The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jonathan Ashworth on 2014-03-26.
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, whether his Department is (a) undertaking or (b) plans to undertake a review of the check-off union subscription provision.
Mr Francis Maude
Arrangements of this sort are kept under review.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jonathan Ashworth on 2014-03-26.
To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, whether his Department is (a) undertaking or (b) plans to undertake a review of the check-off union subscription provision.
Brandon Lewis
As I indicated in my answer of 13 September 2013, Official Report, Column 884W, Ministers in this Department do not believe it is appropriate for public resources to be used to support the collection and administration of membership subscriptions and believe is an outdated and unnecessary 20th century practice.
It is also unsatisfactory that some trade unions collect the political levy via check-off, but make no attempt to inform would-be members that the political levy is optional, or even mention the right to opt out on their membership forms. It is the view of Ministers that this is a misleading and dubious marketing practice through omission.
I can confirm that we are taking further steps to review such practices.
The below Parliamentary question was asked by Jonathan Ashworth on 2014-03-26.
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether his Department is (a) undertaking or (b) plans to undertake a review of the check-off union subscription provision.
Mr Philip Dunne
A review is currently underway.
The speech made by Jonathan Ashworth, the Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, on 26 September 2022.
Last Friday’s Tory budget was the most unfair, the most unjust, the most unequal and the most divisive budget we’ve seen in our lifetimes.
I ask you, what kind of a government is it who, when pensioners shiver in the cold, hands tax breaks to the wealthy that no ordinary person could ever dream of?
What type of government is it, who when parents queue at foodbanks, tells mothers there is no help to feed their hungry children but there’s money to lavish tax cuts on bankers and billionaires?
That budget was proof, if ever it was needed, that we speak for Britain in saying a new government is needed and we need a Labour government now.
When workers see their pay packets cut, disabled people live in fear, when women working part time face sanctions, these Tories protect the gas and oil profits, instead of protecting the poor.
I tell you we speak for Britain in saying we need Keir Starmer as Prime Minister now.
These Tories tell us that after 12 years of their own stagnation they now have a plan for growth but all they’ve given us is a plan to grow more poverty, hunger and despair.
They tell us they are ripping up the orthodoxy but it’s the same old Tory orthodoxy back – that wealth will trickle down and a rising tide lifts all.
We’ve seen that story before. It means more sinking beneath the waves. It sees pay and conditions worsen. It leads to the offensive, grotesque fiction of Ministers telling us that to make bankers work harder, pay them more but to make working people work harder, pay them less.
Friends, doesn’t that tell you it’s time for change, time for fairness. Friedns, it’s time for Labour.
And it renders social security so threadbare, that food banks are now the safety net and churches turn their halls into ‘warm banks’.
I thank those running them. But we seek government to create a society where foodbanks are no longer needed. Because we shouldn’t have to rely on charities to feed children and keep pensioners warm.
This isn’t the way, as Rachel Reeves says, to secure growth in our economy. Because you can’t build sustainable growth when so many are left behind.
What we need is an economy of all talents with full and fulfilling employment. Worklessness is such a waste.
I remember queuing with my dad at the dole in the 80s, I remember the desperate look on faces.
So for young people not in work or training and the thousands of over 50s now not in jobs but want one, we will reform Jobcentres and employment services to help more people into work as we target our ambition of the highest employment in the G7.
We’ll do it, not through Tory threats or sanctions. But through active help with training, coaching and support for those who need it.
We’ll do it not by wasting money on big outsourcing corporations but instead delivered on the ground, in partnership with community groups, local authorities and services like the NHS.
And we’ll insist these jobs adhere to a very simple principle that when people work for a living, they should be paid a decent living wage as we tackle in-work poverty too.
And we’ll reform, overhaul and replace the Tory Universal Credit system. We’ll treat people with dignity, not burden them with impossible debts, support children not punish them and we’ll reinstate a principle Labour has championed since the days of Barbara Castle but ditched by the Tories, the financial independence of women should be protected in our social security system too.
A few weeks ago, I received this letter from a mother:
“Sorry, it took so long to post after writing: I struggled to justify the price of the stamp.
“My babies are sound asleep but I cannot sleep: I sit awake terrified for their future.
“I am stressing about what to feed my kids tomorrow.
“What is going to be done, Mr Ashworth?”
What is to be done, Mr Ashworth?
What sort of a government ignores pleas like that? I’ve known hardship and how it seeps through every aspect of your being. Consumes every decision.
How it excludes from the necessaries, comforts and pleasures of society and haunts for the rest of your life. Children never forget going to school hungry and ill clad.
We’re one the biggest economies in the world yet 4 million children live in poverty and tonight, thousands of children hungry, cold and have no bed to sleep in at all. It doesn’t have to be like this.
Social inequality need not be etched into the landscape of this nation. Defeating child poverty is the obligation our generation owes to the next.
Never forget Labour in government lifted millions of children out of poverty before and that’s the change we can make again.
So, friends, this is our mission:
Full employment and decent pay;
Security in retirement;
A better world for our children;
Because as Nelson Mandela said:
“Overcoming poverty is not a gesture of charity but an act of justice.”
Let us rise to that cause and build a future of opportunity, fairness and justice for all.
The tribute made by Jonathan Ashworth, the Labour MP for Leicester South, in the House of Commons on 9 September 2022.
I rise to express my personal condolences to His Majesty the King and the royal family, to associate myself with the remarks that we have heard so far, and to pay tribute to Her late Majesty on behalf of my Leicester South constituents and the city of Leicester. Leicester is proud of its radical tradition. Notwithstanding our history as a parliamentarian stronghold, Her Majesty was held in deep affection and viewed with deep reverence and love across Leicester. We are united in our grief today.
Leicester’s story today is one of diversity. We have welcomed to our city families from across the globe and the Commonwealth. Some of those families were fleeing persecution with nothing but a hastily packed suitcase. Her Majesty’s leadership of the Commonwealth stands not only as a reminder of the bonds of solidarity between the different nations of the Commonwealth, but as a symbol of inspirational hope for families fleeing persecution—hope for a better future for themselves and their children. We in Leicester were reminded of that only last month, as we recalled the 50-year anniversary of the expulsion of the Asian community from Uganda.
Her Majesty celebrated Leicester’s diversity; she was proud of our different faith groups. Our mosques have been recognising her death and expressing their thanks at Jummah prayers today; our Hindu temples have been placing garlands over pictures of her; and there are prayers in our synagogues, in our gurdwaras and in our Jain temple. We were particularly proud to host Her Majesty 10 years ago for the start of her diamond jubilee tour, for which all our communities came together.
Indeed, for the start of that diamond jubilee tour, my hon. Friend the Member for Leicester West (Liz Kendall) and I had the privilege of welcoming the Queen to De Montfort University in my constituency. After we had queued nervously to greet Her Majesty and His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh, in the corner of my eye, I caught her looking somewhat bemused—if not slightly askance—at her husband, who had asked me and my hon. Friend whether we were reds or blues. I do not know what his opinion was of our answer, frankly.
A few months after we in Leicester had celebrated Her Majesty at the start of the diamond jubilee tour, we were nervous because we had discovered the remains of the last Yorkist monarch in a Leicester City Council car park. That provoked all kinds of knotty constitutional questions for the palace, including what we were going to do with Richard III. With her usual aplomb, and the diplomatic skill about which we have heard so much, Her Majesty let it be known that she was following developments with great interest, and a couple of years later, she visited Leicester cathedral—the final resting place of Richard III—to hand out Maundy money on Maundy Thursday.
In February 1952, when this House debated a motion on the loss of His Majesty King George, Winston Churchill said from the Dispatch Box said he hoped the accession of Queen Elizabeth would usher in a golden age. In response the former Prime Minister and then Leader of the Opposition Clement Attlee said that he hoped the accession of Queen Elizabeth would lead to another glorious Elizabethan era more renowned than the first one. My God, she more than surpassed the aspirations and hopes of those two great Prime Ministers. Rest in peace, and God save the King.
The speech made by Jonathan Ashworth, the Labour MP for Leicester South, in the House of Commons on 17 May 2022.
This is a debate about the 250,000 households that the National Institute of Economic and Social Research predicts will be forced into destitution next year. This is a debate about the 1.3 million people, including 500,000 children, who will be pushed into absolute poverty. This is a debate about the 2 million—and rising—pensioners in poverty. This is a debate about the 2 million adults who did not eat for a whole day last year. This is a debate about our constituents who are working all hours God sends and still need to queue at food banks to feed their families.
In his speech earlier, the Chancellor—I do not know where he is, by the way—boasted of an employment miracle, but is it not the truth, as the Office for National Statistics has shown today, that pay is being outpaced by inflation, with real wages falling by 1.2%? That is the largest monthly fall in real regular wages in a decade, yet at the same time, pay-as-you-earn data shows that the wages of the very top earners are increasing rapidly. Labour market inequalities are widening, and workers deserve a fair pay rise.
If we drill down into the employment figures, we see that it is also the truth—and this has come up today—that they are lower than they were pre-pandemic. Indeed, 1.5 million have left the labour market, including more and more over-50s who are drawing down their defined-contribution pensions. The sickness levels of those out of work are at their highest level for 20 years—[Interruption.] Ah, here he is—come on in, Chancellor! Instead of providing help, the Gracious Speech had no employment Bill—it was ditched—while Jobcentre Plus and Department for Work and Pensions offices will be closed and staff laid off, and job scheme funding is being cut or underspent. This is a Government failing on employment.
Our constituents face a cost of living crisis, but instead of action we had a complacent speech from the Chancellor, who said that he may act on a windfall tax “soon”—but people need action today. Does he really think that the parents who are making choices between feeding meters and feeding their children, the families who are cutting off their meters and the people who are scared of the final demand from their energy companies can say to those energy companies, “Don’t worry, we’ll pay you soon”? Of course not—the mañana Chancellor needs to act today to help people.
A theme across the House not just today but throughout the week has been the failure of the Chancellor and the Government to help people with the cost of living crisis. I cannot mention all of the many speeches we have heard today, so I will mention only a few. The hon. Members for Dudley South (Mike Wood), for Newton Abbot (Anne Marie Morris) and for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott) made sympathetic noises towards a windfall tax. In fact, they were so sympathetic, I thought they had got hold of the parliamentary Labour party’s briefing pack for the debate.
Mike Wood
Will the right hon. Member give way?
Jonathan Ashworth
We are pushed for time, so I beg the hon. Gentleman’s pardon—but he can have a word with me when he is voting with us in the Lobby later.
Look at the realities facing our constituents: the cost of pasta is up 10%; milk, cheese and eggs, up 8.6%; butter, up 9.6%; cooking oils and fats, up 18%. And the message from Ministers? “Just purchase supermarket own brand.” “Buy value beans”—the new three-word slogan from the Tory party.
Another quotation of which the Chancellor may be aware is from Milton Friedman; I know the Chancellor is a big fan. Milton Friedman said:
“Inflation is taxation without legislation”.
But the Chancellor has legislated. Instead of helping people on universal credit, he legislated to cut universal credit in real terms—a loss of around £500. Instead of helping pensioners with the triple lock, the Government legislated to impose the biggest real-terms cut to the pension for 50 years, meaning a cut of more than £420 for the typical retiree.
The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions is about to embark on a programme of cutting the incomes of some of the most vulnerable people on legacy benefits as they migrate to universal credit. But it does not have to be like this, because—as the Chairs of the Treasury Committee and the Work and Pensions Committee, many charities and the Institute for Fiscal Studies have said—one could bring forward a proportion of the benefit increase pencilled in for 2023 today. Indeed, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury said a few weeks ago at the Dispatch Box that the 2023 increase in benefits and the pension will take account of inflation. The Government are promising to increase benefits and the pension in line with inflation in 2023, but in the meantime are sending the very poorest on a rollercoaster. Some 500,000 children will be pushed into absolute poverty.
To be fair to the Chancellor, he said, “We looked at this, but the IT system said no”. As many Members have said, it is a shame that his computer didn’t say no when he was cutting universal credit by £20. But I have been given a briefing note by Oracle, which I understand provides the IT systems for the Department for Work and Pensions, entitled: “How DWP transformed the backbone of the UK benefits system”. The note says that the changes that made to the computer system
“has built automation into…management—this allows DWP to make changes every week, rather than having to plan six months in advance”.
Mr Mark Bell, who is the deputy director at the Department for Work and Pensions, said:
“This has been widely recognised as one of the best technical achievements delivered by DWP Digital for many years…It also enabled us to make further digital enhancements to benefit millions of UK citizens.”
Technical lead Mr Nick Cutting says that this has brought “flexibility” and that it led to the Department being able to do things it
“never could have done, or that would have taken significant time at a significant cost”
if it was still running on legacy infrastructure. You see, Madam Deputy Speaker, the truth is that it is not the mainframe that is preventing the Government from acting; it is their frame of mind.
The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Dr Thérèse Coffey)
I appreciate that the right hon. Gentleman used to be a political adviser to the previous Government, but they did not have universal credit. What he is describing is universal credit, a system that the Labour party has consistently opposed. That is why we are able to make the changes; it is true and accurate, as he has just read out to the House, that it is the legacy systems that are the problem. That is why we cannot simply change the rates of all benefits as he wants us to do. The point is that we cannot do that, and he has read out the reasons to the House.
Jonathan Ashworth
The right hon. Lady has just confirmed that she is refusing to increase universal credit, with the consequence that 500,000 extra children will be pushed into poverty—[Interruption.] I am not misleading the House. I remember meeting her for negotiations over the pandemic legislation. We met in the offices of the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. We said that we needed more support on universal credit and we came to an arrangement. She also gave a lump sum to those on working tax credit, which is a legacy payment. So if there is a will, the Government can do it, but the truth is that they do not want to do it.
The reality is that if the Government wanted to lift children out of poverty, they could do it. If they wanted to lift pensioners out of poverty, they could do it. If they wanted to prevent 250,000 families from being pushed into destitution, they could do that too. The fact that they will vote against the amendment in the Lobby tonight tells us everything we need to know about this Tory party. For them, rising child poverty is a price well worth paying.
The comments made by Jonathan Ashworth, the Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, on 18 December 2021.
It’s shaping up to be another miserable winter for pensioners.
Not only are heating bills rocketing, prices are going up in the shops and many community activities our most vulnerable pensioners rely on are cancelled because of Boris Johnson’s failure to grip the covid crisis.
It’s a disgrace that so many older people feel isolated at home, understandably concerned about covid, yet are unable to afford the heating bills.
Action is needed to support our elderly this winter. Labour has called on the Government to immediately remove VAT on domestic energy bills for six months, and for the largest homes upgrade programme in generations to warm homes and bring down bills.
The comments made by Jonathan Ashworth, the Shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, on 11 November 2021.
We’ve heard serious warnings from hospital chiefs about the unsustainable pressure the NHS is under. Today we’ve had confirmation of dangerously lengthy waiting times patients are forced to endure and the scale of pressure on overwhelmed A&Es.
The coming winter weeks are set to be the most challenging in history for the NHS. It’s now urgent ministers fix the stalling vaccination programme, resolve the immediate crisis in social care and bring forward a long term plan to recruit the health care staff our NHS now desperately needs, which Rishi Sunak has failed to provide despite imposing a punishing tax rise on working people.
The speech made by Jonathan Ashworth, the Shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, in the House of Commons on 9 November 2021.
I thank the Secretary of State for, as always, timely advance sight of the statement.
Vaccination saves lives—it is the best protection against this deadly disease and helps to cut transmission—and we of course want to see NHS staff vaccinated. As has been pointed out many times before, there are already categories of staff for whom a hepatitis vaccination is expected. We will look carefully at the regulations and the equality impact assessment, but I urge the Secretary of State to proceed with caution, because the NHS is already under the most intense pressure this winter; waiting lists are close to 6 million; there are more than 90,000 vacancies across the NHS; and the Chancellor failed to allocate in his Budget funding for training budgets to train the medics we need for the future. There will be anxiety at trust level that a policy, however laudable in principle, could exacerbate some of these chronic understaffing problems. We simply cannot afford to lose thousands of NHS staff overnight.
We do welcome the fact that the Secretary of State has listened to representations from organisations such as NHS Providers and others about delaying the implementation of this until after the winter; we welcome that. None the less, there are still organisations, such as the British Medical Association, that have raised concerns about the practicalities of implementing this policy. Helen Stokes-Lampard of the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges has said that mandatory vaccination is neither “necessary” nor “proportionate”. Will he agree to meet the royal colleges, the BMA, and the relevant trade unions to agree a framework for how this policy will be implemented? Will he outline to the House what success looks like for this policy? Some of the 10% of NHS staff who are not vaccinated include those with medical exemptions, those who are on long-term sick, and those who could not get the vaccine first time round because they were ill with covid. Will he tell the House: what is the actual number of NHS staff who should be vaccinated, but who have not had the vaccine? What is the actual number? In other words, what then does he consider a success? What does full vaccination across the NHS look like for him? Is it 94%, 95%, or 96%? What are we aiming for here? What is his target?
The aim of this policy is presumably to limit those with covid coming into contact with patients, but one can still catch and transmit covid post vaccine, so will the testing regime that is in place for NHS staff—I think it is twice a week at the moment—increase in frequency? Furthermore, thousands of visitors go onto the NHS estate every week, so will visitors to hospitals be asked whether they have had the vaccine or have proof of a negative test?
What analysis has the Secretary of State done of those who are vaccine hesitant in the NHS workforce? What targeted support has he put in place to persuade take-up among those groups? He refers to trusts where take-up is around 80%, so what specific support has he put in place to help those trusts drive up vaccination rates? We know from society more generally that there has been hesitancy, for example, among women who are pregnant and who want to have a baby. That has meant that a significant proportion of those in hospital with covid are unvaccinated pregnant women. A large proportion of the NHS staff workforce are women of a similar age, so is this one of the issues as to why there is hesitancy in certain pockets across the NHS? Will he therefore look at a large-scale campaign to reassure pregnant women of the safety of the vaccine and look at launching an information hub, perhaps a dedicated phoneline, to offer clear advice to women and their partners who might have concerns?
Finally, on vaccination more generally, I do not want to see—I do not think that anyone across this House wants to see—anymore lockdowns imposed on cities such as my own in Leicester, or across Greater Manchester, or Bradford, but in many of these areas, vaccination rates are not good enough. Leicester has a vaccination rate of just around 61%, Bradford 63%, Bolton 69%, and Bury 71%. Generally, on children’s vaccinations, we are only at 28%. On the boosters, there are still around 6 million people eligible for a booster who have not yet had one. The Government’s own analysis shows that people over 70 who are dying from covid or hospitalised should have had a booster, but have had only two jabs.
With Christmas coming, which will mean more mixing indoors at a time when infection rates are still high—one in 50—we are facing six crucial weeks. What more support will the Secretary of State offer now to local communities, such as Leicester, Bolton, Bury and Bradford, to drive up vaccination rates, because nobody wants to see those local lockdowns again.
The text of the speech made by Jonathan Ashworth, the Shadow Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, in the House of Commons on 8 November 2021.
I thank the Secretary of State for advance sight of his statement and for its content, and I welcome what he has announced today.
This is an unspeakably vile and horrific crime, and across the House our thoughts and hearts go out to the families of Wendy Knell and Caroline Pierce, and to the families of those with deceased loved ones. Those 100 victims—we are talking about the corpses of 100 women —were, as has been reported in the press, violated in the most monstrous, vile and sickening way. Will the Secretary of State confirm that all the families impacted will have immediate access to the psychological counselling and support that they need? Will NHS staff at the hospital, many of whom will themselves be devastated, also have access to appropriate counselling and support?
I welcome the announcement of an inquiry, and I pay tribute to local Members of Parliament across Kent and Sussex who have spoken up on behalf of their communities in recent days. In particular, the right hon. Member for Tunbridge Wells (Greg Clark) said over the weekend that authorities and politicians must
“ask serious questions as to how this could have happened and…establish that it can never happen again.”
I agree, and that is why an inquiry is so important.
Will the Secretary of State offer some precision as to when the terms of reference will be published? Fuller was caught because of a murder investigation, which in itself prompts a number of questions about the regulation of mortuaries. The Human Tissue Authority, which regulates hospital mortuaries, reviewed one of the mortuaries in question as part of its regulatory procedures. It raised no security concerns, but found a lack of full audits, examples of lone working, and issues with CCTV coverage in another hospital in the trust. Will the inquiry consider—or perhaps this is the remit of the Secretary of State—the Human Tissue Authority’s standards, the way it reviews hospital mortuaries, and how those standards are enforced? Will the inquiry recommend new processes that the Secretary of State will put in place if it is found that a mortuary fails to meet the high standards for lone workers, for security and for care?
The NHS has asked trusts to review their procedures; I welcome that. Will the Secretary of State ensure that all mortuaries document and record the access of all staff entering a mortuary, and will he ensure that standards for CCTV are enforced and that CCTV is in place comprehensively across all mortuaries? There are, of course, other premises where dead bodies are stored, such as funeral directors, that do not fall under the regulatory remit of the Human Tissue Authority, so will its remit be expanded, or will the inquiry look at regulation for other premises where bodies are stored?
When our loved ones are admitted into the hands of medical care, that is done on the basis of a bond of trust—that our loved ones will be cared for when sick and accorded dignity in death. That bond of trust was callously ripped apart here. I offer to work with the Secretary of State to ensure that something so sickening never happens again.