DERBYSHIRE MP POISED TO PULL THE PLUG ON RAIL JOBS IN DERBY

LISTENING to Transport Minister Simon Burns in a pre-Christmas parliamentary debate, confirming the betrayal of Derby's proud rail industry, was among my bitterest moments since coming into politics.

The battle to persuade the Government to rethink its decision not to award Bombardier the Thameslink contract last year has been arduous and enduring. It involved hundreds of hours of commitment from politicians, including myself, trade unions, business leaders and tens of thousands of Derby people who signed petitions and protested.

Now, another nail has been hammered into the coffin after Mr Burns confirmed that commercial agreement had been reached with rival bidder Siemens. The final hurdle is "financial close", which basically means checking that Siemens has adequate finance in place to deliver the contract. And Mr Burns says that is expected next month.

The backhanded manner in which the Tory-led Government ignored endless well-founded concerns over its process and decisions is scandalous. It makes it difficult to brush myself down and take any satisfaction from giving it my all and trying my hardest. Instead, as we near the end of this 18-month campaign, I'm left with a feeling of emptiness and anger. The arguments have not been considered and rejected but ignored and neglected.

In the pre-Christmas House of Commons debate that I secured, Mr Burns failed to respond to my points about serious questions over the legitimacy of the Government's role in this contracting process. Nor did he respond to challenges about why Siemens Project Ventures GmbH was allowed to be part of the process, despite EU regulations which should have precluded it. He didn't respond either to the expert evidence I cited, which had been considered by the Transport Select Committee, showing Siemens' credit rating gave it an unfair and discriminatory advantage.

Even now, it beggars belief that the traitorous decision over Thameslink came just three months after Prime Minister brought his Cabinet to Derby. Mr Cameron said the point of coming to Derby was "to ask one fundamental question – what can Government do to help the economy to rebalance...to invest and employ people". His words ring very hollow after doing the opposite.

Remarkably, it is still within the gift of Secretary of State and Derbyshire MP Patrick McLoughlin to put the brakes on this process.

Although I am an eternal optimist, even I don't have an ounce of hope left that it will happen. He and his predecessors, Justine Greening and Philip Hammond, have dug themselves a deep hole with their bloody-minded determination not to show weakness by changing their view. The irony is that it would actually show incredible strength to finally admit they got it wrong.

The truth is this whole affair has been a shocking aberration and yet another example of why this Government is not fit for purpose. But in just under two-and-a-half years the people of Derby and Derbyshire can give their verdict at the ballot box.

TORY-LIB DEM GOVERNMENT FIRE CUTS WILL PUT LIVES AT RISK

The public and firefighters are being put at risk as a result of irresponsible cuts being forced on fire authorities across England.

I wrote to the Fire Minister, Brandon Lewis, before the Government announced its latest funding plans for the fire and rescue service. I asked him to spare it from further punitive cuts, but my exhortations fell on deaf ears and the next wave of reckless cuts were announced on 19th December.

Almost 5,000 firefighters have either already been laid off or will be over the next two years in addition to more than 1,000 key support staff. Scores of fire stations and dozens of appliances will also be lost across England.

Only last month we saw what an important role the fire and rescue services play in dealing with flooding across the country. But this is not a statutory function and the latest cuts will make it increasingly difficult for them to respond future flooding episodes. Fire chiefs are warning that they simply will not be able to cope if the planned cuts go ahead on top of those they have already had to absorb. In other words this Government is putting lives in jeopardy.

By contrast, under Labour, the number of people killed in fires fell by 30 per cent between 2000 and 2010. The number of fire casualties also dropped by a massive 40 per cent during the same period. The Metropolitan fire authorities – that are set to absorb 62 per cent of the cuts between them – have warned Ministers that the progress made in the last decade is likely to be reversed under the Tory-Lib Dem Government.

The public have a right to expect protection from properly resourced emergency services. The Government should urgently change course.

MYTHS ABOUT SOCIAL SECURITY 12: “LOW-INCOME FAMILIES ARE USUALLY SINGLE PARENT FAMILIES”

Whilst the risk of poverty is greater amongst single parent families compared to couple families (not surprisingly given that single parent families are reliant on one individual being able to bring in a wage), the majority of children in poverty are in couple families.

Two thirds (65%) of children living in poverty are in couple households.

MYTHS ABOUT SOCIAL SECURITY 11: “THERE ARE LOTS OF CHILDREN LIVING IN FAMILIES WHO HAVE NEVER WORKED”

There is sometimes confusion between data showing workless households and households where no one has ever worked.  Yet the difference between these figures is great.  Preventing temporary worklessness and supporting parents when this is unavoidable should be a greater focus for policy makers interested in tackling child poverty.

12.8% of households containing dependent children are currently classed as workless households.

Just 2.1% of children are classed as living in households where no one has ever worked (and this includes households where parents may have never worked for good reason – ie. disability or longstanding illness, or where parents have recently finished studying and have only just entered the labour market).

MYTHS ABOUT SOCIAL SECURITY 10: “MOST FAMILIES IN POVERTY HAVE LARGE NUMBERS OF CHILDREN”

Larger families are at greater risk of poverty than families with one or two children, largely because of the extra cost of having more children entails and greater barrier to labour market participation it can create. However, it is wrong to say that having 3 or more children is the experience most common to families in poverty.

Over two thirds (68%) of children in poverty live in families with one or two children.

MYTHS ABOUT SOCIAL SECURITY 9: “THE STATE PAYS FOR WORKLESS PEOPLE TO LIVE IN MANSIONS”

The truth is that only a small number of households were receiving support through Housing Benefit worth £50,000 or more a year before a cap came in on the amount of support a household can receive through Housing Benefit (£20,800 a year).

In March 2012 just 110 households in receipt of Housing Benefit received over £50,000 a year (out of 5,014,650 recipients)

According to the latest DWP figures, the average Housing Benefit award is £4651.92 a year.

In fact, only 0.037% of Housing Benefit claimants are receiving more than £30,000 per annum and most of those are receiving between £30,000 and £40,000.

Surprisingly a third of children in poverty live in owner-occupier families with around a third in social housing and a third in privately rented housing.

MYTHS ABOUT SOCIAL SECURITY 8: “MOST PEOPLE ON BENEFITS ARE FIDDLING THE SYSTEM”

This just isn’t the case.  The amount we lose to benefit fraud is comparatively small and has fallen substantially since the late 1990s. It is also less than the amount we lose to errors by those operating the system.

In 2011-12, overpayment due to fraud and error in respect of DWP benefits is provisionally estimated to have remained at around £3.2bn (2% of total DWP benefit spend), of which £1.1bn was due to fraud (0.8% of benefit spending). Also, an estimated £1.3bn was underpaid in error.