PROGRESSIVES MUST COLLABORATE TO DEFEAT THE FORCES OF CONSERVATISM

How can Labour win the next general election will be a question exercising the minds of Labour’s leadership contenders and party strategists alike.

The Tories, with their reactionary policy prospectus, have just won an overall majority with less than 37 per cent of the popular vote.  That doesn’t of course mean that 63 per cent of the electorate necessarily want a progressive alternative.  I do however believe there is a large enough electoral cohort to give Labour the edge in 2020 if we can inspire enough people who have just voted Green, Lib Dem or SNP.

I know that some people hark back to the New Labour project.  They suggest we must accept privatisation, market economics and austerity if we are to stand any chance of beating the Conservatives next time, but I think that would be a mistake.  We should remember the words of Harold Wilson who told the 1962 Labour Party conference that “this party is a moral crusade or it is nothing.”

Labour’s purpose is to stand for something better, to offer hope and provide a vision of a better world.  Our problem in the last election was that we didn’t persuade enough people that we still represented the ‘moral crusade’ to which Harold Wilson referred over half a century ago.  

Even though our manifesto offered a genuinely progressive policy prospectus, our timidity in decisively breaking with austerity and failing to speak loudly enough about the importance of public services cost us dearly.  

I was one of the casualties of Labour’s diffidence, losing Derby North by just 41 votes.  The Conservative’ negative and vituperative national campaign strategy undoubtedly scared enough floating voters away from voting for me.  But I would still have comfortably won my seat for Labour were it not for the votes that were lost to the Green Party. 

I have been campaigning on social justice and green issues since the mid 1970s, a vegan since 1976 and a League Against Cruel Sports trustee since 1979.  I won Derby North with a majority of 613 in 2010 and had hoped the Green Party might welcome my re-election as a kindred spirit.  After all, they weren’t standing in every constituency and I therefore thought they wouldn’t put a candidate up against me. 

But that proved to be a naïve pipe dream as the Greens did field a candidate at the last minute who secured 1618 votes.  I spoke to dozens of voters during the short campaign who said they would support me if the Greens weren’t standing.  Others told me it was “safe” to vote Green in Derby North as they thought I was going to win by a “landslide”.

My experience illustrates why it is imperative for Labour to win back those voters who dallied with the Green Party on 7 May before their support becomes a long-term relationship.  To achieve this we must demonstrate that Labour is committed to a moral crusade and remains the best vehicle to deliver social justice and progressive social change. 

If those of us who believe in a fairer and more compassionate society continue competing for votes in marginal seats it will only help the Tories to win again in 2020.  People may not like the first past the post electoral system, but it’s the one we’re stuck with.  We therefore need to work within its constraints to deliver a better society.  That means collaborating with fellow progressives, including those in other parties, and convincing people to make smarter voting choices in order to defeat the forces of conservatism. 

Failure to rise to this historic challenge will see the Tories laughing all the way to the despatch box, and leave Britain’s most vulnerable citizens at the mercy of the most pernicious, ideologically driven Tory government in living memory.

LABOUR’S BETTER PLAN FOR OLDER PEOPLE

THE Tory plan is failing older people.  Pensioners’ living standards have been hit hard by the Tories and their Lib Dem collaborators.  

This government’s refusal to act against rip-off energy bills, their decision to slash social care funding and their changes to pension rules have diminished living standards for pensioners.

Typical energy bills have risen by £300 a year since David Cameron became Prime Minister.  Nearly one in ten older households now face fuel poverty and delayed action to ban rip-off pension fees has left savers worse off.  Cuts to elderly care have sent more older people to A&E with unnecessary hospital admissions, making it harder for them to get the care they need at home.

With all the damage the Tories have already inflicted on us, they still want to go even further by cutting public spending to a level not seen since the 1930s before there was an NHS.

Older people who I have spoken to say they are tired of being let down by the Tories.  Labour knows the importance of ensuring those who have worked all their lives can retire with dignity.  That’s why Labour’s plan for pensioners and older people is essential.

Labour will protect the ‘triple lock’ that ensures pensioners’ incomes keep pace with the cost of living.  Although Ed Balls has said he will restrict Winter Fuel Payments from the richest five per cent of pensioners to help pay down the deficit, Labour will guarantee that there will be no further changes to Winter Fuel Payments.  Furthermore, we are guaranteeing that universal free TV licenses and bus passes for pensioners will be protected by a Labour government.

We will help pensioners struggling with energy bills by capping gas and electricity prices until 2017. We’ll also offer free efficiency improvements to at least 200,000 households at risk of fuel poverty.

We’ll give people freedom over how to spend their pension savings, but ensure they are protected from rip-offs.  This will be achieved by introducing a cap on fees and charges for new pension products that allow people to draw-down on their savings so they get the same protection when they take their money out as when they put it in.

And we will improve social care to keep people safe and healthy at home.  We’ll end the scandalous culture of 15 minute care slots for some of the most vulnerable older people by bringing in 5,000 new homecare workers.

Older people can’t afford five more years under the Tories.  Labour has a better plan to protect pensioners’ incomes, safeguard savings, keep homes warm and invest in our NHS with more doctors and nurses so they have time to care.

BADGER TRUST CALLS ON NFU TO STOP MISLEADING THE PUBLIC OVER THE IMPACT OF BADGER CULLING

Ahead of a meeting with the Environment Secretary Liz Truss on the 3 March, the Badger Trust has called on the National Farmers’ Union to stop misleading the public by making claims over the impact of badger culling on TB rates in cattle in the Gloucestershire and Somerset cull zones, which have no scientific foundation and are not supported by Government data from the pilot badger culls.

At the NFU Annual Conference in Birmingham on Tuesday 24 February, the NFU President Meurig Raymond stated: “I want to stress that in the two pilot areas in Somerset and Gloucestershire we are already seeing that TB incidence on farms has declined. Not just by a small amount either, in the Somerset Pilot area TB incidence on farms has decreased from 34% to 11% compared with two years’ ago”.

He then went on to say: “just two days’ ago, one of our Gloucestershire members was given the fantastic news that his farm is now clear of TB for the first time in 11 years. He is very clear that the only thing that’s changed on his farm is that we are now doing something to control the disease in wildlife”.

When making these statements the NFU President at no point confirmed that it was far more likely these reductions in TB (which have also been seen outside of the cull zones) were due to tighter testing, movement and biosecurity controls forced on the UK farming sector by the European Commission in 2012. He also made no mention of the fact that DEFRA have not released any data on the pilot culls to support any claims about the impact of badger culling on TB rates in cattle.

In responding to the claims by the NFU, the CEO of the Badger Trust said:

“Nigel Gibbens, the DEFRA Chief Veterinary Officer, recently stated that: 'the fall in TB outbreaks in cattle herds, cannot be attributed either to the pilot culls or in Wales to their badger vaccination programme. It is to do with continued strengthening of the cattle measures.'

“Meurig Raymond seems to have forgotten these important facts when it comes to his NFU conference speech.

“The Badger Trust would never make any claims about the impact of badger vaccination without scientific evidence to back it up and we expect the NFU to do the same, when it comes to making claims about the impact of badger culling.

“We must deal in facts not fiction when it comes to assessing the impact of the badger culls on lowering bovine TB. When it comes to real facts the case against the badger cull policy is damning.

“Approximately £15 million has been spent killing 2476 badgers to date (£6058 a badger). None of these culled badgers were tested for TB, but data from a Government-led scientific trial and results from badgers tested by DEFRA in 2013 for the European Food Safety Authority, indicate a disease rate no higher than 15%.

“Many of these badgers were shot by poorly trained marksmen with no effective monitoring and took up to 10 to 15 minutes to die a long painful death by multiple gunshot wounds.

“This is despite the fact that the DEFRA Chief Scientist Ian Boyd confirmed at an NFU TB conference in November 2014, that the transmission rate of TB from badgers to cattle is less than 6%. The key route of infection is cattle to cattle transfer.”

It's clear that the Badger Trust's observations are based on scientific fact whereas the NFU's position is based on myth and supposition.

The NFU would do well to focus on improving poor and inadequate husbandry rather than its unjustifiable default position, which is always to blame everyone and everything else.  The fact that the demonisation of the badger population flies in the face of the evidence doesn't faze them, they just bluster on and on regardless.

It's the same with the fox population being used as an excuse for poor husbandry at lambing time. All the evidence shows foxes do not kill lambs, but still they are blamed for lamb mortality.

It's time governments stopped paying so much attention to the views of the NFU.  Not only is a lot of their policy prospectus spurious nonsense, the vast majority of farmers are not even members. 

TIME TO JAIL FOXHUNTERS

THIS month marked the 10-year anniversary of Labour ending years of Tory filibustering by banning the barbaric act of hunting foxes with dogs.

But while the anniversary is worthy of celebration, it still grates on me and everyone else who found fox hunting so utterly barbaric to know that the practice has not yet been completely stamped out.
The League Against Cruel Sports revealed this month that there is still, on average, one person per week prosecuted under the Hunting Act’s provisions.

About two thirds of those prosecutions lead to a conviction, suggesting there is still a hunting fraternity more than willing to flout the laws that Labour set out a decade ago.

As a long-serving trustee and former Chair of the League, they are statistics that disappoint me but, unfortunately, do not surprise me.

The pro-hunt lobby has remained active ever since the ban was introduced, using every trick in the book to try to continue with its activities under the radar.

I have blogged before on the aggression, threats and even violence that hunt monitors have been exposed to, as the lobby does not take kindly to anyone challenging the rights and wrongs of their behaviour.

Organisations such as the Countryside Alliance continue to show their true colours too; their recent unsuccessful attempt to ban a film portraying the cruelty of hunting with dogs evidenced their desire to cover-up the obvious wrongdoing of hunt activities.

The successful prosecution to conviction rate gives us reason to believe in the action being taken. Every one of those convictions is a tribute to the original piece of Labour legislation which ended decades of procrastination from Tories who never really wanted to ban hunting.

And that factor still remains a threat.  It is only a year or so since amendments were proposed by some Tories to try to nullify aspects of the Hunting Act, and it was only after vociferous campaigning by myself and others that the Prime Minister backed down before that got any further.

Far from weakening the legislation, we should be strengthening.

For example, a current provision allows for the killing of wild mammals to be passed off as an “unfortunate accident” during trail hunts, but this dangerous loophole needs closing.

Another change which would be appropriate would be to strengthen the punishments that can be dished out to those who ignore the Hunting Act, including jail terms.

It has done much to deter the majority, but if the minority still believe they are above the law then we should give them food for thought.

These are among changes which the League Against Cruel Sports has proposed to mark the 10-year anniversary, and they are amendments I would back.

Our society is all the more decent for that change a decade ago, and that should rightly raise our spirits. But rather than rest on our laurels we should look to how we can make bloodthirsty activities like fox hunting all the more reprehensible and all the less acceptable forever.

TACKLING CLIMATE CHANGE SHOULD BE A GOVT PRIORITY

Tackling climate change is probably the single most important challenge facing humankind.  The last Labour government passed the Climate Change Act and was the first in the world to do so.

This government has retreated from the commitments given by the previous government and is full of climate change deniers.  That is why it is essential that Labour wins the next election to get the country back on track and ensure that the UK leads the world to make this an international priority.

Labour leader, Ed Miliband, has set out the objectives for a Labour government which would mean:

•  Ambitious emissions targets for all countries, reviewed every five years, based on a scientific assessment of the progress towards the 2C goal.
• A goal of net zero global emissions in the second half of this century.
• Transparent, universal rules for measuring, verifying and reporting emissions with all countries adopting climate change adaptation plans.
• An equitable deal in which richer countries provide support to poorer nations in their efforts to combat climate change.

REAL WAGES FELL BY OVER £500 IN THE EAST MIDLANDS IN 2014

The TUC has published analysis today showing average pay in the East Midlands fell by over £500 in real terms last year.

The report coincides with the launch of the TUC’s Fair Pay Fortnight, to raise awareness about pay inequality.  The campaign is calling for an increase in the minimum wage, greater extension of the living wage and higher pay settlements in the public and private sector.

Average full-time wages in the East Midlands have fallen in real terms by £2,652 per year since 2010, or £51 a week. 

This is the longest real wage squeeze since records began in the 1850s.  Even with inflation falling sharply in recent months, at current rates of progress it will still take years for wages to recover to their pre-recession levels.

Meanwhile, as average wages for workers saw a real terms fall of 9.6 per cent since 2014, fat cat pay for FTSE 100 bosses shot up by 26 per cent.  To put it another way, while workers’ wages have fallen, the remuneration of FTSE executives is on average £700,000 higher today than it was in 2010.

Rising inequality in the UK is threatening the future of our economy.  We therefore desperately need a different approach to stop Britain returning to a 'Downton Abbey' society. 

Changes in the median annual real earnings of full-time employees 2010-2014

	Change Since 2010 (£)	Change Since 2010 (per cent)	Change Since 2013 (£)	Change since 2013 (per cent)
Region/nation
United Kingdom	-2,509	-8.4	-487	-1.8
North East	-1,663	-6.3	164	+0.7
North West	-2,461	-8.9	-506	-2.0
Yorkshire and The Humber	-2,380	-8.7	-554	-2.2
East Midlands	-2,652	-9.6	-510	-2.0
West Midlands	-2,430	-8.9	-1,037	-4.0
East	-2,297	-7.9	-343	-1.3
London	-3,940	-10.1	-978	-2.7
South East	-2,935	-9.3	-390	-1.3
South West	-2,085	-7.5	-298	-1.2
Wales	-2,217	-8.3	-318	-1.3
Scotland	-1,882	-6.5	-102	-0.4
Northern Ireland	-1,681	-6.5	-527	-2.1

Source: Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings, RPI adjusted. All real values are reported are in April 2014 prices, using April RPI: All Items Index values

Changes in FTSE 100 CEOs real earnings 2010-2014

	Change Since 2010 (£)	Change since 2010 (per cent)
FTSE 100 Chief Executives	+£696,236	+26.3

Source: IDS Directors’ Pay Report 2014/15, data from Graph 1.2: CEO and employee median earning trends data 2000 to 2014.

FTSE 100 CE0 pay, compared to median earnings

East Midlands median wage in 2014	£25,027
How many more times the regional median wage FTSE 100 earned in 20141	133
Hours it took CEO to earn median wage in region2	15
Working days it took CEO to earn median wage in region3	2.0

¹This value is FTSE 100 median annual wage divided by regional full time median annual wage and rounded to the nearest whole number.

²This value assumes a standard working week of 37.5 hours per week for 52 weeks per year. Not taking any leave into account, this comes to 1950 standard working hours per year. The FTSE 100 median hourly wage was therefore estimated at £1,709.74, which is the FTSE 100 median annual wage divided by 1950.  Finally, each regional full time median annual wage was then divided by this hourly rate and rounded to the nearest hour.

³This value took the number of hours it would take a FTSE 100 CEO to earn the full-time median annual wage divided by a standard 7.5 hour work day and was rounded to the nearest tenth of a day.

- Fair Pay Fortnight will run between Monday 16 February and Sunday 1 March.

- The Fortnight is part of the TUC’s Britain Needs a Pay Rise campaign and will feature a series of events across England and Wales to raise awareness about low pay, pay inequality and falling living standards. For more information please visit www.fairpayfortnight.org

WAS TORY FUNDRAISER POLITICAL SATIRE? NO IT WAS REAL LIFE

THE recent revelations about the Tories’ latest fundraising activity could genuinely have come straight from a political satire or even a sketch show.

Picture the scene.  Hundreds of obscenely wealthy Tories throwing cash around like there’s no tomorrow, spending outrageous sums on ridiculous auction lots.

Imagine one snooty Tory splashing out £110,000 so he and his pals can shoot 500 pheasants,  or another paying twice that sum for a week’s holiday at a 24-guest mansion in Majorca.

The sketch would climax with another millionaire splashing out more than £200,000 on a bronze bust of that dubious heroine to all Tories – Margaret Thatcher.

I can well imagine settling down on my sofa to watch such entertainment on a Sunday night, or perhaps as an ironic sketch highlighting the differences between rich and poor on Comic Relief.

The incredible truth is that the picture I have painted is not a fiction, but a genuine description of David Cameron’s recent fundraising ball.

This is a political party that tries to make capital out of Labour’s funding links to the trade unions.

Yet here it was, drawing cash from its wealthiest donors who stumped up £15,000 per table even to be at the event, even before the auction began.

Who are you more like?  Someone who is part of a trade union, or the sort of person who can afford to spend six figure sums on whatever folly takes their fancy on a whim, or perhaps to impress their pals.

And that, in a nutshell, is the difference between the Labour Party and the Conservative Party.

One is representative of the worker, and one is representative of the elite super-rich.

It is reflected in everything our respective parties stand for.  Labour is about sharing the wealth and ensuring that everyone is treated fairly and equitably, regardless of their situation.  The Tories are about ensuring that the wealth of the richest is protected, at the expense of the poor.

That’s why my party makes pledges to do things like abolish the bedroom tax, whereas the Tories introduce tax cuts for millionaires.

David Cameron’s quote in the official brochure for the plush fundraiser says it all: “As the clock ticks down to polling day, we all need to dig deep to ensure that we stick to our plan.”

A personal message to millionaires, and a sinister reference to “our” plan.

What is this plan you share with the super-rich, Mr Cameron?  To make them richer still while you continue your austerity measures and slash public spending?

It absolutely defies belief, and is truly sickening.  In a few words, the Prime Minister has summarised everything I despise about Tory ideology, and about the exclusive club who benefit from their policies.

The truth is that there are very few people who really benefit from a Conservative Britain.

I have a theory that the secret to their success is by convincing those better paid ‘ordinary’ people – not the millionaires or super-rich but the so-called middle earners – that they are beneficiaries of Tory policies.

They are not.

The truth is that, unless you’re the sort of person who can afford to spend lavish amounts of cash on stupid auction prizes like those I’ve described, you don’t come close to benefiting from Tory policy. 

Any people not in that bracket who vote Tory under a mistaken belief that they are rich enough to benefit are, unfortunately, kidding themselves.

These are the voters who we need to come home to Labour, because only Labour is capable of reversing the damaging cuts that have widened the gulf between rich and poor and damaged our country.

Britain is in a far worse state than it was five years ago, thanks to the Tories, yet the deficit has not been addressed.  Conservative policies have failed.

While the champagne-quaffing millionaires may chuck their money about without a care in the world, it troubles me to contemplate the state our country will be in if this goes on for five more years. 

VENEZUELA UNDER ATTACK FROM RIGHTWING INSURGENTS

Today marks the first anniversary of the start of the violent 2014 ‘La Salida’ protests in Venezuela.  The intention is to oust the country’s elected, constitutional Government.

These developments in Venezuela are disturbing echo of the US backed rightwing coup in Chile 42 years ago when Salvador Allende was brutally overthrown.  Allende was replaced by the vile dictator General Augusto Pinochet with horrifying consequences for human rights and the neoliberal economics that was inflicted on the country led to an exponential rise in poverty and inequality.

The violence and undemocratic intentions of these extremist elements have also been condemned by regional bodies such as the Organisation of American States and Union of South American Nations.

Commenting on the Situation in Venezuela, Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa said: “We are reminded of the economic warfare that was carried out by the Chilean elites against Salvador Allende once they realized that they could not achieve victory in the ballot box and were defeated in the legislative elections in 1973.”

Everyone who believes in democracy and progressive politics should support the Venezuelan people against this rightwing, anti-democratic insurgency.

That is why I was proud to add my name to the statement below in support of peace and dialogue in Venezuela, and against U.S sanctions, which they recently introduced on the country.  Prominent signatories supporting President Nicolas Maduro's government include former Labour Government Ministers Frank Dobson, Peter Hain, Sir Gerald Kaufman and Andrew Smith.

This is the full statement followed by all the names of all the signatories.

"We the undersigned join Latin America’s main regional bodies such as the Organisation of American States and UNASUR (Union of South American nations) in both condemning the wave of anti-democratic violence from extreme elements of Venezuela’s right-wing opposition, whose declared aim (‘La Salida’) is the ousting of the elected government, and in supporting the calls of Venezuela’s elected President Nicolas Maduro for peace and dialogue.

"We agree with the OAS in its call for “respect for the principle of non intervention in the internal affairs of states and its commitment to the defense of democratic institutionalism of the state of law in agreement with the OAS Charter and international law,” and therefore disagree with all external interference, including through any US sanctions on Venezuela.

"We urge all parties internationally to support the efforts of UNASUR in working for peace and dialogue in Venezuela.”

Signatories:

1.       Dave Anderson MP,
2.       William Bain MP,
3.       Roberta Blackman-Woods MP,
4.       Paul Blomfield MP,
5.       Katy Clark MP,
6.       Michael Connarty MP,
7.       Jeremy Corbyn MP,
8.       Mike Crockart MP,
9.       Jim Cunningham MP,
10.   Nic Dakin MP,
11.   Ian Davidson MP,
12.   John Denham MP,
13.   Rt. Hon Frank Dobson MP,
14.   Brian Donohoe MP,
15.   Frank Doran MP,
16.   Jim Dowd MP,
17.   Mark Durkan MP,
18.   Neil Findlay MSP,
19.   John Finnie MSP,
20.   Paul Flynn MP,
21.   George Galloway MP,
22.   Andrew George MP,
23.   Lord Anthony Gifford QC,
24.   Sheila Gilmore MP,
25.   Roger Godsiff MP,
26.   Tom Greatrex MP,
27.   Nia Griffith MP,
28.   Rt. Hon. Peter Hain MP,
29.   David Hamilton MP,
30.   Mike Hancock MP,
31.   Mark Hendrick MP,
32.   Stephen Hepburn MP,
33.   Cara Hilton MSP,
34.   Kate Hoey MP,
35.   Jim Hood MP,
36.   Kelvin Hopkins MP,
37.   George Howarth MP,
38.   Glenda Jackson MP,
39.   Cathy Jamieson MP,
40.   Bethan Jenkins AM (Welsh Assembly Member,)
41.   Darren Johnson AM (London Assembly Member,)
42.   Baroness Jenny Jones AM (London Assembly Member,)
43.   Rt. Hon. Sir Gerald Kaufman MP,
44.   Jean Lambert MEP,
45.   Ian Lavery MP,
46.   John Leech MP,
47.   Alex Lowley MSP,
48.   Elfyn Llwyd MP,
49.   John McDonnell MP,
50.   Catherine McKinnell MP,
51.   Siobhan McMahon MSP,
52.   Anne McTaggart MSP,
53.   Michael Meacher MP,
54.   Graeme Morrice MP,
55.   Grahame Morris MP,
56.   Ian Murray MP,
57.   Lord Martin O’Neill of Clackmannan,
58.   Fiona O’Donnell MP,
59.   Sandra Osborne MP,
60.   Albert Owen MP,
61.   Murad Qureshi AM (London Assembly Member,)
62.   Jenny Rathbone AM (Welsh Assembly Member,)
63.   Lord Nic Rea,
64.   Linda Riordan MP,
65.   RT. Hon. Dame Joan Ruddock MP,
66.   John Robertson MP,
67.   Alex Rowley MSP,
68.   Lindsey Roy MP CBE,
69.   Barry Sheerman MP,
70.   Jim Sheridan MP,
71.   Rt. Hon. Andrew Smith MP,
72.   Elaine Smith MSP,
73.   Stephen Timms MP,
74.   Derek Twigg MP,
75.   Jean Urquhart MSP,
76.   David Ward MP,
77.   Tom Watson MP,
78.   Sandra White MSP,
79.   Hywel Williams MP,
80.   Mark Williams MP,
81.   Chris Williamson MP
82.   Mike Wood MP

BEGINNING OF THE END FOR AUSTERITY

SYRIZA’S resounding victory in the Greek general election creates a huge opportunity to reverse the damaging consequences of the austerity confidence trick being imposed across Europe.

Austerity in Greece - demanded by the terms of the 'bailout' by the Troika (European Commission, European Central Bank and International Monetary Fund) - has crippled the economy, with GDP falling by 26% since 2009, and unemployment running at 26%.

Nobel prize winning economist, Paul Krugman was withering in his criticism of the Troika's treatment of Greece.  He said: “If the troika had been truly realistic, it would have acknowledged that it was demanding the impossible.”

Syriza’s had made a series of demands including:

• Writing-off the greater part of public debt’s nominal value so that it becomes sustainable in the context of a European Debt Conference.
• Introducing a growth clause in the repayment of the remaining part of the debt so that it is growth-financed and not budget-financed.
• Allowing a significant grace period moratorium in debt servicing to save funds for growth.

Syriza is seeking an immediate renegotiation of the terms of the so-called 'bailout' when the current arrangement expires on 28th February.

It is vital that they receive international support to renegotiate Greek public debt and end the humanitarian crisis that has been imposed on the Greek people.

It is imperative that Syriza succeed in these negotiations because it will have ramifications across Europe, including the UK, where austerity has been entirely counterproductive, hitting living standards and economic growth.

Syriza’s leader, Alexis Tsipras, summed up the futility and savagery of austerity when he said: “Austerity has proven to be an economic & social catastrophe.  He added: “Austerity is the crisis itself – it’s not a solution to the crisis.”  

Here in the UK since 2010, the Tories and their Lib Dem poodles have used their austerity programme to deliver an ideological agenda, that’s impoverished millions and further enriched the already super-rich. 

The state’s assets and taxpayers’ money have been put at the disposal of the corporate sector through privatisations and tax cuts.  Meanwhile ordinary citizens have seen their living standards under attack, unemployed and disabled people have been traduced and there has been a rapid rise of in-work poverty.

But it doesn’t have to be this way.  Just as the election of Hugo Chavez was a catalyst for the Democratic Bolivarian Revolution, which swept across Latin America rejecting neoliberalism in favour of a progressive alternative, so Syriza’s victory could be Europe’s catalyst.

There is a general election in Spain at the end of the year, and there too, people are weary of austerity that protects the wealthy and inflicts hardship on ordinary people.  There is a good chance that the Spanish people will elect the anti-austerity left-wing progressive party, Podemos, led by the charismatic Pablo Iglesias, a 35-year-old political science professor.

Sandwiched between these two elections is, of course, the British general election.  There is therefore an historic opportunity for Labour to be part of a progressive pan-European anti-austerity alliance.   

The spirit of 1945 beckons!  We need to seize the moment to reject neoliberalism and build a progressive alternative that makes capitalism the slave of democracy not the other way round.  That is why I signed the statement, along with 15 other Labour MPs, calling for the party to build on our progressive offer by being more ambitious ahead of the next election.  You can read the statement here: http://labourlist.org/2015/01/16-labour-mps-release-statement-calling-for-change-in-party-policy-direction/

Such an approach is not only the right thing to do, it is popular too, a view reinforced by a YouGov poll showing that Labour would gain more support with an anti-austerity message: http://labourlist.org/2015/01/labour-could-gain-more-support-with-anti-austerity-message-poll-finds/

So although Britain and Greece are very different, there are lessons that Labour can learn from Syriza's political prospectus.  I would love to see Labour at the heart of a progressive anti-austerity Europe.  If we win the election in 98 days, we can take the first step on that journey.  I will certainly be doing all I can to make sure that we do.

In the meantime two parliamentary motions welcoming the election of Syriza are gaining support from Labour MPs in the House of Commons - EDMs 729 and 733: http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2014-15/729
http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2014-15/733 

CLOSURE OF NHS WALK-IN CENTRES HITTING A&E

FAILING to see the wood for the trees has been a common theme of David Cameron’s Government, but the latest farce NHS Walk-In Centres is an issue which is playing with people’s lives.

It is well over two millennia since Aristotle first mused the concept of what made things happen, but the principle of cause and effect is evidently lost on the Tories.

So obsessed are they with enforcing their ideological blueprint on the UK that it seems they just cannot see beyond the end of their nose at the damage they cause.

First we saw it with the economy. They sucked the money out, increased joblessness and then scratched their heads as the welfare bill went up.

We’ve also seen it with councils. Budgets have been slashed, services have diminished and then the Tories declare it an outrage when local authorities are left with little choice but to increase council tax as they try to make ends meet.

It’s happened with policing, where there are now fewer bobbies on the beat, and it’s happened with fire services, where intervention work has been hammered and firefighter numbers have been slashed. The consequential increases in crime and delayed response times are an inevitability.

But the abominable way in which the Government has treated the much-loved NHS is among the worst of their attacks on public services. Quite aside from making a hash of a costly reorganisation which wasn’t even needed, their funding decisions are now leading to increasing numbers of NHS walk-in centres being closed up and down the country.

It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that fewer NHS walk-in centres will result in more people attending A&E departments. And nor do you have to be of Aristotle’s intellect to grasp that more pressure means slower service delivery.

The next logical step is the most devastating, though. And that is that a slower, bogged down A&E service inevitably leads to less prompt treatment and, awfully, the increased likelihood of deaths.

As is so often the case with this Government’s cuts, the ministers making the reckless decisions will largely be unwittingly shielded by the organisations being forced to react to them.

I don’t blame the clinical commissioning groups that are proposing closures of walk-in centres any more than I blame councils cutting services or emergency services being forced to remove frontline officers.

They have to make the best of a desperately bad situation, and they have a duty to protect and prioritise whichever services they are able to.

But I do blame the Government for, again and again, either failing to see or perhaps failing to care about how they are damaging lives.

That is why I have signed a Parliamentary motion highlighting that it is unacceptable to shut A&E departments when patients have nowhere else to turn, and pointing out the vital role NHS walk-in centres play in reducing A&E footfall.

We’re less than 100 days from a General Election, and the public need to make a decision on whether these relentless attacks to our services is what they want to sign up for.

I certainly don’t remember reading anything about crushing Britain’s public services in the Tory manifesto back in 2010, but that certainly looks likely to be Mr Cameron’s legacy.

Perhaps if the Tories suffer a huge collapse in support at the ballot boxes on May 7, it may finally help them to finally grasp what cause and effect is all about.

IN 100 DAYS WHITHER THE UK

IN 100 days the polls will be open for the General Election. I see that as a key milestone as we move towards what will be an incredibly close election that Labour is still on course to win.

Labour certainly has plenty to be proud about from the last five years. As an effective opposition, we have held the Government to account over a wide range of outrageous policy decisions. These have included the cruel welfare reforms, imposition of the bedroom tax, relentless attacks on public services, wasteful reforms of the NHS and hopeless inaction to address the housing crisis and escalating energy costs. While Shadow Fire Minister, I was also particularly proud to lead a campaign which resulted in this Government's half-baked ideologically driven plans to privatise our fire services being shelved.

But, unlike the Tories and Lib Dems, as a party we have never focused solely on the inadequacies of our political opponents; we have plenty to be proud about ourselves. Perhaps the most memorable achievement locally was the campaign to save Bombardier. I was delighted to lead the biggest petition Derby has ever known and I am in no doubt that our fierce opposition to the outrageous decision to send the Thameslink deal overseas affected later contract awards. Another issue I have been heavily involved in has been lobbying for funding to protect and enhance Derby’s flood defences, and again we have enjoyed success on that front too.

We have also fought hard to highlight the issue of low paid workers being penalised through zero hours contracts, an issue which is firmly on the agenda for all parties to address. And in this city we have led a campaign to persuade employers to offer the Living Wage, with the council having been the first major organisation to rise to that challenge.

Labour is less than 50 seats behind the Tories, who currently hold 303 seats against Labour's 257, so we know already the election is going to be tight.

It is therefore all the more important that people who believe in social justice and want a progressive government should unite behind Labour. Only a Labour government can help the country to recover from five ruinous years of Tory control. Labour is the only party capable of forming a government with progressive solutions to the challenges facing the country on issues like the cost of living crisis, housing, NHS, education, environmental sustainability, energy, jobs, social care and transport.

This could be Labour's year to return to power, but it is going to be close. I therefore urge anyone who thinks that Britain deserves better; who wants austerity to be jettisoned; who believes in putting public service before private profit; to join me making it happen.

LET’S MAKE DERBY BRITAIN’S FIRST LIVING WAGE CITY

IT is unthinkable now that, less than 20 years ago, some employers in this city and beyond were getting away with paying workers below a pound an hour.

Yet awful though that sounds, it is in fact a grim reality of a Britain that had been left to rot during two decades of Tory rule under Margaret Thatcher and John Major.

I can even remember the opposition that the Labour government faced following its election in 1997, when it set about introducing a minimum wage that was long overdue.

Opponents warned of economic collapse, of businesses ceasing to exist, of ruin and resultant joblessness.

This was, of course, utter nonsense as it quickly became clear that the additional disposable income created by having a minimum wage bolstered local economies, rather than destroying them. This is not to mention the fact that having a minimum wage was the morally right thing to do.

It is with that episode in mind that I am absolutely confident that Derby’s major employers should now be ready and able to do something even more progressive by adopting the Living Wage.

For anyone who doesn’t know, the Living Wage raises the bar above the minimum wage to a level which reflects the true costs of existing in Britain today.

Derby is in a better position than many other cities in regard to the Living Wage – the city council has already committed to its adoption and, in doing so, has helped to dispel many of the myths which opponents to it are keen to put about.

Such as the alleged escalating costs as the knock-on effect of rising salaries is felt higher up the pay ladder. In fact, this suggestion is nonsense. It is very easy for employers to dampen the impact so that the benefits are felt at the bottom end of the pay scales without impacting on those already earning a decent salary.

No organisation in our city has been placed under more intense pressure than the council in the last five years – with budgets drastically cut and increased expectations – and if it can find a way to make the Living Wage work then so can other employers.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Derby could truly become Britain’s first Living Wage City? What a statement it would make if people knew that earning the Living Wage was the very least that Derby’s workforce could expect.

We are all unified in a hope of improving Derby’s local economy and making it a better place to work in order to attract the best possible talent. Local workers tend to reinvest a large proportion of their earnings within their own economy, creating an upward spiral of growth. The more organisations that support this, then the greater the impact will be.

That is why I have just written to every employer with more than 100 staff in Derby’s ‘travel to work’ area, in the hope of persuading them to make the Living Wage commitment. This is about companies saying: “We value our workforce and we’re prepared to put our money where our mouth is”.

I am not naïve enough to recognise that Derby becoming a Living Wage City is not going to happen tomorrow, next week or next month. But because something is aspirational does not make it unachievable. It is certainly very possible; all that is needed is the will to make it happen.

CORPORATE FAT-CATS ENJOYED £500,000 PAY RISE IN 2014:

TIME TO FORCE CAPITALISM TO WORK FOR EVERYONE

AT the time of writing (3.00pm on Sunday 11 January 2015) Britain’s top company executives had already ‘earned’ (sic) over £90,500 in 2015. In fact they’d made more money by last Tuesday, (6 January 2015), than most UK workers will earn all year!

That’s why last Tuesday was dubbed ‘Fatcat Tuesday’. On that day top bosses’ earnings surpassed the average full-time UK worker's annual salary – just two days after returning to work following the Christmas and New Year holidays!

Calculations by the High Pay Centre think-tank showed that earnings for company executives returning to work last Monday had reached the equivalent of the UK average salary of £27,200 by late afternoon on ‘Fatcat Tuesday.’

FTSE 100 Chief Executives are paid an average £4.72 million. The High Pay Centre found that even if CEOs are assumed to work long hours with very few holidays, this is equivalent to hourly pay of nearly £1,200

When the High Pay Centre made the same calculation last year, the think-tank estimated that top bosses would have to wait until the first working Wednesday of 2014 to surpass the earnings of the average worker. But while pay realised by FTSE 100 Chief Executives has risen by nearly £500,000 since last year, the annual pay of the average UK worker has increased by just £200, from £27,000 to £27,200.

These figures demonstrate that the Government’s half-hearted effort to curb top pay by giving shareholders the power to veto excessive pay packages has been a complete failure.

Labour’s plans to make firms publish the ratio of their top earners pay compared to average employees and put worker representatives on remuneration committees would help to tackle this grotesque inequality.

Let’s remember that the UK is one of the richest nations on the planet. But if we are ever going to make our economy more productive and ensure that everyone shares in Britain’s wealth, we need a different approach.

That means standing up to big business and the super-rich to start making capitalism work for everyone, not just Britain’s wealthiest individuals, as is the case now. One important step we should take is to give workers the power to force employers to share pay more fairly throughout their organisation. We could also follow the Ecuadorian example that requires companies to pay the Living Wage before they can declare any dividends for shareholders.

If anyone doubts the need to take action I suggest you watch the BBC2 documentary ‘The super-rich and us’ screened last week. It’s available now on iPayer.

£1000 REWARD FOR GUILDFORD GIN TRAP CULPRIT INFORMATION

The League Against Cruel Sports and the Wildlife Aid Foundation (WAF) have today launched a public appeal and a £1000 reward for information leading to the successful conviction of the individual or individuals responsible for setting the illegal gin traps resulting in the death of two foxes in Guildford, Surrey.

The animal welfare and wildlife charities have partnered up to offer the cash incentive fearing that there may be more of the cruel devices in the area.

Anyone with information relating to the perpetrators and the traps are being urged to contact the League via their Wildlife CrimeWatch Line in complete confidence on 01483 361 108 or via the charity’s website using their online form as soon as possible to prevent any further wild animals, pets or even child casualties. Alternatively members of the public can report information to the Police by calling 101 and quoting crime watch reference number: P15006136.

WAF Chief Executive Simon Cowell MBE said: "We don’t know how many gin traps there are in the area. If some very sadistic person has been going around putting out these traps around Guildford to try to kill foxes, it is anybody's guess how many of the devices are out there.”

Joe Duckworth, Chief Executive of the League said: “Like snares, gin traps are incredibly archaic, indiscriminate and inherently cruel devices - designed purely to cause destruction, pain and suffering.

“We hope that by partnering up with Wildlife Aid to offer this monetary incentive, anyone with information will come forward to prevent any more wild animals, pets or even people falling victim.”