TORIES ARE OUT OF TOUCH ON THE RISING COST OF RAIL FARES

Hardworking people are suffering from David Cameron’s latest broken promise as rail fares soar under the Tory-Lib Dem Government.

Despite promising to cap rail fares to 1 per cent above inflation, David Cameron has allowed train companies to increase fares by as much as 9.2 per cent this year, reversing Labour’s strict cap on fare rises.

Labour plans would put passengers first by banning train companies from increasing fares above a strict cap, meaning fares would be rising by no more than 1 per cent above inflation.

This Tory-Lib Dem Government, including Transport Secretary, Patrick McLoughlin, who is a local MP, has shown how out of touch they are by putting the wrong people first on rail fares.  Ministers have caved in to pressure from the private train companies by allowing them to make massive increases to fares at a time when many families are struggling to make ends meet.

GOVT ABANDONS COMMUNITIES TO GAMBLING SHARKS

IF I was asked to put in the most simplistic terms what critical value Conservatives lack it would probably be a sense of social responsibility.

So much of what we hear, and so much of what we have seen in the last two-and-a-half years of Tory Government, has been placed on a determined focus political dogma and ideology rather than a genuine understanding of the human impact of decisions that are taken.

That’s why I was totally unsurprised to read the startling figures of a recent study which revealed the problem of increased gambling among communities whose residents can least afford to be out of pocket.

When Labour introduced the Gambling Act on 2005, its objectives were quite clear: to prevent gambling being a source of crime, to ensure gambling was conducted fairly and openly, and to protect children and vulnerable people from being exploited by gambling.

A key part of that was the commitment was to keep under review fixed odds betting terminals.

The Gambling Prevalence Survey was vital to that. Its focus was on keeping a check on gambling patterns and to monitor the impact of fixed odds betting terminals on problem gambling.

Now the Government has scrapped the survey. So although the poorest communities have been shown to be most vulnerable, the Government has left itself with no means to examining the facts and figures so it knows how to tackle the issue. The survey would have provided that information.

I can almost hear George Osborne and David Cameron shrugging their shoulders and absolving themselves of any responsibility now.

They will probably dismiss people drawn into gambling as layabouts who are a drain on society.

And that’s where my frustration lies. The Tories don’t seem to grasp that society isn’t simply something which must conform to the ideologies forced upon it; in fact, society is also the product of such political dogma.

So what separates the Tories from Labour isn’t simply different policies and priorities.

They are also separated by their relationship with the public. The Tories see their role purely and simply as setting the rules and then requiring everyone else to live by them. Theirs is not to help people because, in Tory eyes, people should help themselves.

Labour also believes in people helping themselves, but by providing a cohesive society in which everyone is able to thrive, rather than just those most advantaged by circumstance.

You need look no further than the two economic policies for proof of that. From day one, the Tories have been focused on reducing the deficit by cutting, irrespective of the effect it has on people. In their minds, people will just have to cope.

Labour leader Ed Miliband has offered a different view from the outset. By investing in society rather than slashing at it we would provide society with the tools with which to rebuild itself. It’s not about doing things for people; it’s about creating an environment in which they are able to help themselves.

So the Tories’ lack of interest in dealing with the disproportionate numbers of people in poorer areas losing money on fixed odds betting terminals is hardly a surprise.

The Tory mindset is incapable of seeing such people as the victims of their ideology because they are too obsessed with dismissing them as worthless.

If I was in the Government I would be pushing my party colleagues to reintroduce the Gambling Prevalence Survey tomorrow. Not because it is a priority over and above other areas where there have been cuts, but because people matter and, as elected representatives, we have a responsibility to help.

And I don’t buy the argument that in such financial times it is inevitable that such matters will fall by the wayside as spending becomes even more squeezed.

Why do I not buy it? Because it presumes that the slash and burn approach of this Government is the default position when, in fact, it need not be.

As each day goes by, the consequences of this Government’s repugnant rightwing ideology are being felt by increasing numbers of people. This must focus the minds of every one of us, who believe in a more compassionate and progressive future for our country, to ensure Labour wins the next election.

THE MID-TERM REVIEW? NOTHING NEW

Labour leader, Ed Miliband, responded to the Tory-Lib Dem led Government's so-called re-launch, today. He said:

“The problem is that if you’re a young person looking for work, if you’re a family whose living standards are being squeezed, if you’re a small business that is looking for a loan, today’s relaunch changes nothing.

“What people need in tough times is a government on their side, fighting their corner, not a government that promised change but has actually made things worse not better. That’s the problem with today’s relaunch.”

You can read Labour’s briefing on the Tory-Lb Dem Government’s real record of failure, here: http://www.labour.org.uk/uploads/7f7363aa-807e-7694-e9d1-4fc9b9bc3314.pdf

WHAT’S MISSING FROM TORY-LIB DEM COALITION’S MID-TERM REVIEW

• The Deficit Reduction section has no mention of the double-dip recession, or of the fact that the Government is now set to borrow £212 billion more than they originally planned – over £12,500 for every working household in the country.

• The Personal Taxation section has no mention of the cut in the 50p top rate of tax – a tax cut worth an average £107,500 to 8,000 people earning over £1 million a year.

• The Jobs and Welfare section has no mention of the strivers tax – it does not even try to defend the Government’s plan to cut the incomes of 7 million working families with a 1% cap on tax credits and benefits.

• The Crime and Policing section has no mention of cuts in police officer numbers – but we know that 6,800 frontline police officers have already been lost, with at least 15,000 police officers to go by 2015.

• The NHS section has no mention of the fact that nearly 6,000 nurses have been cut since the election. The promise in the original Coalition Agreement that “We will stop the top-down reorganisations of the NHS that have got in the way of patient care” has – unsurprisingly – been dropped. And so has the promise to stop the closure of A&E and maternity wards.

• The Energy and Climate Change section has no mention of action to tackle rising energy bills – even though David Cameron announced in October that the Government would legislate to ensure the lowest tariffs for customers, taking his own Energy Secretary by surprise.

• And there isn’t a Transport section at all, which will come as no surprise to Derby people who have seen this Government betray Derby's train making industry.

LABOUR WILL AMEND WELFARE BENEFITS UPRATING BILL

Labour has tabled a 'reasoned amendment' to the Second Reading of the Welfare Benefits Uprating Bill and will seek to put this to a vote in the House of Commons tomorrow.

Labour MPs will challenge the Government to support Labour's plan for a compulsory jobs guarantee for long term unemployed people. The vote comes as new figures from the IFS show 7 million working people will be hit by the Government's 'strivers tax'.

The new report from the IFS shows that 7 million working families will lose out under the government’s real terms cuts to tax credits and other benefits. It follows Children’s Society research which shows that a second lieutenant will lose £552 a year, a nurse could lose £424 a year and a primary school teacher could lose £424 a year.

The Government’s myths about who will be hit by their cuts to tax credits and benefits have now been exposed.  While millionaires get a tax cut, 7 million striving working families are paying the price for the economic failure of Messrs Cameron, Osborne and Clegg.

It’s now clear. There's a Labour way to bring down the welfare bill and a Tory way.  The Tory way is to hijack support for working people. The Labour way is to help people work.

This hopeless Tory-Lib Dem Coalition has delivered a flatling economy and rising long term unemployment which has increased the welfare bill by over £13 billion more than planned. And now they want working people to pay the bill with a strivers tax that will hit 7 million families. Yet they're happy to give a £107,000 tax cut to 8,000 millionaires.

The Government’s Bill does nothing to create a single new job, fix the chaos in Universal Credit or the Work Programme which has been an utter failure.  So Labour will be asking MPs to vote for real welfare reform, a compulsory Jobs Guarantee that for the first time will end a life on welfare.

Ed Balls said: " Our plan is tough but fair and the Government should back it"

This is the full text of Labour’s amendment that will be voted on tomorrow:

“That this House declines to give a Second Reading to the Welfare Benefits Up-rating Bill because it fails to address the reasons why the cost of benefits is exceeding the Government’s plans; notes that the Resolution Foundation has calculated that 68 per cent of households affected by these measures are in work and that figures from the Institute for Fiscal Studies show that all the measures announced in the Autumn Statement, including those in the Bill, will mean a one-earner family with children will on average be £534 worse off by 2015; further notes that the Bill does not include anything to remedy the deficiencies in the Government's work programme or the slipped timetable for universal credit; believes that a comprehensive plan to reduce the benefits bill must include measures to create economic growth and help the 129,400 adults over the age of 25 out of work for 24 months or more, but this Bill does not do so; further believes that the Bill should introduce a compulsory jobs guarantee, which would give long-term unemployed adults a job they would have to take up or lose benefits, funded by limiting tax relief on pension contributions for people earning over £150,000 to 20 per cent; and further believes that the proposals in the Bill are unfair when the additional rate of income tax is being reduced, which will result in those earning over a million pounds per year receiving an average tax cut of over £100,000 a year.”

WELFARE BENEFITS UPRATING BILL – COST TO WORKING FAMILIES

The Welfare Benefits Uprating Bill will cut over £1,000 from working families on modest incomes who have 2 children.

This is on top of the freezes to Working Tax Credit and Child Benefit over the last 2 years, which have already cost the same families over £800.

Thousands of working families are already struggling to cope financially and do not know how they could face another 3 years of cuts to the support that they need.

This is what the implications of the pernicious bill will mean if the Government force it through tomorrow.

1. Cost to Families of the Welfare Benefits Uprating Bill

The Welfare Benefits Uprating Bill is another blow to working families. Compared to uprating Child Benefit and tax credits by CPI from 2013/14 to 2015/16, the analysis below shows the Bill will cost working families on modest incomes:

• £784 for a family with 1 child

• £1,091 to a family with 2 children

• £1,398 to a family with 3 children (See Note 1 for full figures)

2. Working Families affected by these effective cuts

Child Benefit – all families with children, with one partner earning up to £60,000

Child Tax Credit – 2.6 million working families with earnings up to:

• £27,000 with 1 child

• £34,000 with 2 children

• £41,000 with 3 children

Working Tax Credit – 1.8 million working families with earnings up to £20,000

3. Families are already Suffering from Freezes for the last 2 years

This comes on top of freezes to Child Benefit and Working Tax Credit for the past 2 years which, compared to RPI increases, have already cost these same families:

• £741 for a family with 1 child

• £846 for a family with 2 children

• £951 for a family with 3 children (See Note 2 for full figures)

4. Treasury Figures for Losses by Families on Minimum Wage in 2013-14

In response to PQs from Ann Coffey MP, the Treasury has confirmed that the Working Tax Credit lost in 2013-14 by people working full-time on the minimum wage, due to the Government’s freezes and increase in the earnings taper, is:

• £475 lost by a single person with no children

• £660 lost by a couple with 1 child

(18 Dec 2012, Col 688. Responses to questions 133778 – 133782)

Contrary to assertions in Parliament, the amount of Working Tax Credit lost by families with one earner on the minimum wage is greater than their tax saving of £420 in 2013-14 from the increase in the personal tax allowance.

5. Measures in the Welfare Benefits Uprating Bill

In 2013-14:

• Child Benefit and the basic & 30 hour elements of Working Tax Credit - frozen

• Couples & lone parents element of WTC and Child Tax Credit to rise by 1%

In 2014-15 and 2015-16:

Child Benefit, all Working Tax Credit elements and Child Tax Credit to rise by 1%

6. Comparison of Rates of Increases with RPI and CPI, 2011 to 2016

Working Tax Credit and Child Benefit

Year         Actual          CPI        Difference   RPI        Difference
                Increases     (Sept)     to CPI        (Sept)     to RPI

2011-12   0 %             3.1 %     3.1 %          4.6 %    4.6 %
2012-13   0 %             5.2 %     5.2 %          5.6 %    5.6 %
2013-14   0 or 1 %      2.2 %     1.7 %          2.6 %    2.1 %
                Avg 0.5%
2014-15 *  1%            2.5 %      1.5 %         2.6 %    1.6 %
2015-16 *  1 %           2.2 %      1.2 %         3.1 %    2.1 %

Total          2.5 %       15.2 %    12.7 %       18.5 %  16.0 %

* These are estimates by the Office of Budget Responsibility

7. Other Cuts affecting Working Families
The following cuts also affect most families on low and modest incomes:

January 2011: Rise in VAT cost the average family on low pay £307 a year

April 2011: Tax Credit for babies under 1 year old - £545 cut

• Childcare Tax Credit reduced from 80% to 70% - average loss £457 per child

• Increase in earnings taper of Working Tax Credit from 39% to 41% (an effective 2% tax rise for the low paid) - cost families with 1 child up to £400 and those with 2 children up to £500 each year

October 2011: Housing Benefit capped at 30% of market rates – cost an average £468 (40% of claimants are in work)

April 2012: Couples had to work 24 hours a week instead of 16 hours. 200,000 couples lost all their Working Tax Credit of £3,870

April 2013: ‘Bedroom tax’ will cost social housing tenants an average £728 a year

• Cuts to Council Tax Benefit with localisation in April 2013. As pensioners are to be protected, the benefit for working age recipients will be cut

GOVT RE-LAUNCH CAN’T PAPER OVER THE COALITION’S CRACKS

This week, just over halfway between the last general election in 2010 and the next general election expected in 2015, David Cameron and Nick Clegg have reprised their Downing Street Rose Garden moment and reaffirmed their coalition vows.

But no amount of re-launching can obscure the reality of the impact of their time in office. No doubt we’ll have more smiles and claims of success but I know people in Derby won’t be fooled. They know that this is a Government that promised change but which has made things worse, not better.

That David Cameron and Nick Clegg are keen to re-launch is predictable. In recent weeks this Government has revealed itself as hopelessly out of touch with the concerns of hard-working people. But their problem isn’t their media strategy – it’s their failed policies and a re-launch isn’t the answer. On a recent visit to the city, David Cameron demonstrated his pig-headedness when he when he insisted that Derby was getting a fair deal from his Government. The fact that all the evidence points in the opposite direction made no impact on our privileged Prime Minister, whose background gives him no insight whatsoever into the lives of ordinary people.

At the Autumn Statement George Osborne tried to claim he was making scroungers and benefits cheats pay the price for cutting the welfare bill, but that quickly unravelled when it became clear that his changes are actually going to hit people who are already in work.

This shambolic Government has failed to help hard-working people who are struggling to make ends meet. They have failed on growth and jobs; the cost of living is soaring, with prices going up faster than wages; the economy went in to double dip recession on their watch; and the benefits bill is set to soar by £13.6 billion higher than forecast. All of this means that they are having to borrow more than they planned to pay for their own failure.

And their failure extends far beyond the economy. They have pushed through a massive, wasteful upheaval of the NHS whilst almost 7,000 nurses have been axed and more people wait longer in A&E; 15,000 police are set to go by the next election despite their promises to protect the frontline; house building starts have fallen; and Sure Start Centres are closing. This is the price we are all paying for this Tory Lib Dem failure.

The people I speak to in Derby don’t want re-launches, they want a One Nation government that will bring us together to overcome the challenges we face. The truth is that all David Cameron and Nick Clegg can offer is division and more of the same. They simply cannot be the change we so desperately need.

VAT CUT TOPS NEW YEAR’S WISH-LIST FOR BUILDING FIRMS

A VAT cut for housing renovation and repair work is at the top of the New Year’s wish-list for most small and medium-sized construction companies.

A major survey has been conducted of members of the Federation of Master Builders (FMB), which is the largest trade association in the UK construction industry. It showed that 75% felt VAT was an issue that they wanted the Government to address. Building regulations, planning and finance were also listed as priority issues by over half the businesses surveyed.

Labour’s five point plan for economic recovery published last year included a reduction in VAT to 5% on home improvements, repairs and maintenance to help homeowners and small businesses. Brian Berry, Chief Executive of the FMB, said: “It comes as no surprise that construction SMEs want this targeted reduction in VAT. Most are still struggling with falling workloads and competition from the informal economy. This is about creating a level playing field and reducing the number of individuals and businesses that rely on avoiding VAT.

“It is also about boosting growth in the economy by making it easier for homeowners and landlords to commission the work they need doing on their properties. Independent research has shown that the Government will quickly make up the initial loss of tax revenue owing to the growth in demand for housing repair and maintenance work.”

Up until now the Messrs Cameron, Osborne and Clegg have been unmoved by the disastrous consequences of their counterproductive austerity programme. This Tory-Lib Dem Coalition has been an unmitigated disaster in its first two and half years. Sadly it looks like the next the next two and a half years will be even worse. I shudder to think what that will mean for millions of fellow Britons.


All progressives need to muster behind the Labour Party at the next General Election to bring an end to this nightmare. The stakes could not be higher.

GOVT CUTS PUBLIC SERVICES BUT SQUANDERS PUBLIC MONEY ON RAIL PFI

GOVERNMENT Ministers have sought to absolve themselves of blame for betraying the British train manufacturing industry by claiming it is all Labour’s fault. They say Labour was in Government when the tenders were drawn up, and Labour appointed the Hitachi-led consortium as the preferred bidder for the £7.5bn Inter City Express (IEP) contract, QED.

But they are being typically disingenuous. The IEP contract has resulted in Hitachi constructing its main European base here in the UK – in County Durham. British jobs will directly result from it, whereas the new trains for Thameslink will be designed and assembled by Siemens in Germany.

Furthermore, Labour had second thoughts on the IEP project and Lord Adonis commissioned Sir Andrew Foster to review the Intercity Express Programme. http://tinyurl.com/c4nv2wr Sir Andrew’s report was published just after the Tory-Lib Dem Coalition was formed in 2010, and raised serious questions about the IEP’s value for money.

But the then Secretary of State for Transport, Philip Hammond, still decided go ahead with the IEP project and it was signed-off by his successor, Justine Greening, despite the concerns about excessive costs.

So what about Thameslink? Just like the IEP contract, the Thameslink programme contains flaws in the process, which I have highlighted to Transport ministers, the Chancellor and the Prime Minister. Moreover, expert advice given to the Transport Select Committee demonstrated that the formula created and used by the Dept for Transport, to select the preferred bidder, gave Siemens an unfair commercial advantage over Derby’s Bombardier. Recent analysis shows that an excessive financial burden will be incurred if it goes ahead in its present form. But all this evidence has been disregarded by the present Government.

Thameslink, like the Hitachi contract, is being taken forward as a Private Finance Initiative (PFI), but ministers are making an even bigger error than they made on the IEP contract. Not only are they ignoring Sir Andrew’s VFM criticisms, they have not secured any British jobs either, other than the ones that would have been created whoever won the contract.

Before the General Election George Osborne said he would replace PFI with a more cost effective system. In a Written Ministerial Statement (WMS) in November 2011 he said he would ensure: “... investment is cost effective, and that the taxpayer is getting maximum value for money”. This was to be delivered through “an accelerated and cheaper procurement process”. http://tinyurl.com/7rvpwqu

Then in the Autumn Statement, earlier this month, the Chancellor announced the publication of the Government’s proposed replacement for PFI. The document entitled: ‘A new approach to public private partnerships’ http://tinyurl.com/b2zq33u claimed the so-called PF2 would secure “improved value for money for the public sector and the taxpayer”.

But it seems Justine Greening didn’t read the Chancellor’s Written Ministerial Statement and Mr Osborne must have omitted to tell her what he was planning to announce in his Autumn Statement.

Had she looked at the railway press she would have seen evidence that the IEP contract costs will be almost double what they would be were it not a PFI scheme. Applying the same analysis to the Thameslink contract suggests the annual expenditure will also be hundreds of millions of pounds more than necessary.

To make such a crass decision would be unforgiveable when the Government’s austerity measures are imposing unprecedented cuts to cherished public services and diminishing most people’s living standards. But the current Transport Secretary, Patrick Mcloughlin, himself a Derbyshire MP, with constituents who work at Bombardier, seems to be steeling himself to do just that. Yet he is under no obligation to do so because the much criticised tender documentation http://tinyurl.com/4yoys6j gives the Secretary of State the power to stop the process at any time.