UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Keir Starmer

  • Keir Starmer – 2021 Comments on Boris Johnson and Coal Mine Statement

    Keir Starmer – 2021 Comments on Boris Johnson and Coal Mine Statement

    The comments made by Keir Starmer, the Leader of the Opposition, on 6 August 2021.

    The Prime Minister has shown his true colours yet again.

    For Boris Johnson to laugh when talking about the closure of the coal mines is a slap in the face for communities still suffering from the devastating effects of Margaret Thatcher’s callous actions.

    I’m proud to have always stood with our coalfield communities. I represented the miners in court as the Tories tried to close the pits. These communities contributed so much to the success of our country, and then were abandoned.

    The Tories didn’t care then, and they don’t care now.

    For Boris Johnson to treat the pain and suffering caused to our coalfield communities as a punchline shows just how out of touch with working people he is.

    The Prime Minister must apologise immediately.

  • Keir Starmer – 2021 Letter to Boris Johnson Over Self-Isolation

    Keir Starmer – 2021 Letter to Boris Johnson Over Self-Isolation

    The letter sent by Keir Starmer, the Leader of the Opposition, to Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister, on 18 July 2021.

    Dear Prime Minister,

    During the pandemic the public have sacrificed so much to stick to the rules. At a time when we need to maintain confidence in self isolation, parents, workers and businesses will be wondering what on earth is going on in Downing Street.

    Today’s latest fiasco of yourself and the Chancellor being magically selected for a testing trial so you could avoid isolation like the rest of us is just the latest example of the Conservatives fixing the rules to benefit themselves, and only backtracking when they were found out.

    The reported comments that you “did look briefly at the idea” of taking part in a daily test pilot scheme will provide no reassurance to the public, to whom this will look very much like one rule for Conservative ministers, and another rule for the public.

    There are still serious questions that remain:

    How did the trial to avoid self-isolating include the Prime Minister, Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster?

    How was inclusion in the trial decided?

    How long was it before the trial confirmed you could be released from isolation?

    When did you travel to Chequers? Why did both your and Chancellor’s original statement say you would continue to work from Downing Street?

    Where is the Chancellor self-isolating?

    If the pilot has been letting Conservative ministers avoid self-isolation since May, why has this not been made public sooner?

    Will the Government release a full list of Conservative ministers covered by the self-isolation trial?

    Have any other ministers benefitted from the trial and avoided self-isolation?

    How many people have deleted the NHS app?

    Will join me in urging the public to continue to follow the rules on self-isolation?

    There are hundreds of thousands of people who have been forced to miss family events, close businesses and go without pay because they have done the right thing. And yet ministers have played the system. This cannot go on. The public need clear leadership at this time, not this hypocritical way of trying to do things that just undermines confidence in the rules and puts lives at risk.

    As news broke this morning of your initial decision to avoid self-isolation, the many thousands of people across the country who are self-isolating would have wondered why they were not offered the same opportunity.

    Over the past week, there have been children sent home from school after a positive case in their bubble, NHS staff working overtime to cover staff absences and businesses struggling to run a normal level of service due to their employees self-isolating. These people deserve an immediate answer from ministers about the Cabinet’s participation in this scheme.

    I have been sent examples of businesses and individuals struggling to do the right thing and follow the rules. They would have benefited from this policy. Examples I wish to highlight include:

    – A Midlands transport provider concerned that high numbers of drivers and control room staff isolating will negatively impact on services and lead to cancellations

    – Train drivers in Sheffield self-isolating and leading to service cancellations this weekend

    – Large numbers of staff at Ipswich hospital who had to take time off because they or their family had to isolate, causing elective surgeries to be cancelled

    – Security staff at Heathrow Airport having to self-isolate, causing disruption

    – Bin collections being cancelled due to staff shortages caused by self-isolation

    In addition, the tube workers on London Underground, which is now facing staff shortages due to self-isolation leading to delays and cancellations, could have benefited from the trial. But contrary to the Government’s claims, Transport for London has not yet been confirmed as a participant in the scheme.

    The public deserve an answer to these questions. I look forward to his response, and trust that a minister will come to Parliament on Monday to explain this system for the benefit of our constituents.

    Keir Starmer

    Leader of the Labour Party

  • Keir Starmer – 2021 Speech on Foreign Aid Cuts

    Keir Starmer – 2021 Speech on Foreign Aid Cuts

    The speech made by Keir Starmer, the Leader of the Opposition, on 13 July 2021.

    I start by thanking you, Mr Speaker, and hon. Members from across the House for ensuring that this debate took place today. In particular, I thank the right hon. Members for Sutton Coldfield (Mr Mitchell) and for Maidenhead (Mrs May). I think they are the “lefty” propagandists that the Prime Minister was talking about a couple of weeks ago. I have to say that if the Prime Minister had confidence in the arguments he is making to this House, he would have given way to them a moment ago so that his arguments could be tested. He does not have confidence in them, otherwise he would have done so—that is obvious already. However, we do welcome the chance to debate this motion.

    The motion is broad and, if I may say so, from this Prime Minister it is typically slippery. The House should have had the opportunity for a straight up/down vote on whether to approve or reject the Government’s cut to overseas aid to 0.5%. This motion does not do that. But the Chancellor’s written ministerial statement is clear: if the motion is carried, the cut in overseas aid to 0.5% will effectively carry on indefinitely. I will expand on that point in just a moment—[Interruption.] I will expand on that point and take interventions on it.

    Mr Mark Harper (Forest of Dean) (Con)

    Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman give way?

    Keir Starmer

    I am going to develop that argument. When I get to it, I will give way so that that argument can be tested, in the usual way. But if the motion is rejected,

    “the Government would consequently return to spending 0.7% of GNI on international aid in the next calendar year”.—[Official Report, 12 July 2021; Vol. 699, c. 4WS.]

    Let me be clear: Labour will vote to reject this motion tonight and to return overseas aid to 0.7% of GNI.

    Mr Harper

    Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman give way?

    Keir Starmer

    I am going to summarise my argument—[Interruption.] I am going make my argument, and when I get to the relevant part, I will take interventions.

    The case that we make is this: first, that the cut is wrong, because investing 0.7% on international aid is in Britain’s national interest; secondly, because the economic criteria set out by the Chancellor would lead to an indefinite cut that is likely to last beyond this Parliament; and, thirdly, because it matters that this House keeps its word to the voters who elected us. Every Member here—every Member here—was elected on a manifesto to retain the 0.7% target, and it matters that we keep our promises to the world’s poorest, particularly at such a time of global uncertainty.

    Mr Harper

    I am grateful to the right hon. and learned Gentleman for giving way. I agree with him about keeping promises, and Conservative Members were also elected to keep fiscal promises to reduce our debt and not to borrow for day-to-day spending. I hope in his remarks he will set out, given that he is not going to support this motion, which areas of spending he is going to cut to pay for it or which taxes he is going to raise. If he does not do either of those things, then I am afraid his promises and his vote today are hollow, and no one will believe him.

    Keir Starmer

    I have to say that it is a bit rich from someone who may break the manifesto commitment to say that the vote today and the words today are hollow, but just to take that straight on, it is a false economy, I am afraid. Cutting aid will increase costs and have a big impact on our economy. Development aid—we all know this—reduces conflict, disease and people fleeing from their homes. It is a false economy to pretend that this is some sort of cut that does not have consequences.

    Mr Mitchell

    The right hon. and learned Gentleman is making a House of Commons speech, not a partisan speech. Can I ask him what I would have asked the Prime Minister if the Prime Minister had given way? First, will he confirm that the cut we are discussing today is 1% of the borrowing the Prime Minister described that he quite rightly sanctioned last year? Secondly, will he underline the fact that this was an all-party promise made at the general election by every single one of us, and we really should not break our promises to the poorest in this terrible way?

    Keir Starmer

    Yes and yes. It was not ambivalent in the manifestos and it was not conditional; it was clear.

    On the first part of the argument—the national interest—British aid saves lives, it builds a more secure world, and it promotes democracy and British soft power. For the last 20 years, that has been the political consensus across this House. Tony Blair and Gordon Brown first set the goal of the UK reaching the 0.7% target—[Interruption.] I am making a speech to the House and for the House. David Cameron and the right hon. Member for Maidenhead made it a reality, and we acknowledge that in the right way. It has been supported—[Interruption.] The chuntering is all very well, but this has been a cross-party position for 20 years, and successive Prime Ministers have kept to the commitment. Every other living Prime Minister thinks this is wrong; there is only one Prime Minister who is prepared to do this, and he is sitting there, on the Front Bench. I acknowledge what those on the Benches opposite did in relation to this—the previous Prime Minister is sitting opposite. I am openly acknowledging that, and it has been supported by all parties, and rightly so. As the sixth richest country in the world, Britain has a moral obligation to help the world’s poorest, and our aid budget has done that with fantastic results.

    Dame Andrea Leadsom (South Northamptonshire) (Con)

    Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman give way?

    Keir Starmer

    I will in a moment.

    This has been providing education for women and girls; fighting poverty; providing sanitation, healthcare and vaccines; building resilience and infrastructure; and doing incredible post-conflict and reconstruction work, where I think Britain does a better job than anyone else, so it has real results. Let us be clear what these cuts would mean: 1 million girls losing out on schooling; nearly 3 million women and children going without life-saving nutrition; 5.6 million children left unvaccinated; an estimated 100,000 deaths worldwide. [Interruption] The Prime Minister says “Rubbish”; that is the human toll of the choices the Government are making, and it is not rubbish.

    Sir Edward Leigh (Gainsborough) (Con)

    The case being made by the right hon. and learned Gentleman is that the Prime Minister is making a promise he will not keep, but what did Tony Blair and Gordon Brown do? They made a promise but they never, ever spent 0.7% of GDP on aid, and therefore the right hon. and learned Gentleman’s speech lacks all moral force.

    Keir Starmer

    They more than doubled it; they set the goal, and then successive Prime Ministers implemented that goal. That is such a weak argument—11 years into this Government that is such a weak argument. When I was Director of Public Prosecutions, which has a five-year term, the very idea that I could turn around four or five years into the role and say it was somebody else’s fault five, 10, 15, 20 years ago—I have always found such an argument particularly weak. This is such a bad argument but it is used all the time. They have been in power for 11 years; either take responsibility for what you are doing or give up.

    Our overseas aid budget goes beyond that moral obligation: it also helps build a more stable world and keeps us safer in the UK. In Afghanistan aid has supported improvements in security, in governance, in economic development and in rights for women and girls, yet, despite all the challenges that that country now faces and the security and terrorist threats that that poses to the UK—we know about those, and the previous Prime Minister the right hon. Member for Maidenhead knows about them—UK aid to Afghanistan is being cut from £192.3 million to £38.2 million. That is Afghanistan. [Interruption.] The Prime Minister chunters, but they are actually the Government figures. In Yemen, where there is the biggest humanitarian crisis in the world, UK aid has been cut by nearly 60%; in Syria, the Government are slashing aid by around 50%; and for the Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh there is a cut of 42%. All of those decisions will create more refugees, more instability and more people having to flee their homes.

    Christian Matheson (City of Chester) (Lab)

    Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware of the words of General James Mattis, the former United States Defence Secretary? When President Trump proposed cutting overseas aid, General Mattis said, “Fine, cut it, but you will have to give me, the Defence Secretary, more money to buy more bullets.”

    Keir Starmer

    I am aware of that, and it exposes the false economy argument in the Prime Minister’s case.

    This cut will also reduce UK influence just when it is needed most, and of course it risks leaving a vacuum that other countries—China and Russia, for example—will fill. At a time when Britain will host COP26 and has hosted the G7 we should be using every means at our disposal to create a fairer and safer world, but we are the only G7 country that is cutting our aid budget—the only G7 country. That is not the vision of global Britain that those of us on the Labour Benches want to see, and I do not think it is the vision of global Britain that many on the Benches opposite want to see either.

    Dame Andrea Leadsom

    All of us in this House long to see our aid commitments re-established at 0.7% of national income, but the Leader of the Opposition will nevertheless appreciate that we continue to be one of the most generous foreign aid donors. He is making a good point about the 0.7%, but can he explain why, in all the Labour years of Labour Government, they averaged 0.36% of national income on overseas aid?

    Keir Starmer

    They doubled it, actually.

    Let me turn to my second point, which has already been debated: the economic argument behind the Government’s position. The Prime Minister and Chancellor say that these cuts are unavoidable because of the pandemic and the economic consequences we now find ourselves in, but the whole point of the 0.7% target is that it is relative to the UK’s economic success or challenges: it rises when we grow and falls when we experience economic shock like the pandemic. Nobody in this House is arguing for overseas aid to be maintained at the pre-pandemic level during the downturn in strict terms. We all recognise that a contracting economy means a relative contraction in our aid budget, but the Chancellor and Prime Minister are asking the House to agree to go beyond that, to impose a new target of 0.5% and to create entirely new criteria for ever returning to 0.7%. In effect, the Chancellor is proposing a double lock against reverting to 0.7%. The written ministerial statement makes it clear that Britain will go back to 0.7% only when public debt is falling as a percentage of GDP and there is a “current budget surplus”.

    Mr Simon Clarke (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Con)

    Will the right hon. and learned Member give way?

    Keir Starmer

    Let me make this point, and the Prime Minister can intervene if he wants. On the former point, the Office for Budget Responsibility does not predict public debt falling as a percentage of GDP until 2024 or 2025 at the earliest. If the Prime Minister wants to intervene, I am ready. That would mean returning to 0.7% will not happen in any year in this Parliament. I am clear about that. Does anyone want to intervene? That is the OBR’s prediction.

    Anthony Mangnall (Totnes) (Con)

    I thank the Leader of the Opposition for allowing me to intervene. Perhaps he can help in ascertaining when those targets would have been met in the past 20 years.

    Keir Starmer

    Well, that is a very good point. I think it is once in 20 years. However, there are two points here and, if there is a contrary argument, the Prime Minister can make it. On the first point, the OBR does not predict a fall in debt as a percentage of GDP until 2024 to 2025. Therefore, anybody voting tonight who is pretending to themselves that the cut is temporary and will be changed in a year or two is not looking at the facts. If anybody wants to say they have better statistics and the OBR has got it completely wrong, please do so—that includes the Prime Minister.

    On the second point, the OBR does not forecast a current surplus for its entire forecast period. In fact, there is no expected timeline for that criterion to be met at all. What the Chancellor is setting out is not a temporary cut in overseas aid; it is an indefinite cut. Let me remind the House that only, I think, five times in the past 30 years has a current budget surplus been run—four of them, I might add, were under a Labour Government and one under the Conservatives—so the chances of those criteria being met under a Conservative Chancellor are remote at best. All the more so, because the statement creates an artificial £4.3 billion fiscal penalty for any Chancellor who seeks to rebalance the Budget. So this is an indefinite cut—it is not going to be reversed next year or the year after—and, however much the Prime Minister shakes his head, there is no contrary argument.

    This is not just about economic necessity; a political choice is being made. Not only is it against our national interest but it further erodes trust in our politics. That brings me to my third point: trust. There is now a central divide in British politics and across the world between those who value truth, integrity and honesty and those who bask in breaking them. We were all elected on manifestos that committed to the 0.7% target. I am proud to have stood on that commitment and I know that many hon. Members across the House are as well.

    Mr Simon Clarke

    Will the right hon. and learned Member give way?

    Keir Starmer

    I will in just a moment. Let me quote page 53 of the Conservative manifesto, which says:

    “We will proudly maintain our commitment to spend 0.7 per cent of GNI on development”.

    Do not shake your head, Prime Minister—it is there in black and white. As Conservative Members have said, that is not equivocal or conditional. It was a clear promise to voters and it should be honoured. If it is not, where does that leave us? There are already countless examples of the Prime Minister breaking his promises, such as: no hard border in the Irish Sea; no cuts to our armed forces; and an already-prepared plan for social care—the list is endless. That matters. It matters to the British people that they can trust a Prime Minister to honour a clear commitment. It matters to our reputation around the globe that the word of the British Government will hold in good times and bad.

    Today, the House has the chance to stand up for a better kind of politics for the national interest, to do what we know is right and to honour our commitments to the world’s poorest. When the Division is called, Labour MPs will do so, and I am sure that others on the Conservative Benches will do so. I urge all Members to do so.

  • Keir Starmer – 2021 Comments on Eve of England Football Match

    Keir Starmer – 2021 Comments on Eve of England Football Match

    The comments made by Keir Starmer, the Leader of the Opposition, on 10 July 2021.

    To Gareth Southgate and our England heroes, I want to say thank you.

    On and off the field, you’ve shown the best of England during this tournament.

    You’ve been as fearless as the three lions on our crest. You’ve lit up this tournament. And in spite of those who tried to undermine you, you’ve used your platform to stand up for our shared values as a country.

    In doing so, you have become role models not just to a generation of young people, but to an entire nation.

    I want you to know that as you line up at Wembley today, the whole of England will be bursting with pride watching you.

    We still believe. Bring it home.

  • Keir Starmer – 2021 Comments on Visit to Peace Bridge in Derry/Londonderry

    Keir Starmer – 2021 Comments on Visit to Peace Bridge in Derry/Londonderry

    The comments made by Keir Starmer, the Leader of the Opposition, on 9 July 2021.

    Lyra McKee was the very best of Northern Ireland. She dreamt of a future of equality and reconciliation.

    Lyra’s partner, Sara Canning has fought a determined campaign for justice. Her determination to build on Lyra’s legacy, and to build a lasting peace, is humbling and demands all our support.

    I was honoured to cross the Peace Bridge, a symbol of reconciliation between two communities, with Sara.

  • Keir Starmer – 2021 Speech on the Queen’s Address

    Keir Starmer – 2021 Speech on the Queen’s Address

    The speech made by Keir Starmer, the Leader of the Opposition, in the House of Commons on 11 May 2021.

    Before I turn to the Address, I want to pay tribute to Her Majesty. This was Her Majesty’s 67th Queen’s Speech. At a time of incredible personal loss for Her Majesty, it must have been one of the hardest to deliver, as she did this morning.

    I congratulate the mover and the seconder for what were both fine speeches. The Address was moved by the hon. Member for North West Cambridgeshire (Shailesh Vara). He was typically erudite and engaging, and I should not have been surprised, because I am told he is a former winner of the coveted “rising star” award at the Conservative party conference, although I think that was in the year 2000. Perhaps his star has risen again today. As a season ticket holder at Arsenal, I am very glad to learn that he supports the reds. I am also told that he has a black belt in taekwondo, so I now know who to call on at the next shadow Cabinet meeting.

    The seconder of the Address, the hon. Member for South Ribble (Katherine Fletcher), showed why she also is tipped as a rising star. She gave a fine, passionate speech. She is surely the only Member of Parliament who is also a qualified safari ranger, and once survived being charged by a rhino. Her speech showed how those skills have transferred nicely to the Westminster jungle.

    We also remember those Members of this House who passed away in the last Session. In April we lost Cheryl Gillan, who served Chesham and Amersham with such distinction—I look up, because in this place I would normally see Cheryl sitting up there on the Back Bench. As a new Back Bencher in 2015, I had the privilege of working closely with Cheryl on a cross-party basis, and we quickly developed a mutual respect and friendship; I know that many hon. Members would say the same and will remember Cheryl, as I do, with warmth and affection.

    It is a tradition during these debates to welcome new Members to this House, so of course I congratulate the new hon. Member for Hartlepool (Jill Mortimer) on her victory. She now has the huge honour of representing that great town; I hope that she will forgive me if I say that I hope it is not for too long. I wonder what plans she has for the 40-foot inflatable of the Prime Minister.

    I turn to the Address. After a year of sacrifice, this is a seminal moment in our national story. As the hon. Member for North West Cambridgeshire spoke about the pandemic, let me start with this point. Even before the pandemic, Britain needed transformative change to reset our economy, to rebuild our public services and to strengthen our Union and our democracy for decades to come. That is because, even before the pandemic, there were 5.7 million people in low-paid or insecure work and 4.2 million children growing up in poverty. Class sizes were at their highest for 20 years, one in seven adults were unable to get the social care that they need, and Britain had one of the worst levels of regional inequality in Europe. Most shockingly of all, life expectancy stalled, for the first time in a century. Let that sink in: life expectancy stalled, for the first time in a century.

    That is the record of the last 10 years. That is the record that the Prime Minister is trying to run away from today. We can see why: because in the past year, the pandemic has brutally exposed the consequences of that decade of neglect. Tragically, the pandemic has shown that if you live in low-quality, overcrowded housing, if you are trapped in insecure work, if you are one of the millions of people who are one pay cheque away from hardship, this pandemic will have been harder for you than for most.

    Today we needed a Queen’s Speech that rose to the scale of the moment, that rewarded the sacrifices of the past year and rebuilt the foundation. Instead, this Queen’s Speech merely papers over the cracks. It is packed with short-term gimmicks and distant promises—this Government are never short of those—but it misses the urgency and scale of the transformation that is needed in our economy, in our public services and in our society, and it lacks the ambition or a plan to achieve it.

    At the heart of this Queen’s Speech should have been a jobs plan—a plan to tackle unemployment, particularly the shocking levels of youth unemployment, and also to change how the economy works. That is not impossible. Just look across the Atlantic. There we see the kind of plan that is needed: a plan for long-term investment; a plan to make the economy more resilient, greener and more dynamic; and a plan to halve child poverty, to deliver a fairer tax system and to grow the economy from the middle out, not from the top down. But what do we see on this side of the Atlantic? A Queen’s Speech that pits regions against each other in a fight for limited funding, an economy still driven by chronic short-termism, a Government preparing to take money out of the pockets of working people and a Chancellor saddling businesses with debt when they need to invest.

    This address spoke of plans to increase infrastructure spending. Well, about time! Britain should be leading the world on investment, but after 11 years of Conservative Government we are 124th out of 186 countries when it comes to capital investment in our economy, and the scale of what was in this address will not turn that around. This Queen’s Speech should also have provided a plan for better work. For too long, millions of people across Britain have worked longer for lower pay, so where was the employment Bill that was promised in the last Queen’s Speech and repeatedly promised by Ministers? Nowhere to be seen. What was needed was a game-changing employment Bill to end fire and rehire, to give proper rights to every worker from day one and to raise the living wage to at least £10 an hour and go further as quickly as possible. That measure alone would have boosted pay for 8.6 million workers. That is what a Labour Queen’s Speech would have delivered, alongside a green stimulus to create 400,000 jobs and a jobs promise for all 16 to 24-year-olds.

    This address should also have included a clear long-term recovery plan for our NHS, but with waiting lists at a record high of 4.7 million, what we have heard today will come nowhere near the scale of the change needed. And it is unforgivable that there is no clear plan to fix social care. I remind the House that it is now 657 days since the Prime Minister stood on the steps of Downing Street and said that

    “we will fix the crisis in social care once and for all…with a clear plan we have prepared”.

    Yet 657 days on from that promise, what did we hear in this address?

    “Proposals on social care reform will be brought forward.”

    No legislation, no new funding, no details, no timescale. Failure to act for a decade was bad enough, but failure to act after the pandemic is nothing short of an insult to the whole nation.

    It is a similar story on skills and education. I care passionately about this. My dad was a toolmaker who worked on the factory floor all his life, and I know that it is only through world-class skills training, sustained investment and changing the way we think about vocational training that Britain can compete in the 2020s and 2030s. The Prime Minister’s rhetoric on lifetime skills is all very well, but the reality is different. Over the last 10 years, funding on adult education has been slashed by a fifth, and the number of apprenticeships fell by 200,000 in the three years to 2020, so we will judge the Government on their record, not on the rhetoric that we hear today.

    It is the same story on crime and policing. Since 2015, recorded violent crime has doubled and antisocial behaviour has gone up in every area of England and Wales, yet the Conservatives call themselves the party of law and order. Violent crime has doubled and antisocial behaviour is on the up in every area in England and Wales. They have been in government for 11 years. And our courts now have a record backlog, meaning victims waiting years to get justice. Yet the Queen’s Speech will do nothing to address this. I know there is draft legislation now promised on a victims law, but the promise of a victims law has been in the last three Conservative manifestos. Six years ago, I introduced a private Member’s Bill for a victims law, with legally enforceable rights. It had cross-party support. There is cross-party support now. So it is not a draft Bill we need—it is urgent legislation.

    The address also promised much on housing, but for many home ownership is further out of reach than ever. Among the under-45s home ownership has fallen by 800,000 in the last decade—a decade of neglect. House building targets are almost never hit, and rough sleeping has more than doubled since 2010. I see nothing in today’s address that will buck that trend or even attempt to repair the damage of the last decade. If the Prime Minister wanted to act, there is one area where he is guaranteed cross-party support: the cladding scandal. The Grenfell tragedy was four years and three Queen’s Speeches ago, yet thousands of people are still trapped in unsafe buildings, and hundreds of thousands of leaseholders are caught up in homes they cannot sell or afford. People are facing bankruptcy and great anxiety. If anybody needed any reminder of the danger of this, they should look no further than the fire in a block of flats in east London last week. There is no excuse for the Prime Minister’s inaction on cladding; that should have been in this address.

    At a time when the United Kingdom is divided and public trust in our democracy is shaken, this Queen’s Speech was also an opportunity to rebuild the foundations of our democracy. Instead, what does it do? The electoral integrity Bill would make it harder for people to vote, it tramples on civil liberties and it discriminates. The Prime Minister must know that by introducing compulsory voter ID he will suppress turnout; it will disproportionately impact ethnic minorities and it will weaken our democracy. Labour will have no part in that. We also oppose plans in the judicial review Bill to weaken the power of our courts and curtail the right of judicial review. This Government simply fail to understand that our independent judiciary are a strength for our country, not a weakness.

    And where is the legislation to fix the broken lobbying laws? The Prime Minister has chosen instead to put his faith in the Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Act 2014—the Cameron Act. Where did that end? It ended with a Conservative Prime Minister being paid huge amounts of money by dodgy companies almost immediately after leaving office. Come to think of it, given the state of the Prime Minister’s current finances, I can see why he is reluctant to change that bit of legislation.

    There are parts of the Queen’s Speech we will look to work with the Government on. Legislation to ban conversion therapy is long overdue. Conversion therapy is always wrong and indefensible, so we will look very carefully when legislation is brought forward, which must be done soon. We will also look carefully at the draft online safety Bill. That has been much delayed, and we need urgent and effective legislation. And we are always willing to work, on a cross-party basis, to end violence against women and girls. We will bring forward our own proposals on this in the coming days, but of course we will look at any legislation the Government bring forward in this area. Action on Russian and hostile state interference is also long overdue, and progress has been promised for nearly two years. So we will look closely at the promised counter-state threats Bill to see whether we can work constructively to bring about the change that is needed. But those are small glimmers in a Queen’s Speech that shows that the Government still do not understand what went wrong in the past decade and have no plan for the next.

    This is the time for a transformative agenda to rebuild Britain’s foundations after a decade of neglect and a year of national sacrifice—to change the foundation of our economy, invest in the future, solve the social care crisis, clean up our politics and clean up the mess that this Government have created over a decade—but, once again, it is a chance that has been squandered.

  • Keir Starmer – 2021 Comments on Shadow Cabinet Reshuffle

    Keir Starmer – 2021 Comments on Shadow Cabinet Reshuffle

    The comments made by Keir Starmer, the Leader of the Opposition, on 10 May 2021. Details of the Shadow Cabinet reshuffle are here.

    The Labour Party must be the party that embraces the demand for change across our country. That will require bold ideas and a relentless focus on the priorities of the British people. Just as the pandemic has changed what is possible and what is necessary, so Labour must change too.

    In the last 24 hours we have seen fantastic results for Labour Metro Mayors, as well as the Labour government in Wales under Mark Drakeford. They have shown the difference Labour can make in power, standing up for their communities.

    We have seen Labour begin to turn around its fortunes in Scotland under the leadership of Anas Sarwar. These results give us optimism and inspiration for the future. The challenge for us now is to build upon these successes and learn from the places we lost.

    I look forward to working with our refreshed and renewed team to take on that challenge, deliver that change and build the ambitious programme that will deliver the next Labour government.

  • Keir Starmer – 2021 Open Letter to the Country

    Keir Starmer – 2021 Open Letter to the Country

    The open letter written by Keir Starmer, the Leader of the Opposition, on 4 May 2021.

    In a couple of days’ time our country faces important elections. I wanted to write to you directly about the choice facing your community.

    This is a changed Labour Party. Under new leadership, we are putting working people and their communities first, focusing on creating jobs, tackling crime and protecting the NHS.

    My dad was a toolmaker who spent his life working on the factory floor. I’ve always believed in the importance of having a good, secure, local job you can be proud of. But these days, that kind of work is difficult to find for too many people. I want to change that. That’s why Labour will back local businesses and entrepreneurs to create jobs that boost the economy and your community.

    I am proud that my mum, sister and wife have all worked for the NHS. I know the value of our amazing key workers – from nurses and police officers to supermarket workers and delivery drivers, they have kept our country going during this pandemic. Under my leadership, they’d get the rewards they deserve.

    As Director of Public Prosecutions, I led a criminal justice system that prosecuted criminals and protected victims of crime. I know what it takes to get things done to make our country a safer and better place, reversing the rise in violent crime and anti-social behaviour we have seen in recent years.

    As we emerge out of this pandemic, my burning desire is to build a brighter future for our country. My vision for Britain is simple: I want this to be the best place to grow up in and the best place to grow old in, whoever you are and wherever you live. That can start with this week’s elections. Labour in your area has a plan to deliver that future by:

    Investing £30bn to support the creation of hundreds of thousands new jobs in the industries of the future, including steel and manufacturing.
    Introducing a guarantee for young people to get them into work, training or education and end long-term unemployment.
    Getting police out from behind desks and back on our streets to tackle the recent rise in violent crime and anti-social behaviour.
    Guaranteeing the proper pay rise our NHS heroes were promised.

    Under my leadership, the country’s priorities will always be Labour’s priorities. Labour councils, councillors and mayors who are utterly focused on delivering the secure jobs, safer streets and health services we all want to see. We are focused on those issues because they matter most. They are the first step of Labour’s plan to rebuild Britain, based on security and opportunities across the country

    Under the Conservatives, it is one rule for them, another for everyone else. I get angry when I hear how the friend and neighbour of a Tory minister gets £30million of taxpayers’ money, while towns and communities across the country see their local services cut. Or when I see the British people’s money wasted on government contracts that don’t deliver.

    If I were Prime Minister, I would stop the abuse of taxpayers’ money, stop the wasteful approach to outsourcing contracts and clean up our politics. When I was Director of Public Prosecutions, I was not afraid to prosecute MPs who had broken the rules over MPs’ expenses. As Prime Minister, I would not be afraid to overhaul a system that still allows power to be abused.

    But it is not just about fixing things, it’s about a restless, relentless focus on change. Improving people’s lives and the country we all love. There’s no reason we can’t have better jobs, better schools, more opportunities, high streets we are proud of, public services that put people first and an NHS that is the envy of the world again: we just have to prioritise them.

    That means a Labour Government, councils and mayors who are focused on the country, not a Conservative Government busy providing favours for those who have ministers in their WhatsApp contacts. A Labour Government that can deliver a better future for our children, not one cutting pupil premium or that has to be dragged kicking and screaming to provide free school meals for families.

    On Thursday, you have a chance to vote for the first step in that change towards a brighter future and a Britain that works for you. A vote for Labour on Thursday is a vote for more jobs, more police on the streets and to protect our NHS. That’s the change Labour will deliver for you locally and it’s the change I am focused on delivering nationally. It’s the future our country deserves.

  • Keir Starmer – 2021 Comments on Mayoral Elections

    Keir Starmer – 2021 Comments on Mayoral Elections

    The comments made by Keir Starmer, the Leader of the Opposition, on 5 May 2021.

    Our fantastic Labour candidates have shown in this campaign that Labour’s priorities are the British people’s priorities. Creating jobs, tackling crime and protecting the NHS.

    I can’t wait to join Tracy, Dan and Liam on the campaign trail today. They have run energetic and ambitious campaigns and will all make outstanding Mayors.

    Across the UK, if you want strong voices for our towns and cities, our regions and nations, then vote for Labour candidates. They will stand up against a Conservative Government in Westminster which is more interested in providing favours to friends than backing Britain’s communities.

    This is a different Labour Party, under new leadership. Vote Labour tomorrow to put you, your family and your community first. Let’s make Britain the best place to grow up and grow old, whoever you are and wherever you live.

  • Keir Starmer – 2021 Comments on Voting Labour at May Elections

    Keir Starmer – 2021 Comments on Voting Labour at May Elections

    The comments made by Keir Starmer, the Leader of the Opposition, on 5 May 2021.

    Today’s elections are a chance to vote for a brighter, better future for you, your family and your community.

    This is a changed Labour Party. Under new leadership, we are putting working people and their communities first. Your priorities will always be Labour’s priorities, with Labour councils, councillors and mayors utterly focused on delivering the secure jobs, safer streets and health services we all want to see. They are the first step of Labour’s plan to rebuild Britain, based on security and opportunities across the country.

    The choice at this election is simple: a Labour Party in your community that is creating jobs, tackling crime and protecting our NHS or a Conservative Party that handing out contracts to their mates, or wasting taxpayers’ money on contracts that don’t deliver.

    Vote Labour today for more jobs, more police on the streets and an NHS that is protected. Vote Labour for a Britain that works for you.