Peter Dowd speech at the close of tonight’s Budget debates

Peter Dowd MP, Labour’s Shadow
Chief Secretary to the Treasury,
speaking at the close of the
Budget debates tonight, said:

Mr Speaker, last week the
Chancellor painted a rosy picture of the
nation’s finances.

He claimed the Conservative Party’s stewardship had been nothing short of
miraculous.

A relaxed Chancellor attempted jokes throughout his
speech.

The Prime Minister shoulders shook
with amusement. 

Many members opposite chuckled
away.

Some of the more experienced Members
opposite were watching cautiously, as the nose dive gained velocity.

The Chancellor got it wrong – big
time.

Within hours he was attacked by many of his own
backbenchers.

He
was left
hung out to dry by the Prime Minister.

Unsurprisingly,
he has faced
universal criticism over his plans to raise national
insurance to 11 per cent for millions of people who are self-employed.

As Sir Michael Caine, playing the
character of Charlie Crooker in the iconic Italian Job movie said to
his bumbling side kick.

“You’re only supposed to
blow the doors off!”

Well, the debris from the
explosion is still in descending.

A manifesto pledge broken – pure
and simple.

And since last Wednesday No.10 and
No. 11 have been in a briefing war with
each trying to blame the other for the fine mess.

Ostensibly, No.10 suggests the
Chancellor sneaked the NI rise into the Budget.

Apparently, other shocked Cabinet
colleagues have indicated that he failed to mention, that it would break their
manifesto pledge.

It’s worrying, Mr Speaker, that
Cabinet Ministers don’t know what manifesto commitments they made or perhaps
they don’t care?

Then again the Government has an
insouciant attitude towards its manifesto commitments. 

First, the Government committed to getting rid of the deficit
by 2015 – a promise broken.

Second, they said it would be
pushed back to 2019/20 –
another broken promise.

Third, they vowed the debt would
start to come down after 2015 – another broken promise.

The Government will have virtually
doubled the debt and doubled the time they’ll have taken to get it down.

And this is what they call success
and fiscal credibility? 

They seem to think that they can
simply press the reset button when it comes to meeting their own fiscal rules
and no one will notice.

The flip side of John Maynard
Keynes’ approach, namely when I change my mind the facts change with it.

When the Government’s misses a
deadline it’s modus operandi is to set a new one and brazenly move on.

The immutable Tory law of
economics – make it up as you go along.

What happened to the long term
economic plan?

Well, it didn’t last very long? Mr
Speaker

The Prime Minister and the
Chancellor have their finger prints all over every single financial decision
that has been made during the last seven years.

It’s no surprise that
they have come under criticism from many in their own party including the
former Member for Witney.

Or the former Chancellor, Lord
Lamont, who called the NI debacle a “rookie error”.

Otherwise known, in the real
world, as gross incompetence.

But regrettably it’s other people
who will pay the price for that incompetence.

Mr Speaker, turning to Brexit,
I’ll mention it even if the Chancellor doesn’t, it’s the tenth anniversary
since the production of

“Freeing Britain to Compete: Equipping the UK for
Globalisation”

This
publication was a wide ranging policy document authored by the right
honourable Member for Wokingham and friends.

It was endorsed by the then Shadow
Cabinet which included the current incumbents at numbers 10 and 11 Downing
Street.

The publication was hard to track
down as it has been removed from the Conservative Party website and for good
reason.

But I found a copy.

Its contents were toxic and all
the more so in the wake of the subsequent global financial crisis and remain
so.

But in the light of Brexit, and
the resurgence of the honourable member for Wokingham’s influence, it will soon
be getting a second run out.

Mr Speaker, it is worth appraising
the House of a few of the nuggets contained in its pages.

It includes policies such as the
abolition of inheritance tax.

Charging foreign lorries to use
British roads.

The potential
abolition of the BBC licence fee, which it refers to as a poll tax.

The watering down of money
laundering regulations.

The deregulation of mortgage
finance.

Because it’s the:

“lending institutions rather than
the client taking the risk.”

Try
telling that to someone whose house has been repossessed.

It
goes on:

“we need to make it more difficult
for ministers to regulate, and we need to give the critics of regulation more
opportunity to make their case against specific new proposals.”

Remember this document, dated
August 2007, was rubber stamped by the current Prime Minister and
Chancellor at the same time Northern Rock was about to go under.

It continues:

“the Government (the Labour
Government) claims that this regulation is all necessary. They seem to believe
that without it banks could steal our money.”

That
is not quite the case but the
taxpayer, at its peak, had liabilities for the banking crisis of £1.2 trillion.

But, Mr
Speaker, many people did believe the banks were stealing their money.

It refers to wanting:

“reliably low inflation,
taking no risks by turning fiscal rules into flexible friends.”

As for Europe, in search
of jobs and prosperity, it says:

“An incoming Conservative
Government should go to Brussels with proposals to deregulate the whole EU…”

No wonder they wanted to bury the
evidence.

It’s the autobiography of the hard
line Brexiteers.

It’s the Tory blue print for a
post Brexit deregulated Britain.

It’s a race to the bottom.

These policies are a telling
narrative of the views of the fundamentalist wing of the Conservative Party.

The Prime Minister is a hostage to
the far right of the Tory Party.

She is on the hook.

The stage directions are coming
from Wokingham, Haltemprice and Howden, North Somerset and Chingford and Wood
Green with occasional guest appearances by the Foreign Secretary.

The forlorn, melancholic
Chancellor is briefed against because he may just have a less hard-line outlook
as far as Brexit is concerned.

These are the dusted off policies
of the hard Brexiteers who will stop at
nothing until Britain becomes a low wage, low tax, low regulation economy. 

They want to turn our country into
the bargain basement of the western world.

They have the Prime
Minister in tow.

Parliamentary scrutiny is a
hindrance.

Meanwhile, the Prime Minister has
put Kamikaze pilots in the cockpit.

The Chancellor knows this too well and that is why
reportedly he is putting aside £60 billion, equivalent to a year’s worth of
borrowing on the national debt to cope with the trauma.

It’s not Brexit proofing the
economy but rather proofing the economy from the toxic ideology of the hard Brexiteers.

Mr Speaker, ultimately, it comes
down to choices and values.

The Government’s choices in this
Budget are informed by their values and they are not the same as the vast
majority of people in this country.

The
Government propose to increase Insurance Premium Tax
from 10 per cent to 12 per cent, a regressive measure which will be a further
hit on household finances and act as a deterrent to families wanting to obtain
proper insurance cover.

It
was a surprise to see this measure in the Autumn Statement, coming as it did
from a government which constantly uses the high cost of insurance premiums as
an excuse for curbs on victims’ right to claim compensation for their losses,
with particularly damaging effects for those injured in accidents at work.

We
will oppose this rise.

And while the Government drives up
insurance price for millions of families, it has chosen to forego £73 billion
of  revenue to give corporations and the wealthy few tax handouts between
now and 2021.

A choice we would not make.

Their choice is informed by the
value they put on elites and corporations, many of whom readily avoid paying
their fair share of tax.  

They
plan to loosen the rules on the Business Investment Relief, increasing the
scope for non-doms to avoid tax when they bring funds into the UK.

This
is straightforwardly a giveaway to non-doms, which we will oppose.

There
is little evidence that this relief has had a significant impact on inward
investment since it was first introduced in 2012.

And there is little genuine reason
to believe that expanding the relief now will do anything but give non-doms
even more advantages over millions of UK taxpayers.

These and other tax cuts for
elites and corporations come off the backs of public sector employees who have
foregone pay rises for years.

Or those in the private sector
whose wages and salaries remain in the doldrums and will for another decade or
more.

Or the self-employed who are
increasingly driving our economy who will see an increase to 11 per cent in
National Insurance contributions. 

We would make a different choice.
We reject the kick in the teeth to self-employed people.

Not only does it hit many on low
to middle income but will it raise anywhere near the
£2 billion the Treasury
projects?

It may also deter many people from
setting up their own businesses, from innovating and excelling.

It’s a moratorium on aspiration.

We would choose not to give tax
breaks to those who do not need them.

Mr Speaker, in this Budget the
Government claims it’s giving lower and middle earners, the NHS, social care
agencies, the self-employed, schools, businesses, pubs, the strivers, the
entrepreneurs the thumbs up.

Mr Speaker, in practice, this
Budget is not giving a thumbs up to all those people.

On the contrary, it’s two other
digits being put up to those people.

That’s another choice that Labour
would not make.




The government must produce an International Trade White Paper and give urgent clarity what their plans are for our future international trade – Barry Gardiner

Barry Gardiner MP,
Shadow Secretary of State for International Trade
, commenting on this
week’s inaugural Commonwealth Trade Ministers meeting said:

“The
Commonwealth Trade Ministers meeting further demonstrates that the
government is actively holding discussions with potential trading partners on
our future trading relations. Although the government has told us their plan
for Brexit, they have not presented to Parliament and the British people what
their plan is for international trade. We’ve been promised an ‘independent
trade policy’ from the Secretary of State for International Trade, however,
this has not been disclosed.

“The
government must produce an International Trade White Paper and give urgent
clarity what their plans are for our future international trade, outlining
negotiating principles and trade policy objectives.

“To this end,
I have written to the Secretary of State for International Trade
calling for him to urgently publish an International Trade White Paper and to
address key unanswered questions about the government’s international trade
policy.”




Banning bots is a welcome announcement that is long overdue, but a single fix won’t solve the problems of the broken ticket market – Tom Watson

Tom Watson MP, Labour’s
Shadow Secretary of State for culture, media and sport,
commenting on the announcement on banning bots in
ticketing, said:

“Banning bots is a
welcome announcement that is long overdue, but a single fix won’t solve the
problems of the broken ticket market.

"The package of
measures needs to focus on tougher enforcement of existing regulation to stop
big ticket companies flouting the rules without suffering any consequences.

"This is a
significant development in the long running battle to ensure fairness for fans
but we’ll keep campaigning for the comprehensive set of measures needed to
finally end the big ticket rip off.”




John McDonnell – speech to Labour economic conference, Glasgow – Saturday 11 March 2017

*** CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY***

I
want to thank you for coming today.

It’s
been great to see the enthusiasm across the country for these conferences.

There’s
a huge thirst for ideas and for discussion about how we can turn our economy
round.

But
at the heart of our discussions is something fundamental.

Adam
Smith, who taught, as you know, right here in Glasgow, once called economics a
“moral science”.

He
meant that, yes, the economy obeys laws –

But
that it was also about the kind of society we live in.

That
economics is fundamentally about values.

That
when we think about the kind of economy we want, we must always think about the
kind of values we hold for our society.

Our
values are these:

We
believe in a fair tax system where everybody, no matter how rich and powerful,
pay their way.

We
believe that – through a fair tax system and collective endeavour – the elderly
and disabled should be cared for and the sick be treated.

And
children educated to fulfil talents to full.

The
Chancellor presented his Budget statement earlier in the week.

The
contrast between what the Labour Party and the labour movement stand for could
not be clearer.

What
I saw, sitting opposite him, was a Conservative Chancellor boasting about tax
cuts to the corporations and the rich

whilst
refusing to effectively tackle the crisis in social care for the elderly
refusing to properly fund the NHS and increasing the national insurance burden
on many middle and low self-employed earners.

And
at the same time breaking a clear manifesto promise that the Conservatives
would not increase National Insurance.

Labour
opposed the tax hike from the start.

 

 

The
Chancellor’s decision to push a £2bn tax rise on low and middle-earner
self-employed made little sense.

The
justification offered by the government does not stand up.

You
can’t simply demand more taxes off people without offering something in return.

This
week we saw the Government effectively blaming self-employed people for the
dysfunctional labour market.

There
wasn’t a package of measures designed to address the problems of the modern
world of work.

It
was a single unilateral tax hike for all self-employed people earning over
eight thousand pounds.

It’s
a single hike of £2 billion pounds targeted at the self-employed taking place
at the same time as the Tories are slashing taxes for giant corporations.

They’re
making the minicab driver pay more, but the company she works for pay less.

And
that minicab driver will still not enjoy the protections of a full-time
contract.

A
hairdresser earning fifteen thousand pounds a year will be £139 pounds worse
off as a result of yesterday’s measures.

Some
have tried to portray yesterday’s announcement as progressive.

But
what’s progressive about raising taxes for low-paid drivers, while the
Government goes ahead with cuts to capital gains tax for a tiny few?

What’s
progressive about raising taxes for low-paid self-employed cleaners, while the
wealthiest families in the country get a cut in their inheritance tax?

What’s
progressive about raising taxes for plumbers, while multinational corporations
see their tax bills slashed year after year?

What’s
not fair is £70 billion pounds of tax giveaways for the wealthiest and
corporations, while hiking taxes on middle and low earnings.

That’s
not fair. That’s not progressive. That’s just not right.

Meanwhile
the Government’s incremental reforms to business rates fall far short of the
radical long-term reform needed.

They
are trying a delaying tactic, but business rates are a ticking time bomb
threatening to destroy many town centres.

Now
Labour recognise that the labour market is changing.

Some
of this can be welcome.

Self-employment
can give people the flexibility at work that a more conventional contract might
not.

Changes
in technology have opened up new scope for interesting and fulfilling work –
for some.

But
let’s not romanticise this.

Bogus
self-employment is a real and growing problem.

It
means workers going without the protections that the appropriate labour
contract can give.

It
means workers forced into more insecure work, for less pay – and employers
ducking their own requirements to pay National Insurance.

I
want to pay tribute to the campaigning work put in by our unions to bring
employers to heel.

Scottish
TUC are running an excellent campaign, “Better than Zero”, against zero hours
contracts.

The
challenge for the next Labour government and the whole labour movement will be
in securing the balance between the best possible protections for those in work

And
recognising that the world of work itself is changing.

The
labour movement has risen to challenges like this in the past.

It
was born out of the struggle for decent pay and conditions when new
technologies were ripping up existing ways of working.

We
need that same spirit and vision again.

So
I’ll be convening a summit next month of unions, the self-employed, and small
businesses to develop Labour’s policy on self-employment.

We
want to win the widest possible support for a radical, Labour vision of how to
adapt to a changing world.

We
are the party of workers and small businesses.

That
is the message we should carry to every part of the country.

And
we face a government of the giant corporations and tax avoiders.

This
week’s Budget made that only too clear where their priorities lie.

Labour
will make different choices when we return to government.

For
now, we’ll keep the pressure up on the Tories.

Theresa
May has already had to buckle – the tax hike will now not be enacted until the
Autumn.

 

 

But
the Chancellor was silent on the greatest challenge facing this country.

The
word “Brexit” never passed his lips once during the speech.

As
Britain prepares to begin the process of leaving the European Union, the
Chancellor had nothing to say on the matter.

He
kept silent because he does not agree with the position of his own government.

The
Prime Minister claims no deal is better than a bad deal.

But
this is absurd – no deal would be the worst possible deal.

The
Chancellor knows very well that this is the case.

He’s
been warned about it from all sides.

Crashing
out of the EU means we will be cut off from investment.

We
will be cut off from our biggest trading partner.

We
will be cut off from the skills and contribution that EU nationals have made to
our economy and society.

The
government has yet to even offer guarantees for those EU migrants already
living and working here.

It
was Labour’s amendment in the Lords that demanded the government offer a
guarantee.

We
defeated the government then and we will be fighting the case on Monday.

It
is essential these guarantees are given to the three million people from the EU
now living and working here.

Instead
this government seems to think they can treat people as bargaining chips –
apparently forgetting that 1.5 million UK citizens live and work in the rest of
the EU.

 

 

The
Brexit vote creates huge challenges for all of us.

It
has brought some of the fault-lines in our society to the fore.

It’s
forcing us to think about what kind of society we want to live in.

Because
the status quo is no longer an option.

But
the challenge now for all parties, including the Labour Party, is to present an
alternative.

The
Tories have already offered theirs.

It
is a dystopian vision of Britain as a bargain basement tax haven off the shores
of Europe.

Of
poverty pay and misery for the majority – but a fabulously wealthy elite at the
top.

I
do not believe that those who voted Leave voted for this –

Quite
the opposite, many believed that our public services would get more resources,
not fewer.

The
hardliners are pushing for this.

They
want Brexit to be the culmination of decades of free market dogma.

Of
the belief that the only relationships that matter are market relationships.

And
that if you just let markets rip, and let the wealthy do as they please, wealth
will trickle down.

It’s
the belief that the institutions we rely and the relationships we build are
barriers to efficiency.

And
that if we leave everything to the market alone, the result will be a
flourishing of entrepreneurship and growth.

Nearly
forty years since the free market experiment began, we can assess the results.

And
they are abysmal.

We
have a society that is amongst the most unequal in the developed world.

Too
much wealth is held by too few hands.

Following
these free market prescriptions have left Britain with a crumbling
infrastructure, businesses that don’t feel able to invest, and productivity
growth that has slumped.

Here
in deregulated Britain, it takes a typical worker five days to produce what a
worker in regulated France or Germany can produce in four.

And
that gap is getting wider. It matters because without growth in productivity,
sustained improvements in living standards will not be possible.

The
slump in productivity is the major reason we are now looking at the truly grim
forecasts for real wages.

Britain
has the unique distinction of being the only large, developed economy where
when growth returned after the financial crisis, real wages fell.

We
have growth. But that doesn’t mean most people are any better off.

Resolution
Foundation expects real wages to not recover their 2007 level before 2022.

This
15-year period without a pay rise is unprecedented, they say, in 210 years.

For
as long as industrial capitalism has existed in Britain, we haven’t seen a
period like this.

It
is unprecedented. And everything the Tories are doing today is simply
exacerbating the problem.

The
Budget shambles revealed this.

Nearly
a decade after the financial crisis they do not have a clue about how to deal
with its consequences.

They
are continuing to pursue austerity – despite all the evidence, now clear from
across the globe, that it has been a disaster for those countries that pursued
it.

 

 

So
we have to now develop our alternative, and win the argument for a radically
different approach.

We
need to be far bolder in our ambitions for the constitution.

I’ve
spoken of the possibilities of a more radically federal structure for the UK.

Not
just devolution here in Scotland, or in Wales.

But
devolution to the English regions, too.

And
a revival of local democracy everywhere.

If
they shared little else, both the independence referendum and the EU referendum
revealed a healthy scepticism about centralisation.

There
is a deep and growing distrust of authority.

Powerful
institutions are seen as distant, unaccountable, and undemocratic.

Because
if we’re repatriating powers from Brussels, why simply hand them back to
Westminster?

And
then why stop at the existing devolved institutions?

There
is no reason why English counties and regions should not enjoy significantly
greater freedoms.

Labour
won all four metro mayoral elections in England last year, and we’ll be
fighting for victories in this year’s elections.

But
we need to go further.

It’s
not just about the powers that government has.

It’s
about getting wealth back into our communities.

Too
many people, in too many places, have been excluded from economic growth.

That
means taking a different view of how we own our societies’ assets and wealth.

For
too long we have automatically turned to the private sector when new
opportunities arise.

Look
at renewables.

Two-thirds
of the UK’s existing electricity generation capacity will be decommissioned by
2030.

We
need to move quickly to replace it.

It’s
renewable generation that can deliver. The UK is uniquely well-placed to
exploit the opportunity.

In
Scotland you have already undergone something of a renewables revolution, which
of course we should welcome.

However,
when it comes to who owns and profits from renewable energy the record here is,
at best, patchy. It is good that there is some support through the Cares Scheme
for community projects and that many local organisations have developed local
renewable schemes.

However,
let’s be honest – renewables in this country have become a new Klondike for big
multi-nationals.  

Indeed,
for big projects the automatic propensity by Government is to seek private
operators and private money to build and finance them; as shown by former First
Minister Alex Salmond making such a big effort with the Qatari Government to
sell renewable investment opportunities to them.

This
is a massive missed opportunity for public ownership and control of renewable
energy in Scotland.

We
could have saw surpluses reinvested back into the public sector but instead we
have saw profit floating to various boardrooms across the world.

Other
countries in Europe are racing ahead of us in installing new, clean renewable
generation.

Places
like Denmark and Germany are doing it because they are fostering local and
co-operative ownership of renewable energy.

We
could be aiming to create thousands of co-operatives delivering renewable
energy.

Our
network of regional development banks will be charged with supplying the
finance they need to overhaul our existing energy system.

This
will sit alongside new local energy companies, supplying cheap, clean energy to
their local areas and breaking the monopoly of the Big Six.

We’ll
be giving power back to the people and letting local communities take control
of their own power supply.

We
know there are huge advantages to community ownership.

Research
shows that for every single megawatt of community-owned microhydro installed,
10 full-time equivalent jobs are created.

That
is delivering a real boost to some otherwise isolated rural communities,
securing jobs and incomes where otherwise there was little.

So
the next Labour government will create a “Right to Own”.

We’ll
give workers in a company facing a change of ownership first refusal on
presenting their own, worker-owned takeover plan.

Our
new regional development banks will support worker-owned businesses across the
country.

We’ll
aim to double the size of our co-operative sector, so it matches Germany or the
US.

But
I think the same principle has to apply to our communities.

 

 

The
next Labour government will take this new approach.

It’s
an approach that means bringing together those parts of our society where
co-operation and trust are fostered.

For
those on the left, that was a traditional argument for the Union.

The
UK state could be a powerful mechanism to redistribute and create a fairer
society.

That
by pooling our resources through taxation, we can make sure that those who are
better off can support those who are not.

It
means, in theory, we can deliver the same high quality public services across
the whole country.

The
National Health Service is the embodiment of this principle.

And
by creating UK-wide institutions we tie our societies together.

The
economy is always supported and sustained by a dense web of culture and
institutions.

That’s
one reason the Tories’ austerity measures are so criminally destructive –

It’s
not just that public services are being slowly ground into the dirt.

It’s
that the fabric of social life itself starts to become frayed.

The
institutions we rely on – from the local council to the health service to our
schools – aren’t only there to provide a service.

We’re
not mere consumers of education or healthcare.

How
we educate our young people and how we look after those who are sick define us
as a society.

They
tie us together as a collective.

This
is the principle behind taxation.

I
raised the issue, before the Budget, of making public the tax returns of those
who earn over a million pounds a year.

It’s
an anti-avoidance measure, inspired by the example of Norway and Sweden.

Public
disclosure makes it extremely difficult for those who intent on avoiding their
taxes to do so.

It’s
a major reason Norway has one of the lowest rates of tax avoidance in the
world.

But
I think it’s about more than this.

It’s
about shifting our culture.

If
you are rich – and if you earn over a million pounds a year, you are in not
even the top 1%, but the top 0.1% –

If
you are lucky enough to be that wealthy, and to pay the taxes that are due,
your contribution to society matters.

We
all want a society that is fair, and seen to be fair.

So
we in the labour movement are against the dogma from the Tories that views
society as a war of all against all.

We
don’t believe, as Margaret Thatcher said, “that there is no such thing as
society”.

We
don’t believe that you can undermine the institutions that make up the fabric
of our social life –

Whether
they are the NHS, or local councils, or schools –

With
year after year of cuts.

 

 

We
stand for a totally different vision.

It’s
a vision rooted in our values.

It’s
a vision of a more caring society where opportunities are available to all.

“Secure
people take risks,” as the Cambridge economist Ha Joon Chang put it.

A
caring society is one that is also able to take risks – to take on great social
challenges.

Or
to allow individuals to strike out, to be entrepreneurial –

To
invent, and create, and challenge convention.

Those
who are live in fear of unemployment.

Or
of what will happen if they grow sick.

Or
how they will educate their children.

Or
what will happen when they grow old.

People
who are consumed by these fears – all understandable – will not take those
risks.

This
used to be the privilege of great wealth –

That
only those with the wealth to do so can afford to innovate.

But
we don’t have to run a society like this.

Technology
has hugely reduced the barriers against those seeking to establish new
businesses.

We
have built strong institutions that foster co-operation.

And
new technology lets us build new ways of working together, like Platform
Co-operatives.

This
is the immense, shared wealth that our society has built up.

If
we are to face Brexit with confidence, it is the wealth that we must draw on.

We
will need a radically different vision of how society can operate.

We
know the world is changing, rapidly –

The
balance of power and wealth is shifting.

Factory
wages in China now match those in Greece, and are approaching those in
Portugal.

Our
country’s position in the world is changing.

We
can’t rely on a single sector to drag the whole economy along – as we relied on
financial services too heavily before the crash.

And
we can’t think again that concentrating resources and wealth in a few hands in
a single city is good for the rest of us.

It
can’t be right that London gets half of all the transport investment in the
country.

And
unlike the SNP vision that was for a prosperity built on low taxes for big
business, and an over reliance of oil and bank profits, and austerity for
everyone else.

We
must build new institutions, and spread the wealth of our society more fairly.

We’ll
bring in a £10 an hour Real Living Wage, so work always pays properly.

We’ll
deliver investment in jobs and skills across the whole country.

Our
National Investment Bank and network of regional banks will support prosperity
in every region and nation.

I
think we can look to our neighbours and see how our society has a huge
potential that can be brought out.

We
could look to countries like Denmark, Sweden and Norway.

For
example, look at Norway where the best public services in the world are matched
by the highest wages.

Across
these nations you see that measures such as tax transparency at the top,
affordable child care, and greater equality are the accepted norm.

We
don’t have to settle for second-rate.

We
can radically decentralise this country –

Put
power back in the hands of workers, small businesses and communities.

Bring
the investment needed to redistribute wealth across every part of this island.

Labour
would seek a prosperity based on solidarity and fellowship between the nations
of these isles, and those who share our values in Europe.

We
will be part of a new Arc of Prosperity – a radically fairer, more equal, and
more prosperous society.




The Justice Secretary needs to clearly set out what action her department took in response to that 2015 inspection and why it has not worked – Burgon

Richard
Burgon MP, Labour’s Shadow Justice Secretary
, commenting on the fire at Guys Marsh prison, said:

“Two years ago the prisons inspector said this was ‘a prison that was in
crisis, where managers and staff had all but lost control.’

“The Justice Secretary needs to clearly set out what action her department took
in response to that 2015 inspection and why it has not worked.

“Her Prisons and Courts bill does not remedy the crisis. Prisons need action on
the ground not gestures from ministers.”