UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Dadabhai Naoroji – 1893 Speech on Surwur Jung

    Dadabhai Naoroji – 1893 Speech on Surwur Jung

    Below is the text of the speech made by Dadabhai Naoroji, the the then Liberal MP for Finsbury Central, in the House of Commons on 30 March 1893.

    In the absence of the hon. Member for Elgin and Nairn, I beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for India whether he is aware that the present British Resident at the Court of Hyderabad has been accepting as intermediary between himself and His Highness, the Nizam, a person of notoriously blemished antecedents and character, and well known to be hostile to the responsible Minister of State; whether he is aware that this person, named Surwur Jung, has, under the countenance of the Resident, succeeded in obtaining for himself all the real power in the Hyderabad State and completely paralysing the Ministry; whether he is aware that an action for defamation has been under trial before a subordinate of the Resident against the printer of a libellous pamphlet, of which Surwur Jung has been practically admitted to be the author, the complainant being the Home Secretary to the Hyderabad State; that Surwur Jung has compassed the suspension of the complainant from his office while the case is sub judice, has prevented him from having access to his own witnesses, has supported the defence by vast sums of money taken from the Public Treasury and from the trust funds of minors under his charge, and has established a reign of terror amongst witnesses whereby the course of justice is gravely prejudiced; whether he is aware that the complainant’s counsel has presented a Petition to the Resident’s Court, setting forth the contempts of Court which have been thus committed, but that the Resident has neither prevented nor punished such contempts; whether he is aware that during all the period covered by these matters the Resident has been receiving Surwur Jung in private conference at the British Residency, and that by means of the influence thus conferred upon him, Surwur Jung has now succeeded in extorting 100,000 rupees from the Minister by false pretences, with which offence he now stands charged before His Highness the Nizam; and whether, in the interests of public justice, Her Majesty’s Government will urge on the Government of India the necessity of Surwur Jung being removed from the influential position which he has acquired under the Resident’s support?

  • Dadabhai Naoroji – 1893 Speech on East India

    Dadabhai Naoroji – 1893 Speech on East India

    Below is the text of the speech made by Dadabhai Naoroji, the then Liberal MP for Finsbury Central, in the House of Commons on 28 March 1893.

    The hon. Member for Hull told us in very emphatic language of the sufferings of the Anglo-Indian Services in India. I do not blame him for that. Not only he, but even the Viceroy in his long speech went over the same ground, and in as emphatic a manner as possible portrayed what he called the sufferings, and hardships, and cruel wrongs of the Anglo-Indians, and in every way possible emphasised the demands of the Anglo-Indian servants. But it never occurred to either the hon. Member for Hull or the Viceroy that there is another side to the picture. And if these Anglo-Indians are suffering, there are also other people who are suffering far more. What is the position of the Indians themselves from the fall in this exchange? Have the hon. Member or the Viceroy, or any of the English gentlemen who are talking about this subject, given a single thought to the effect which is being produced upon the people of India? “Certainly not,” as I suppose you would say. [Cries of “No!” “Certainly!” and “Oh! oh!”]

    Here is this long statement by the hon. Member for Hull, in which he has portrayed in very strong terms the sufferings of the Anglo-Indian servants, but he has not said one single word as to what the Indians them-selves have suffered. And not only the hon. Member, but the Viceroy also—as I have already said—emphasised as strongly as possible the sufferings, and used all the strong words to be found in the English vocabulary with regard to the hardships of the English servants, but in these long speeches there has not been one word of pity or sympathy with regard to those from whose pocket whatever is demanded has to be paid and what these people themselves have already suffered. Lord Macaulay has said that “the heaviest of ​ all yokes is the yoke of the stranger.” [“Oh, oh!”] So long as this House does not understand that the yoke as it, at present exists practically in India is “the heaviest of all yokes,” India has no future, India has no hope. [Loud cries of “Oh, oh!”] You may say “Oh, oh!” but you have never been, fortunately—and I hope and pray you may never be—in the condition in which India is placed in your hands. [“Oh, oh!”] Wait a little, please. The saddest part of the picture is that while the British people and the British Parliament do not wish and have not willed that India shall be governed on the principle of “the heaviest yoke is the yoke of the stranger,” yet it is so. It is distinctly laid down what the policy is to be, and this Parliament has actually willed 60 years ago that the rule over India ought to be the rule of justice, righteousness, beneficence. That was repeated again in the great Proclamation of 1858. But what has been the actual practice? What has been done by those who have been thus instructed? The actual practice has been to make this yoke the heaviest yoke—”the yoke of the stranger.” [“Oh, oh!”] Has the hon. Gentleman who cries “Oh!” ever been in such a condition as we are? If he has not he can never understand it. I pray that you may never feel that yoke You have been free from it ever since the time when the Normans became assimilated with the English people [Cries of “Question!”] From that] time forward you have been a free people, and I hope and pray you may ever remain so. But, at the same time, it is difficult for you to even surmise the condition of the people of India.

    If it is within your power to make this rule a rule of justice and honour, and at the same time beneficent and profitable, both to yourselves and to us. But I cannot now enter further into that point. The hon. Member for Hull introduced the subject of the poverty of the people of India and treated it with a light heart. That is exactly the question that has to be fought out by me upon the Floor of this House, but the time is not now. I cannot now enter into a Debate upon that point, because you, Mr. Speaker, would very properly call me to Order. I can only intimate my point, and give you some ​ high testimony upon that subject. I will not go into my own reasons, but only quote you the testimony of some of the highest financiers of India. First of all, a Viceroy like Lord Lawrence has distinctly stated in those words—it was in the year 1864—

    “India is, on the whole, a very poor country. The mass of the population enjoy only a scanty subsistence.”

    Then, again, in 1873, he repeated his opinion before the Finance Committee—

    “That the mass of the people were so miserably poor that they had barely the means of subsistence. It was as much as a man could do to feed his family, or half feed them, let alone spending money on what might be called luxuries or conveniences.”

    Thou, coming down to a more recent date—to the days of Lord Cromer—these are the words of Lord Cromer in 1882—
    “It has been calculated that the average income per head of population in India is not more than Rs.27 a year. And though I am not prepared to pledge myself to the absolute accuracy of a calculation of this sort, it is sufficiently accurate to justify the conclusion that the tax-paying community is exceedingly poor. To derive any very large increase of revenue from so poor a population as this is obviously impossible, and, if it were possible, would be unjustifiable.”
    Later on this authority goes on to show the extreme poverty of the mass of the people. Then he reverts back again to the question of the Salt Tax in India—

    “He would ask hon. Members to think what Rs.27 per annum was to support a person, and then he would ask whether a few annas was nothing to such poor people.”

    There is the testimony of your highest Finance Minister, Lord Cromer, who is able to give a very satisfactory account of the work he is doing in Egypt, but was not able to give much encouragement as to India. And when we ask for information from the Government that would satisfactorily show whether, under the most highly praised administration in the world, and after 100 years of this administration, India is poor or not, a Finance Minister as late as 1882 expresses the same opinion as was expressed long ago. Nothing more can be said than that India is extremely poor. These are the words of your own Finance Ministers. Now take the conclusion to which Lord Cromer came in 1882, an extract from ​ which I have read to you with regard to the income of India being not more than Rs.27 per head per annum. This calculation is based upon a Note prepared by the present Finance Minister, and I ask the Government of India, I ask the Under Secretary of State for India, for a Return here in this House of that Note. It is only by complete information given by the Government in conformity with the requirements of this House, which requires that a complete statement of the moral and material progress of India should be laid upon the Table every year, that hon. Members can become acquainted with the actual condition of India. We have it every year of a kind it is not worth the paper it is printed on. There is a certain half-truth line of view always expressed in it, but the information that is required is what is the actual income of the country from year to year. My wish, Sir is to compare figures and see whether the country is improving or becoming poorer. But such information as is needed is not given. I have asked for this Return, and what is the answer given? “That it is out of date.” That is to say, that while this Note of 1881 was the basis upon which this public statement was made by Lord Cromer, this Return is not to be given to us.

    I now ask again that this Return should be given to us, and also a similar Return for 1891, that we may compare and judge whether India is really making any progress or not. Until you get this complete information before the House year by year, you will not be able to form a correct judgment as to the improvement of India. So far, we have, however, these high financial authorities telling us that India is the poorest country in the world, that it is even poorer than Russia. I trust that these facts are sufficient to satisfy hon. Gentlemen. Again, never has England spent, so far as I know, and so far as my information goes, never has there been a single farthing spent out of the British Exchequer, either for the acquirement of India, or for the maintenance of it, or administration, or in any manner connected with India, whilst at the same time hundreds of millions of the wealth of India have been constantly poured into this country. Whether any country in the world could stand such drain as India is subjected to is ​ utterly out of the question. If England itself, with all its wealth, was subjected to such a drain as India is subjected to, it would be reduced to extreme poverty before long.

    When the necessary information is before this House I shall be able to show how during the whole of this century Englishmen themselves have pointed out that India was kept impoverished. Now, what has been the effect upon the natives of India—the taxpayers themselves—from the fall in exchange? During the 20 years from 1873 up to the present day there has been a heavy loss in exchange in the remittances for home charges. I am not hero to-night discussing the justice or injustice of the home charges; I am taking the home charges as they stand, and taking the effect upon the Indian taxpayers. The people live on a very scanty subsistence, and, according to your highest financial authorities, they are extremely poor, yet in their ordinary condition they have to pay Rs. 100,000,000 to the Anglo-Indian servants for salaries, &c., of Rs. 1,000 and upwards per annum, and salaries under Rs. 1,000 besides. There is a large military expenditure to be kept up, and you have other payments under “the system of the yoke of the stranger.” All this means a great loss of wealth, wisdom, work, and capacity to India. I hope the House will be able to take all these points into consideration. Now let us see what a further heavy burden is put upon India by this fall in the exchange!

    There has been already, during the last 20 years, about Rs. 650,000,000 lost to the taxpayer on account of this fall of the exchange, and before next year is over it will be something like Rs. 1,000,000,000. And with these heavy burdens under which the taxpayer of India are groaning, you do not pay the slightest attention to them. You simply think of the sufferings and hardships of your own fellow-countrymen, for which I do not blame you at all. [“Oh, oh!”] It is only natural you should feel for them, but at the same time you ought to have some heart and some justice to consider from what sources this money has to be made up. You do not give a single thought to the sufferings of the men who are being ground to the very dust—as Sir Grant Duff once truly said. To ​ these people who are being literally ground and crushed to dust and powder you wish to add a still heavier burden. They have already suffered greatly from these causes. Can you have the heart to do it? They are a poor people living on a scanty subsistence, merely hewers of wood and drawers of water. I can say nothing more. I leave the matter to your sense of justice, to your heart, to consider whether it is right or proper that you should put still more burdens upon these poor people already so low.

    I have said there has not been a single shilling spent, out of the British Exchequer upon India during all this long connection. But I should make this one exception. On the occasion of the last Afghan War the then Prime Minister, who is also now, offered and gave £5,000,000 towards the expenses that were put upon us by the War. But that was only about one-fourth of the expenses of that iniquitous war. We suffered very heavily by that Afghan War, and heavy military expenses are going on without check or hindrance. Had the British people to pay (which they must pay at least in some fair proportion), we would have heard on this very floor a great deal about them. Now the House is asked by the hon. Member for Hull to put another burden upon the Indian taxpayer. What is the use of asking this?

    The fact is the Viceroy has already committed himself in as strong language as he could that he would do something for the Anglo-Indians, whether the burden upon the poor taxpayers becomes greater or not. He has not said a word about the sufferings of the poor Indian taxpayer. He has not even thought of him. The only thing he said in his long speech was that he did not yet add to the taxation simply because he thought it would be a temporary difficulty. But if it became a permanent difficulty, and as the Anglo-Indian Services could not tolerate the suffering that they have been put to, then he would determine to do something for them by additional taxation. “Very well, then,” says the hon. Member for Hull, “we must do something.” You should not put the expense on the poor native taxpayer, who has no vote. One right hon. Member talked about the vote, and that is just ​ because the poor Indian has no vote that there is so little heed for him. He is truly helpless and crushed down with every possible burden. If hon. Gentlemen here, after drawing millions from the native taxpayer, intend to put this additional burden upon him, then I can only say Heaven save him.

    With regard to the proposed relief, I would like to direct the attention of hon. Gentlemen to the words of the Viceroy in which he almost wholly commits himself to do something. In the face of that admission what is the good of a Committee. The Viceroy says that, whatever may be the Report of Lord Herschell’s Committee, he is determined that if the present state of things continues, the distress which has been borne for some time past by the officials cannot continue to be tolerated. Well, after that you may appoint Committees, but what the result will be is perfectly clear. You have a Committee of Europeans, you have European witnesses, European interests, and all the European sympathy. We know very well what the result will be of the deliberations of such a Committee. We have had ample experience of those Committees in the past. At all gatherings which had been held, where the interests of Europeans and Indians clashed, we know very well that the Indians had gone to the wall. There has hardly been an instance in which a Commission has sat on such a matter as this, and decided in a manner that can be called impartial and unbiassed. [Cries of “Agreed, agreed!”] I can quite understand that hon. Gentlemen should become impatient.

    A Committee is not required to prove the cases the hon. Member for Hull has brought forward. No doubt there is a great deal of suffering, but I ask you not to drag the relief from those who are already crushed, or as he himself said, not to be liberal with other wretched people’s money. I appeal to the British people in this instance to say that it is proper, right, and just that the British Exchequer should find the amount of money wanted. I will give a special reason for this. Every farthing that will be paid for this relief will be spent in this country. It will be simply passing from one hand to another. On the other hand, if you put the burden on the Indians, it means that every farthing taken out of their scanty substance will be carried away from India to this country, and thus our distress and our poverty will be enhanced. The money given for this relief will not be spent in India, but in this country, and I appeal to your justice, to your honour, and to your conscience whether it would be right to put such additional burden on the taxpayer of India? At the present exchange he has lost nearly Rs. 1,000,000,000. I appeal to hon. Gentlemen of this House, to the British people at large, that in this case especially it will be the right and proper and humane thing to give this relief to Anglo-Indian servants from the British Exchequer.

    The Motion is for a Committee. You may have it, but it is merely a farce; the whole thing is a foregone conclusion. Do not put additional taxation on these poor people. The pressure at present upon them is already far too heavy. Lastly, the only effective and permanent remedy for our woes is to remove the cause—the inordinately heavy foreign agency must be reduced to reasonable dimensions—and then there will be no burden and no problem of loss by exchange. Remove the yoke of the stranger and make it the rule of the benefactor, and you will be as much blessed and benefited as we.

  • Boris Johnson – 2020 Statement on the Coronavirus

    Boris Johnson – 2020 Statement on the Coronavirus

    Below is the text of the statement made by Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister, on 3 July 2020.

    Good evening,

    Since I last spoke to you from this podium, we have continued to make progress nationally against the virus.

    We are now reporting regularly fewer than 1,000 new cases each day.

    The Office for National Statistics estimates that between 14 June and 27 June, the most recent period they have analysed, 25,000 people in the community in England had the virus – 1 person in every 2,200.

    SAGE assess that the R rate – the average number of people each infected person passes the virus onto – remains between 0.7 and 0.9 across the UK.

    SAGE also assess that, in England, the number of new infections is shrinking by between 2 and 5% every day.

    And while the number of people dying with coronavirus remains too high, the numbers do continue to fall.

    Now of course this picture is not universal. There are areas – such as Leicester – where the virus is still more prevalent than we would like.

    We always said there would be local outbreaks requiring local action. This is to be expected and will, I’m afraid, be a feature of our lives for some time to come.

    But that should not take away from the great progress we have made, together, as a country against this vicious disease.

    This progress is the reason why we have been able – slowly, carefully, cautiously – to ease the national lockdown.

    Without doubt, lockdown has saved many hundreds of thousands of lives – but it has also had a devastating impact on our way of life and our economy.

    And of course, lockdown has not yet been lifted entirely.

    Indoor gyms, nail bars and swimming pools are still closed, mass gatherings are still prohibited, social distancing is still essential.

    I want these restrictions to be lifted as soon as possible – of course I do.

    We have established taskforces to work rapidly and closely with the sectors that remain closed to explore how they can be Covid Secure. I am pleased to report good progress is being made.

    Next week we will set out a timetable for their re-opening – though of course I can only lift those remaining, national restrictions as and when it is safe to do so.

    Our goal remains to enable as many people as possible to live their lives as close to normally as possible – in a way which is as fair and as safe as possible.

    To achieve this we need to move away from blanket, national measures, to targeted, local measures.

    So instead of locking down the whole country, we will lock down specific premises or local areas where the virus is spreading.

    Instead of closing down non-essential retail and hospitality nationwide, we will only shut establishments locally as required.

    Instead of shutting all schools for most pupils, from September we will only shut those schools where it is absolutely necessary to control an outbreak.

    And instead of quarantining arrivals from the whole world, we will only quarantine arrivals from those countries where the virus is, sadly, not yet under control.

    We are already implementing this targeted approach in England.

    In Weston-Super-Mare, we identified an outbreak in a hospital, closed it to visitors and new admissions, tested all staff and patients and gave the hospital a deep clean. The outbreak was contained and the hospital is open again.

    In Kirklees, we identified an outbreak at a meat packing plant, shut down the plant, moved in a mobile testing unit, tested all employees and traced the contacts of those who were positive. The outbreak was contained and the plant has reopened with additional safety measures in place.

    And of course more recently in Leicester, we identified a community-wide outbreak which was not restricted to a single location, unlike Weston-Super-Mare and Kirklees. Public Health England engaged with the local authority, mobile testing units were deployed, full data was shared – council-wide data was shared on 11 June, and postcode-level data was shared last week.

    This enhanced monitoring through additional testing showed that the infection rate in Leicester was three times the next highest infection rate in any other city in the country. So on Monday, the Health Secretary announced local lockdown measures in Leicester for an initial period of 2 weeks.

    In each of these cases, the problems identified were specific to Weston-Super-Mare, Kirklees and Leicester. So of course it made sense to take action locally, rather than re-impose restrictions on the whole country.

    And we are learning the whole time. With each local outbreak, we see what works well and what not so well, so that we do better next time.

    Informed by our experience of these cases, we have developed an approach for controlling future local outbreaks which has five principle components: monitoring, engagement, testing, targeted restrictions and finally, as a last resort, lockdown.

    First, monitoring. Public Health England, working with the Joint Biosecurity Centre, will examine carefully data on the spread of the disease and people’s behaviour across the country. They will look out for emerging trends, rising case numbers and other indicators, while taking into account local factors. Critically, we have made local data available to all Directors of Public Health in local authorities, so they too can monitor what is happening in their area. And local data will also be available to the public on the gov.uk dashboard.

    Second, engagement. If monitoring identifies local problems, NHS Test and Trace and PHE will work with the relevant local authority to develop a deeper understanding of the problem and identify solutions. Working with local agencies, we will seek to keep the local community informed at every stage, so they know what is happening and what actions, if any, they need to take.

    Third, testing. We now have substantial testing capacity nationwide and we have the ability to target that capacity at local areas in order to get a grip on emerging outbreaks. Scaled-up testing at a local level, combined with contract tracing through NHS Test and Trace, can control the virus and thus avoid more stringent measures.

    Fourth, targeted restrictions. If the virus continues to spread, we will restrict activities at particular locations and close individual premises. As in Weston-Super-Mare and Kirklees, we will restrict access to places which become hotspots for the virus, while testing people who have spent time in those places, and tracing the contacts of anyone who tests positive.

    Fifth, local lockdown. If the previous measures have not proven to be enough, we will introduce local lockdowns extending across whole communities. As in Leicester, that could mean shutting businesses venues that would otherwise be open, closing schools or urging people once more to stay at home. Local lockdowns will be carefully calibrated depending on the scientific and specific circumstances of each outbreak and we are continually exploring smarter means of containing the virus.

    So that is the approach we will take as local outbreaks occur and we will set out more detail soon.

    Let me end by looking forward to this weekend.

    Tomorrow, there will be a moment of remembrance for those whose lives have tragically been lost before their time.

    And at 5pm on Sunday, the NHS’s 72nd birthday, we can all come together to clap those who have worked tirelessly and selflessly to help the nation get through this pandemic.

    I know everyone will be looking forward to the relaxation of national restrictions. As lockdown eases, we should focus on supporting the livelihoods of business owners and their employees up and down the country – all of whom are opening their doors for the first time in more than three months.

    They are our local restaurants, hairdressers, libraries, museums, cinemas, and yes, pubs. They are also hotels, B&Bs, indeed much of our tourism industry.

    All these businesses and their workers have put in a heroic effort to prepare their venues for this reopening, to work out a way to trade in a way that keeps their customers safe.

    But the success of these businesses, the livelihoods of those who rely on them, and ultimately the economic health of the whole country is dependent on every single one of us acting responsibly. We must not let them down.

    Lockdown only succeeded in controlling the virus because everyone worked together, and we will only succeed in reopening if everyone works together again. Because we are not out of the woods yet. The virus is still with us and the spike in Leicester has shown that. If it starts running out of control again this Government will not hesitate in putting on the brakes and re-imposing restrictions.

    Anyone who flouts social distancing and COVID-Secure rules is not only putting us all at risk but letting down those businesses and workers who have done so much to prepare for this new normal.

    So as we take this next step, our biggest step yet, on the road to recovery, I urge the British people to do so safely.

    Remember – don’t gather in groups of more than 6 outside or 2 households in any setting.

    Keep your distance from those outside your household – 2 metres if you can, 1 metre with precautions if you can’t.

    Wash your hands.

    Let’s all stay alert, control the virus, save lives – and enjoy summer safely.

  • Tracy Brabin – 2020 Comments on Redudancies at the Royal Exchange

    Tracy Brabin – 2020 Comments on Redudancies at the Royal Exchange

    Below is the text of the comments made by Tracy Brabin, the Shadow Minister for Cultural Industries, on 2 July 2020.

    The devastating news from the Royal Exchange is just the latest sign of a sector in crisis. Theatres have been warning of mass redundancies for months but the government fails to listen.

    They have had enough of warm words from the Secretary of State, what they need is a sector specific package to support them while coronavirus makes live performances impossible.

    There is a real fear that once we lose some of these jobs – not only will it be devastating for the individuals – but the loss of talent and expertise will cause lasting damage to the nation’s cultural heart.

  • Chris Matheson – 2020 Comments on BBC Regional Cuts

    Chris Matheson – 2020 Comments on BBC Regional Cuts

    Below is the text of the comments made by Chris Matheson, the Shadow Minister for the Media, on 2 July 2020.

    While not unexpected, these cuts are still very damaging and unwelcome. Regional news is among the most trusted with some of the highest viewing and listening figures.

    Regional investigative journalism, such as Inside Out, have been ground breaking over the last two decades and served a need that cannot be met nationally.

    Although some of these cuts have are caused by the Covid-19 pandemic affecting production, the root cause remains the government’s decision to slash BBC funding. We’ve seen £800 million lost so far in this charter period, not to mention the Tories’ broken promise on the over-75s’ free TV licence, where the cost of £250 million was passed to the BBC.

    Ministers need to take responsibility and stop hiding behind the BBC management – the government caused these cuts, they should stand up and be counted.

  • Louise Haigh – 2020 Comments on Providing Guidance for Businesses in Northern Ireland

    Louise Haigh – 2020 Comments on Providing Guidance for Businesses in Northern Ireland

    Below is the text of the comments made by Louise Haigh, the Shadow Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, on 2 July 2020.

    Ministers wasted eight months insisting these checks would never be needed. Businesses are still in the dark and the new system to manage these checks doesn’t yet exist.

    The Government needs to say clearly what businesses need to do, what proportion of goods will face physical checks and how they are going to help Northern Irish businesses weather these new costs.

    This level of incompetence would be irresponsible at any time but, right now, it is completely reckless. Jobs have already been lost and their cavalier approach risks costing many more.

  • Steve Reed – 2020 Comments on Local Government Funding

    Steve Reed – 2020 Comments on Local Government Funding

    Below is the text of the comments made by Steve Reed, the Shadow Communities and Local Government Secretary, on 2 July 2020.

    Many councils are on the brink of bankruptcy because of the costs of tackling Covid-19, so any help is welcome. But if the Government breaks its promise to fund the costs in full, councils will be forced to cut back services like social care, youth activities and bin collections, and closed libraries and leisure centres might never reopen.

    This funding is a start, but we don’t know how it will be shared out and much of the detail is being held back until the autumn which might be too late to save many frontline workers’ jobs that are now at risk.

    We urge the Government to stick to its promise to support councils to do what’s necessary to get communities through this. Councils have kept their part of the bargain, now the Government must do the same rather than punish local communities with cuts to the services they rely on.

  • Cat Smith – 2020 Comments on Career Disruption for the Young

    Cat Smith – 2020 Comments on Career Disruption for the Young

    Below is the text of the comments made by Cat Smith, the Shadow Minister for Young People, on 3 July 2020.

    Young people have been ignored by the Government since long before the coronavirus crisis. After a decade of austerity, young people are facing surging housing prices, stagnating wages, and rising student debt. And the Coronavirus Crisis will only compound and exaggerate these issues.

    Many young people find jobs in the hospitality and retail sectors. The Government must use next week to introduce a Back to Work Budget which preserves those jobs, creates new jobs and provides job guarantees for young people to prevent long term unemployment.”

  • Cat Smith – 2020 Comments on the Generational Divide

    Cat Smith – 2020 Comments on the Generational Divide

    Below is the text of the comments made by Cat Smith, the Shadow Minister for Young People, on 3 July 2020.

    This generational divide is only going to worsen with the Government’s continued radio silence on what it will do for young people.

    The high proportion of young people from Black, Asian, and minority ethnic households unable to access outdoor space highlights wider inequalities laid bare by the Covid-19 crisis.

    This report shows how important it is for a proper government plan that puts young people at the heart of post-pandemic recovery plans.

  • Anneliese Dodds – 2020 Speech on a Back to Work Budget

    Anneliese Dodds – 2020 Speech on a Back to Work Budget

    Below is the text of the speech made by Anneliese Dodds, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, on 3 July 2020.

    Back in March, as lockdown began, hastily written notes were placed in the windows of shops and businesses on high streets across the country.

    They announced an unavoidable shut down with no certainty about how or when they could re-open.

    This is every business’ nightmare, but for three long months, it has been their waking reality.

    Now, for some parts of our economy, the notes are beginning to come down, and the shutters are beginning to come up.

    But for others, the crisis is still not over.

    We are still in the middle of the greatest crisis in a generation one where our government, sadly, has been too slow to act. Too slow to lockdown. Too slow to ramp up testing. And too slow to get PPE to our brilliant frontline workers.

    As lockdown restrictions begin to ease, attention is turning to the economic impact of coronavirus.

    Labour is very clear: the government cannot afford to be too slow.

    Britain needs a Back to Work Budget with a focus on jobs, jobs and jobs again.

    What we are hearing from the government on the economy is worrying.

    Worrying that – yet again – they plan to take a hands-off approach to helping business and people’s livelihoods.

    Worrying that the Chancellor is reported to have said he “shouldn’t be picking winners.”
    As if supporting a local pub or family-run restaurant, that has been boarded up at the direction of government is somehow cheating the natural order of things.

    Worrying that some press reports suggested the Chancellor was considering putting off his Summer Economic Update, in order to wait and see what happens this weekend, when more of the lockdown lifts. Even though many other countries announced weeks ago, their recovery packages, focused on backing the green jobs of the future.

    Waiting to see is not a strategy.

    The OECD’s Global Outlook report published last month, made for sobering reading.
    It suggested that the economic hit on the UK due to the coronavirus would be the worst of all industrialised nations.

    And, that unemployment levels in the UK could be the second worst in the industrialised world.

    Just as the hit to our population’s health from coronavirus threatens to be one of the worst of all industrialised countries, so our economy stands at a crossroads.

    This is not a time to wait and see.

    In Leicester this week we have seen the first major re-imposition of lockdown.

    The government promised these lockdowns would be local.

    But the reality is they are being driven from Whitehall.

    We still do not have a functioning track, trace and isolate system.

    And local authorities are not getting the data they need in the time they need it.

    The experience in recent days and weeks in Leicester is a familiar one in our response to this crisis. Muddled. Confusing. With a refusal to bring in local authorities and too slow – much – much too slow.

    We desperately need and want government to get this right.

    Lives and livelihoods depend upon it.

    Because for as long as there is confusion and delay in the public health response, many people will stay away from our high streets and out of our shops, pubs and restaurants.

    At this time of continued national crisis, Labour is determined to act as a constructive opposition.

    So, in that spirit, I call on the Chancellor to acknowledge the impact of the slow health response on our economy and do something about it.

    Today we call on government, to lay out plans to extend support schemes for businesses and people in areas like Leicester that are forced into local lockdowns.

    These support schemes should serve as economic sandbags, ensuring localised second waves of COVID-19 don’t wash away businesses and jobs in their wake.

    Labour has also repeatedly set out constructive solutions when it comes to test, track and isolate, including changes to sick pay, so people are not having to choose between self-isolating and providing for their families.
    And we have repeatedly called for clear public health messaging – with unambiguous and strongly-enforced guidance.

    These solutions are critical to reducing infection and to building trust and aiding our economic recovery.

    We have also set out the fiscal measures Government should take, to first secure, and then turbocharge our recovery.

    Instead of the limited ‘Summer Economic Update’ promised next week, we need a real Back to Work Budget.

    It must focus on preventing unemployment, supporting the unemployed back into work, and creating the jobs of the future, so that when we emerge from this crisis, Britain is ready to come back even better than before.

    We already know many of the policies which can prevent and combat unemployment, and the long-term costs unemployment incurs.

    And we know that many other countries announced their economic recovery packages not just days, but weeks ago.

    Already we are falling behind others.

    This is no time to wait and see: it’s the time to act in our country’s interest.

    Labour supported the Job Protection Scheme and self-employed schemes – indeed, we called for them.

    We also called for an exit strategy.

    But as with the lifting of lockdown, what we have now is an exit without a strategy.

    First, government must abandon its one-size-fits-all wind-down of the Job Protection and self-employed schemes.

    We need a targeted strategy that acknowledges that workers in struggling sectors cannot and should not be treated the same way, as workers in sectors that are already back to full capacity.

    This is not about ‘picking winners’, in the Chancellor’s words.

    It is about protecting those who have lost – through no fault of their own. It is about giving people across the country a fair chance.

    The reward for months of sacrifice cannot be a redundancy notice.

    This week we saw a wave of companies announcing enormous job losses – because the government is refusing to shift from its one-size-fits-all approach.

    Smaller companies have a shorter redundancy period. To avoid the same flood of redundancy notices for workers within smaller companies later on this month, government must act now – and abandon its one-size-fits-all approach.

    When we talk about our economy, it can feel distant and remote: interest rates and budgets and spreadsheets. It is anything but.

    The economy is our jobs and family incomes.

    It is our high streets and our communities.

    It is the things that add meaning and character to the places we live and love.

    It is small business owners, who have put their life and soul into building their businesses.

    It has been heartbreaking to hear from many of them in recent weeks. How they feel their businesses slipping through their fingers because of a temporary lack of cash flow, even though with the right, targeted support now, they would be perfectly viable in the long term.

    That frustration, that anger, at working hard all your life, playing by the rules, doing the right thing, waiting your place patiently in the queue. Only to find it snatched away from you by a combination of this terrible crisis and government’s refusal to help.

    Supporting them now isn’t about picking winners.

    It’s about basic fairness.

    Government must also act now to provide support for those who have become unemployed.

    Instead, the DWP are re-introducing sanctions at a time when there are more than eight people unemployed for every vacancy.

    This government seems completely divorced from the scale of the unemployment crisis facing us.

    It must speedily put in place the ‘active labour market policy’ that already operates in many other countries, and which our JobCentres do not have the capacity to provide.

    Government must also act now to support the jobs of the future.

    And here we need guarantees of delivery, not just warm words.

    In 2015, the Conservative government promised to huge fanfare 200,000 new homes for first-time buyers. Not a single one of those homes was built.

    The Conservatives have talked and talked: they have not built.

    If you could construct houses out of Conservative press releases, promises and hot air, the housing crisis in this country would have ended years ago.

    Instead, the rate of homeownership has fallen, and almost 800,000 fewer households under-45 own their own home now, compared to in 2010.

    The Conservatives have talked and talked: they have not built.

    And on the green infrastructure that every region and nation of this country is crying out for, there have been promises and paper commitments, but precious little action.

    The Conservatives have talked and talked: they have not built.

    Two years ago, the National Infrastructure Commission published an assessment. There has been no official response.

    And this week the Prime Minister tried to claim he was creating a ‘New Deal’. Most of it was re-announcements of things we have heard before.

    So, it wasn’t really ‘new’.

    And, when we cut through the bluster and looked at the detail of what the Prime Minister was actually offering, it works out at less than £100 investment per person.

    So, it’s not much of a deal either.

    Ten years of Conservative government. Ten years of talk. Ten years of inaction.

    Instead of yet more promises and yet more talk, we need a laser focus – on jobs, jobs, jobs.

    To deliver on jobs, the Chancellor’s statement must meet four key tests.

    First, it must focus, not on re-announced, re-hashed prestige projects, but on supporting high-quality jobs.

    The test of a project can’t be if it piques the interest of the Prime Minister’s closest advisor.

    Instead, projects must involve local firms. They must give the local workforce new skills and training. They must lead to material improvement in the quality and availability of local employment.

    And, programmes to support employment must be measured against the success of schemes like the Future Jobs Fund, and reflect the different challenges faced by young workers, older workers, and particularly impacted areas of the UK.

    Second, the Chancellor’s statement must buck the trend of the last ten years and rebuild economic resilience right across our country.

    As a recent report noted:

    “[t]here is little chance of a so-called ‘bounce-back’ in areas such as Pendle, Burnley, or Barnsley where local authority service spending has fallen by 53 per cent, 51 per cent, and 35 per cent over the decade in real terms”.

    And public support for ailing companies must come with good-value strings attached, to support local employment, to keep value in the UK by avoiding dividend payments, share buybacks and the use of tax havens, and to adhere to strong environmental requirements.

    Third, every single project must be consistent with the drive to net-zero – so we can build the green jobs of the future.

    Last week’s Committee on Climate Change report showed how far behind the UK is falling – now is the time for action.

    Just as the German, Danish and South Korean stimulus packages have focused on green technologies, so must the UK’s, if we are to avoid falling behind other countries.

    And fourth, any benefits of investment now must not be cancelled out by poor decisions later.

    Because, while the Prime Minister says now that those who have borne the brunt of the crisis will not be called on to pay for it, we’ve seen the opposite over the last ten years.

    Since this dreadful virus struck, we have seen who our key workers really are.

    Those who staff our NHS; those working in our emergency services; those keeping supermarkets open; and the elderly and vulnerable cared for.

    Our keyworkers are the people keeping bins collected, children educated, and the country safe.

    Those on the frontline of this crisis have heroically risen to the challenge over the last few months – but, for many, that follows a decade of reductions in pay, security and living standards.

    Over the last ten years, the gap in income and wealth has increased, and living standards for low and middle-income people have stagnated – at the same time as taxes for the very best-off have been reduced.

    So finally, government must commit, at the very least, to not increase taxes or cut support for low and middle-income people, during the period while we recover from this crisis.

    Because just like the small business that fears for its future, what people want – what they deserve – is fairness.

    We cannot go back to business as normal.

    We cannot “wait and see”.

    We cannot have more empty promises.

    We cannot have more inaction.

    We need a response which recognises the scale of the challenge we face.

    And the first step in this, the first move to get Britain back on its feet, needs to happen now.

    Britain needs a Back to Work Budget – one that focuses on jobs, jobs, jobs.