Category: Economy

  • Ed Miliband – 2020 Comments on Help for the Self-Employed

    Ed Miliband – 2020 Comments on Help for the Self-Employed

    The comments made by Ed Miliband, the Shadow Business Secretary, on 23 October 2020.

    The promise of doing ‘whatever it takes’ to protect workers is a distant memory. Despite public health restrictions tightening and many sectors being shut, Ministers are leaving self-employed people in the lurch.

    Almost half a million self-employed people work in industries either partially or fully closed. They’re in desperately choppy waters with many deeply worried about their future.

    Yet Ministers are taking away their life raft and leaving them to sink or swim. That’s not just callous, but economically wrong. These are our country’s artists and performers, and people in our vibrant tourism, sports, cultural and hospitality sectors.

    The Business Secretary must stand up for them and ensure they are given a fair deal.

  • Angela Rayner – 2020 Speech on Fair Economic Support

    Angela Rayner – 2020 Speech on Fair Economic Support

    The speech made by Angela Rayner, the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, on 21 October 2020.

    I beg to move,

    That this House calls on the Government to publish clear and fair national criteria for financial support for jobs and businesses in areas facing additional restrictions, to be voted on in Parliament; and calls on the Government to make good on its claim that workers faced with hardship who are subject to the Job Support Scheme extension will receive at least 80 percent of their previous incomes.

    I start by placing on record my thanks to the staff at Stepping Hill Hospital in Stockport who recently cared for my aunt, who died of coronavirus last week. I speak today not just as a Member of this House, or just as a Mancunian, but as someone like the many others across our city and our country who have in the past few weeks lost loved ones to this terrible virus. That, more than anything, is why I come here wanting the Government not to fail but to succeed, because lives literally depend on it.

    We know that a public health response will save lives only if it is supported by a fair economic settlement. The British people want to do the right thing, and they will do the right thing, but we need to support them in doing so. That is why I was so appalled by what I witnessed yesterday. I was with fellow Greater Manchester MPs on a Zoom call with the Health Secretary, who was handing us scraps from the Prime Minister, while our elected Mayor found out from Twitter. The Government then tried to blame it all on our Mayor for not doing what he was ordered to do from Whitehall. I have heard of power without accountability, but apparently the Government’s idea of devolution is accountability without the power.

    We were offered £8 per head—or, to put it another way, 30 seconds of work for a consultant working on the collapsed test and trace system. Let me say this: £8 per person is an insult. And now the Government are attempting to play us off against each other across GM. Well, let me tell the Prime Minister: our Mayor stood up for Greater Manchester, but he spoke for Great Britain. Indeed, his call for Parliament to have a say and a vote on these measures is one that so many Government Members have made.

    Gary Sambrook (Birmingham, Northfield) (Con)

    On the point about votes in Parliament, many of us called for votes in this place on national restrictions a couple of weeks ago but, unfortunately, near enough all Opposition ​Members did not bother to turn up for those votes, including the one on the rule of six. If the Opposition get their way and have votes on localised restrictions, will they even turn up?

    Angela Rayner

    As the hon. Member has turned up today, I hope he will do the right thing and support people with an economic package so that they can do the right thing and we can save people’s lives across Greater Manchester and the whole of this country. I hope he will do the right thing and support us in the Lobby tonight.

    The Government have not given us the chance to have our say, so today we are giving the House the chance to do so. Our motion calls for the Government to bring forward fair national criteria for financial support in areas facing additional restrictions, and it provides for Members to have a vote on the criteria.

    Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab)

    I congratulate my hon. Friend on making some excellent points in her speech. Given that the Government’s strategy to deal with the pandemic is not working, does she agree that, rather than using divisive tactics and treating the regions of our nation with utter contempt, the Prime Minister needs to adopt a united, one nation approach? Does she also agree that, if we want to impose stricter measures, we need to provide support to individuals and businesses, and that we cannot have lockdown on the cheap?

    Angela Rayner

    I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. Over the past 24 hours, the people of Greater Manchester, regardless of their political persuasions or colours, have been absolutely dismayed by the way in which our democratically elected Mayor has been treated, but this is about the treatment not just of our Mayor but of the people of Greater Manchester. This is not some spiteful little game; this is about people’s lives, people’s loved ones and people’s jobs. They have spent years building up our economy in Greater Manchester. This Government choosing the path that they have chosen has done one thing for Greater Manchester: it has completely brought us together in saying that this Government and Prime Minister must do the right thing by the whole of our nation and support everywhere, not pick us off one by one.

    Alun Cairns (Vale of Glamorgan) (Con)

    What advice would the hon. Lady offer my constituents in the Vale of Glamorgan, where the infection rates are exceptionally low, given that a one-size-fits-all approach has been taken across the whole of Wales? Retailers, hairdressers, personal service providers, beauticians and all those sorts of businesses have been closed, irrespective of the exceptionally low rate. Does that make sense? What does she have to say to those businesses that have invested all their time, effort, money and innovation in creating employment and wealth?

    Angela Rayner

    The right hon. Member makes a point about what the Welsh Government are doing. What they are doing is putting people, business and lives first. They are working with local government and with businesses to bring the R number down. The Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies has said that the plan for Greater Manchester as it currently stands will not bring the R rate down and that it will lead us into poverty and destitution. When I speak to the experts, they tell me that poverty and destitution ​have a link to how deadly this virus is. In parts of areas such as Oldham in my constituency that have faced restrictions since July—I have not been able to see my granddaughter because of those restrictions—the rates have gone up. We do not want to plunge our businesses into destitution. I am proud of the Welsh Government’s defence of the people and their support for the people of Wales. I just wish we had a better Government here in Parliament.

    Our motion calls on the Government to implement their own promise that workers on the job support scheme extension will receive at least 80% of their previous income. I remember the promises the Prime Minister made, not just in this crisis but before it. He offered levelling up for communities such as mine, but he is not levelling us up; he is letting us down. Under Thatcher, we were consigned to managed decline, but now it feels like mismanaged decline. And it is not just a conflict between the north and the south, or between London and the rest. The elected leaders of our nation’s cities, regions and countries have been treated with the same contempt, from Wales to Wigan.

    Patrick Grady (Glasgow North) (SNP)

    I pass on the condolences of the Scottish National party to the hon. Lady and her family on the loss of her aunt.

    We are not in a position to field a Front-Bench spokesperson today—that might have been easier if the Government had allowed us virtual participation—but I can confirm that we will support the official Opposition in the Lobby this evening, precisely because of the hon. Lady’s point about the need for support across the UK. Any enhanced package that is provided to Liverpool, Greater Manchester and South Yorkshire must attract consequentials above what has already been guaranteed to Scotland. Scottish businesses are looking at the additional package of support that the Government have found for these English regions, and expect additional funding to be delivered to Scotland. Does she agree that that should happen for Scotland and the other devolved Administrations?

    Angela Rayner

    I thank the hon. Member for his contribution. I absolutely agree. All our nations and regions —the whole of Great Britain—have to come together, because this virus is a challenge for us all. We cannot treat people in different parts of the country and in our nations disproportionately and disgracefully.

    In Greater Manchester, we were promised a powerhouse, but what we have at the moment is a power grab. Even here in London, just this week, the Government have threatened to seize control of the tube. We now have a Prime Minister so determined to punish a Labour Mayor that he wants to whack a transport tax on his own constituents, yet the Government still refuse to take the decisive national action that is needed. Instead, they have tried to play people off against each other—divide and misrule.

    Kevin Hollinrake (Thirsk and Malton) (Con)

    I am very sorry to hear about the hon. Lady’s aunt.

    Will the hon. Lady she be straight and honest with British citizens when she talks about a national lockdown? Is it not the reality that the SAGE paper says that it might take multiple circuit breakers to keep this virus at low levels? Will she be clear about the impact that that would have on jobs and businesses in this country?

    Angela Rayner

    The hon. Member invites me to be clear and honest, and the one thing that probably most people know is that I tell it how it is and I always have. I can be clear and honest with him: the Prime Minister’s plan, as it currently stands, will not protect the people of Greater Manchester and will plunge us into more poverty. We have seen the evidence that says that. I promise him and other hon. Members across the House that the Labour party will always put the people, and the protection and security of the people, first. I ask the hon. Member to get the Prime Minister to do the same thing, instead of playing party politics with people’s lives and livelihoods.

    Today this House can vote for a fair deal for all and to end these political games. No more will the Health Secretary have to tour the country like a pound shop Noel Edmonds, announcing “Deal or no deal?”. The Government can honour their own promises that every worker facing hardship on the job support scheme will get at least 80% of their previous income, because what is good enough for the office worker in the City of London is good enough for the caterer in the city of Manchester, and what was good enough for the whole country in March is good enough for the midlands and the north today. We are trying to hold the Government to their own promises. Businesses need consistency, and they need that promise honoured.

    The Prime Minister told the House on 14 October that

    “whatever happens, a combination of the job support scheme and universal credit will mean that nobody gets less than 93% of their current income.”—[Official Report, 14 October 2020; Vol. 682, c. 368.]

    He then said that those on low incomes will get at least 80% of their income. Perhaps he can tell that to the waitress in my constituency who earned £9 an hour on a 32-hour week, serving in a central Manchester bar that has now closed. The Resolution Foundation has shown that she will end up with less than 70% of that wage under the Government’s current plan. So the Government are telling my constituents to survive on less than the minimum wage for months, because the Government cannot tell us when an area will leave tier 3 and how those restrictions will be lifted.

    Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)

    I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving way and thank her for the case that she is making. Is she interested, as I am, that not a single one of the interventions that she has faced from the Conservative side has been relevant to the motion that we are debating? They all seem to be dragging us back on to Labour party policy, rather than standing up for the financial settlement that they are offering to Manchester, and that we know will be going to so many other areas. So can she help me in inviting them to actually speak about the 80% that we are trying to ensure gets into some of the most impoverished people’s—some of the most impoverished workers’—pockets, rather than trying to change the debate into the one they want to have?

    Angela Rayner

    I thank my hon. Friend for his contribution. I will go a little bit further and compliment some of the Tory Members who have stood up as part of Greater Manchester, and I will be incredibly disappointed if what I have seen over the past 24 hours results in this ​becoming a party political fight. Because in Greater Manchester, despite what the Prime Minister and the Health Secretary were trying to suggest, we were united in trying to support our citizens across the conurbation in doing the right thing, bringing the virus rate down and supporting our economy. I hope we can continue to do that. I hope we do not get distracted by messages that are not in the motion, and I absolutely hope the Prime Minister does the right thing, because this is not just about Greater Manchester—this is coming to a town near you. In so many areas now, the R number is increasing. So many areas are in tier 2; so many areas are going to go into tier 3. This is a marker to ensure that our economy survives through those problems.

    Mr Clive Betts (Sheffield South East) (Lab)

    On that point about coming to a town near you: it is indeed coming to cities and towns in the Sheffield city region, it was announced today. The package of assistance is totally inadequate. It is nothing like what the leaders and the Mayor asked for. It is exactly the same as has been offered to other areas—the standard package. It is not locally negotiated; it is the standard package. As the leader of Rotherham said, “They put lots of civil servants into a room with us to tell us what we couldn’t have.” That is actually what has been happening in the negotiations.

    Angela Rayner

    I thank my hon. Friend for his insight. Many of the local leaders I have heard from have said that it felt like they had been blackmailed and pressurised into taking a deal. Greater Manchester and the Mayor were not just trying arbitrarily to get more than somewhere else. We put a package together based on the needs of our city, our conurbation, our lowest-paid and the businesses that needed the support. It was not a bargaining chip to get this or that; it was about making sure that there was a floor that meant people were given the support that, by the way, this Government promised. They promised that support, and we are just asking them to keep to their promise.

    Nadia Whittome (Nottingham East) (Lab)

    Does my hon. Friend agree that it is grossly unfair that while the Prime Minister, reportedly, is complaining about not being able to live off £150 k a year, he is expecting my constituents in Nottingham, and all the constituents of every one of us in this House, to live off two thirds of the minimum wage unless a proper economic settlement is provided?

    Angela Rayner

    I thank my hon. Friend for her contribution. People on the Government Benches might grunt, but my hon. Friend was a care worker before coming into Parliament, like myself, and knows exactly how people on the minimum wage feel, and I commend her for standing up for her constituents, not leaving them behind like many Members on those Benches seem to be doing now.

    Even the two-thirds wage support under the job support scheme extension is only available to businesses legally required to close. Someone who works for a firm that is not required to close, but whose business is severely impacted as a result of the restrictions—such as a brewery supplying pubs that have to close—gets absolutely nothing.

    Imran Hussain (Bradford East) (Lab)

    My hon. Friend is making an excellent contribution, which highlights the points. Does she agree that much of the debate is around tier 3 support, not to say that tier 2 areas have no support whatsoever, which emphasises the point that she makes?

    Angela Rayner

    I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. I say to the hon. Member for Winchester (Steve Brine) who keeps chuntering: you had your chance, mate. Let other people in.

    For hundreds of years, Mancunians have been told to know our place, but we have never listened—from the People’s History Museum to the Mechanics Institute, from our science and industry to women’s suffrage. We will not be told what our place is, and we will not be bullied into taking it. We are proud of our history and proud of our collective contribution to our great country and determined to build a great future together.

    This is not just about Greater Manchester; this is about all of us. We will not be picked off one by one. We will not be offered the crumbs when we helped bake the loaf. We deserve a fair slice and our people deserve a Government willing to protect them and to do as the Chancellor promised—“Whatever it takes”. In recent days, it has been Lancashire, Liverpool and Greater Manchester. Next week, and in the weeks ahead, it will be communities in other parts of the country that find themselves in tier 3. If the Government are prepared to wilfully inflict so much harm on their own people in the middle of a pandemic in one part of the country, they will do it to people elsewhere as well.

    We are staring down the barrel of a bleak winter, because the Government have lost control of the virus: infections are rising; hospital admissions are rising; and deaths, tragically, are rising. The testing system has collapsed. People and businesses across the country will be anxious that they will not be able to make ends meet and put food on the table. Our motion today will ensure a fair national deal for the country, a vote of this House on it and the Government’s own promises to workers kept. Madam Deputy Speaker, I commend this motion to the House.

  • Anneliese Dodds – 2020 Comments on Boris Johnson and the Midlands and North

    Anneliese Dodds – 2020 Comments on Boris Johnson and the Midlands and North

    The comments made by Anneliese Dodds, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 21 October 2020.

    The Government had a chance to fix its shambolic approach to supporting areas moving into Tier 3. It said no.

    The Prime Minister said those on the lowest salaries would get 80% of their salary, but by voting against our motion he has blocked huge numbers of workers facing hardship from getting the support they need.

    Boris Johnson promised to deliver for the North and the Midlands, but he’s let them down in the middle of a pandemic.

  • Ed Miliband – 2020 Comments on Businesses Becoming Insolvent

    Ed Miliband – 2020 Comments on Businesses Becoming Insolvent

    The comments made by Ed Miliband, the Shadow Business Secretary, on 21 October 2020.

    We are already seeing mass redundancies and rising unemployment, but measures to prevent businesses from becoming insolvent have helped keep the number of business closures low.

    Labour welcomed those measures. Yet Ministers cannot explain why they have pulled the plug on this protection. If it was right to help businesses stave off insolvency in June it is right now. The government seem to have moved from ‘we’re all in this together’ to ‘sink or swim’.

    Ministers claim to want to protect struggling businesses, but the decision to remove this key protection for business owners flies in the face of that claim. They must urgently change course or the risk is that we see insolvencies snowball before Christmas.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2020 Statement on the Job Support Scheme

    Rishi Sunak – 2020 Statement on the Job Support Scheme

    The statement made by Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the House of Commons on 12 October 2020.

    Following my announcement on Friday 9 October that I am expanding the job support scheme (JSS), and increasing the generosity and frequency of local restrictions support grants, I am pleased to share more detail of these schemes and how this Government are supporting and protecting jobs and livelihoods.

    The JSS is being expanded to provide temporary, localised support to businesses across the UK whose premises are legally required to close as a direct result of coronavirus restrictions set by one or more of the four Governments of the UK.

    This expansion of the JSS will help businesses through the period they are affected by these restrictions, supporting the wage costs of employees in eligible premises who have been instructed to cease work and comply with this instruction. This scheme will enable those premises to reopen as quickly as possible when they can. It will help protect employee incomes, limit unemployment and maintain employer-employee matches.

    This is part of the job support scheme, available to employers from 1 November 2020 for six months, with the scheme reviewed in January. Further guidance will be published in the coming weeks. Employers will be able to make a claim in arrears on a monthly basis online through www.gov.uk from early December 2020.

    The coronavirus job retention scheme (CJRS) remains in place until 31 October, and flexibility in the system means if an employer is required to close in October, eligible employees can be furloughed until 31 October. The new job support scheme is available from 1 November, with payments from early December. Eligible employees whose employers use the expanded JSS will continue to be paid by their employer throughout this period. Neither the employer nor the employee needs to have previously used the CJRS to be eligible for the expanded JSS.

    In line with the rules for the JSS already announced: all employers with a UK bank account and a UK PAYE scheme registered on or before 23 September can claim the scheme. Only employees that are on their employer’s payroll by 23 September are eligible. This means a real time information (RTI) submission notifying payment of that employee to HMRC must have been made on or before this date. This scheme will cover businesses that, as a result of restrictions set by one or more of the four Governments in the UK, are legally required to close their premises. This includes businesses told to provide only delivery and/or collection services from their premises. This scheme is open to employers across the UK, and we look forward to working constructively with the devolved administrations to ensure it operates effectively in all four nations.​

    The scheme will pay a grant to the employer calculated based on the number of eligible employees who cannot work at the relevant premises—which has been required to close by Government. Employers will only be able to use the scheme for employees who have been instructed to cease work—paid or unpaid for that employer.

    Eligible employees cannot work for a minimum of seven consecutive (or calendar) days. An employee can return at a later date. Claims must not overlap and must be made monthly in arrears. These payments will be taxable, and employers will be required to cover employer NICS and automatic enrolment pension contributions in full, where applicable, but are not required to make further contribution to wage costs. However, employers can top up employee pay if they wish.

    In line with JSS payments for hours not worked, the grant per eligible employee available from the UK Government is two-thirds of their normal pay up to a limit of £2,100 per month. Further detail on how normal pay is calculated will be set out in guidance. If an employer is closed by Government regulations then they can claim under the applicable rules. When that changes and they are able to reopen they can claim under the wider JSS for firms facing reduced demand under the criteria we outlined in September. Employers will be able to claim the job retention bonus for employees provided they are eligible. JSS grants can be used by employers to pay an employee’s wages and help meet the JRB minimum income threshold.

    The employer must use the scheme to cover their employees’ wages and pay relevant payroll taxes. The whole of the grant must be used to meet employee costs. The grant will not cover class 1 employer NICs or pension contributions, although these contributions will remain payable by the employer. Payments will be made in arrears, reimbursing the employer for the Government’s contribution.

    On 9 September, the Government announced the local restrictions support grant scheme. This scheme provided businesses which are forced to close for three weeks or more due to a nationally imposed local lockdown in England with grants of up to £1,500 per three-week closure period.

    The Government are now making this scheme more generous so that businesses receive up to £3,000 per month, and are eligible for payment sooner, after only two weeks of closure rather than three. The Government are also extending the scheme to include businesses which have been required to close on a national rather than a local basis, or which have not been legally able to reopen since the first lockdown in March.

    Businesses will receive the following:

    For properties with a rateable value of £15,000 or under, grants to be £1,334 per month, or £667 per two weeks;

    For properties with a rateable value of between £15,000 and £51,000 grants to be £2,000 per month, or £1,000 per two weeks;

    For properties with a rateable value of £51,000 or over grants to be £3,000 per month, or £1,500 per two weeks;

    Local Authorities will continue to receive 5% of the funding which they received for the local restrictions support grant scheme as a discretionary fund, which the ​Government will encourage them to use to support business that have been legally mandated to close by the Government but are outside of the business rates system.

    Grants will be administered by local authorities, and eligible businesses will probably need to provide their details to their local authority to access this support.

  • Anneliese Dodds – 2020 Comments on UK Unemployment Rate

    Anneliese Dodds – 2020 Comments on UK Unemployment Rate

    The comments made by Anneliese Dodds, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 13 October 2020.

    Today’s redundancy data is deeply concerning. Sadly, more people are going to lose their jobs until the Government gets a grip. That means fixing test, trace and isolate, putting in place a proper Job Recovery Scheme and making clear, consistent and fair funding available to local areas as soon as restrictions are applied.

    The Chancellor’s chaotic habit of trying to fix problems of his own making at the last possible minute risks unemployment spiralling to levels we haven’t seen in decades.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2020 Comments on Job Support Scheme Being Expanded

    Rishi Sunak – 2020 Comments on Job Support Scheme Being Expanded

    The comments made by Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 12 October 2020.

    Throughout the crisis the driving force of our economic policy has not changed. I have always said that we will do whatever is necessary to protect jobs and livelihoods as the situation evolves.

    The expansion of the Job Support Scheme will provide a safety net for businesses across the UK who are required to temporarily close their doors, giving them the right support at the right time.

  • Anneliese Dodds – 2020 Comments on GDP Figures

    Anneliese Dodds – 2020 Comments on GDP Figures

    The comments made by Anneliese Dodds, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 9 October 2020.

    It is deeply worrying that growth was weak in August despite the easing of restrictions, especially as we now face Covid-19 cases rising and more areas coming under local restrictions.

    The Government must get a grip on test, trace and isolate, reform the sink or swim Job Support Scheme and urgently put in place consistent economic support for areas of localised restrictions.

    If the Chancellor doesn’t act, we risk a devastating spike in unemployment that will choke off the recovery as we head into winter.

  • Anneliese Dodds – 2020 Comments on the Job Support Scheme

    Anneliese Dodds – 2020 Comments on the Job Support Scheme

    The comments made by Anneliese Dodds, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 9 October 2020.

    The Chancellor should have introduced a Job Recovery Scheme that incentivised employers to keep more staff on. Instead, his Job Support Scheme makes it more expensive to bring staff back than many other international schemes.

    Viable businesses just need support to cope with the restrictions the Government has imposed on them. They pinned their hopes on the Chancellor to deliver, but he’s forcing them to flip a coin over who stays and who goes.

    This wasn’t by accident – it was by design. The Chancellor’s sink or swim Job Support Scheme is a throwback to the worst days of Thatcher, and just like in the 1980s people on the lowest incomes will pay the highest price.

  • Jo Stevens – 2020 Comments on Cineworld

    Jo Stevens – 2020 Comments on Cineworld

    The comments made by Jo Stevens, the Shadow Secretary of State for Culture, on 5 October 2020.

    This is devastating news for Cineworld workers and cinema goers, and will have a knock on impact on towns and city centres.

    The cinema industry was viable before the crisis and will be afterwards, when the film industry recovers. The failure of Ministers to recognise the value of shut-down businesses, which now includes many cinemas, means they are consigning thousands of workers to the scrap heap.