The city council is issuing guidance so everyone is able to cast their vote in the General Election on 4 July.
If you applied for a postal vote by 7 June, then this has been posted out and should arrive soon if you haven’t already received it. If you applied for one between 8-19 June it will be sent out by this weekend. Further information can be found on our website.
Please fill your postal vote in as soon as possible once you receive it and post it back to us.
When filling out your postal vote if you’ve separated the statement from envelope A this isn’t an issue, please just send everything back. Don’t worry about using blue ink.
If you need a proxy vote, where someone votes on your behalf, the deadline for new applications is tomorrow (26 June) at 5pm. Guidance on proxy votes is available on our website.
If you are going to vote in person, this is the first UK General Election where voters must show a form of photo identification (ID) to cast their ballot.
“These figures, and our own research, clearly evidence the shameful and shocking reality of poorly patients who need to be cared for on hospital wards having to wait many hour hours, ever days, often on trolleys in corridors because there is not enough capacity in the system.
“There simply are not enough beds to admit people to, often because the people in those beds are medically well enough to go home but can’t because of inadequate or delayed social care support.
“It is not just a matter of inconvenience or lack of dignity – which is bad enough. The longer people’s in-patient admission is delayed, the greater the risk the risk to their life.
“There is no one quick fix, but the problems are fixable. RCEM is ready to work with whoever forms the next Government to begin the process of resuscitating our health system and ending these unacceptable and dangerous long waits.”
Recent events in the UK have brought to light a significant betting scandal involving political figures, underscoring the urgent need for stringent ethical standards and enforcement in public office.
As more names surface in the ongoing investigation, the scandal is set to have wide-ranging implications for political accountability and public trust.
The controversy began when it was revealed that Craig Williams, a senior aide to Rishi Sunak, placed a bet on the timing of the next general election just days before it was announced. This has sparked a broader investigation into betting activities among political figures, with more names expected to emerge in the coming days. Williams has since faced significant scrutiny and potential legal challenges.
Ethical Implications
This scandal highlights several critical issues:
Conflict of Interest: Politicians and their aides have access to privileged information. Betting on such information compromises their ability to act impartially and can lead to decisions influenced by personal gain rather than public interest.
Public Trust: Incidents of this nature severely erode public confidence in political institutions. When political figures are seen engaging in unethical behavior, it diminishes the public’s faith in their ability to govern fairly and transparently.
Regulatory Gaps: The current regulatory framework for political conduct may be insufficient to address modern challenges such as betting and financial conflicts of interest. This scandal underscores the need for comprehensive reforms.
Current Measures and Recommendations
In light of these events, several steps should be considered to strengthen ethical oversight in politics:
Enhanced Disclosure Requirements: Politicians should be mandated to disclose all betting activities and any financial interests that could pose a conflict of interest.
Regular Audits and Monitoring: Implementing regular financial audits and monitoring the activities of politicians can help detect and deter unethical behavior.
Clear Consequences: Establishing strict penalties for breaches of ethical conduct, including betting on privileged information, can serve as a significant deterrent.
Ethics Training: Providing regular ethics training for politicians and their aides can reinforce the importance of maintaining integrity and help them navigate complex ethical dilemmas.
Moving Forward
As the investigation continues, it is crucial for political parties and regulatory bodies to take decisive action to address these issues. Strengthening ethical standards and ensuring rigorous enforcement can help restore public confidence and ensure that political decisions are made in the best interest of the public.
Andy Bell from Bettingsites.ie says: “The unfolding scandal serves as a critical reminder of the importance of transparency, accountability, and integrity in public service. By addressing these challenges head-on, the UK can work towards rebuilding trust in its political institutions and ensuring that such issues are effectively managed in the future.”
What impact has the ‘two-child limit’ in universal credit had, and what policy choices does the next government face? – a report by Institute for Fiscal Studies
Low-income families typically receive an additional £3,455 a year of universal credit (or child tax credit) for each child they have1 . But the ‘two-child limit’ means that claimants do not receive an additional amount for third or subsequent children born after 5 April 2017.
This policy has been the subject of controversy, and the Liberal Democrats and Green Party have both committed to abolishing the limit in their manifestos, while the Labour Party have said they will abolish it ‘when fiscal conditions allow’.
In this comment, we (IFS) outline the impact of the two-child limit on household incomes and work incentives, and the public finances.
To illustrate the impact of the policy, take a lone parent with three children who lives in social rented accommodation costing £500 per month2 , and not working.
Their universal credit entitlement will be made up of the basic £4,721 per year in universal credit for single adults; £6,000 to cover the cost of their housing; and – in the absence of the two-child limit – £10,365 for their children3 .
On top of this, they receive £3,102 a year in child benefit, which is unaffected by the two-child limit, giving them a total income of £24,188 (without the two-child limit); they would also generally have support to cover most or all of their council tax bill. The two-child limit means they receive £3,455 less each year in universal credit, representing a 14% cut to their income and putting them into relative poverty.
Turning to the impact across the population, we find that, when fully rolled out, on average affected households will lose £4,300 per year, representing 10% of their average income and 22% of average benefit income4 .
These losses are concentrated among 790,000 households (10% of working-age households with children) and would affect nearly one in five children (2.8 million).
As things stand, the policy affects only 550,000 households. The difference is because there are families with three children all of whom were born before 6 April 2017; as time passes, more and more large families will have children born after that date.
We estimate that 250,000 extra children will be affected by the policy next year and 670,000 extra children will be affected by the end of the next parliament. HMRC statistics show that in 2023, 50% of families affected by the two-child limit were single parents and 57% had at least one adult in paid work.
Figure 1 shows where in the household income distribution households that are affected by the two-child limit sit. For comparison, we also show the equivalent for all households with children and all households with children receiving universal credit.
Unsurprisingly, the two-child limit disproportionately affects poorer households, but the figure shows that affected households are also more likely to have low income than are all universal-credit-receiving families with children.
76% of households affected by the two-child limit are in the poorest 30% of working-age households. In comparison, 63% of households eligible for universal credit with children are in the poorest 30% of working-age households.
Figure 1. Distribution of households affected by two-child limit; universal credit claimants with children; and all households with children, by equivalised income decile
Note: Assumes full take-up of benefits and full roll-out of universal credit and the two-child limit. Only includes households where all adults are under 66.
Source: Authors’ calculations using the Family Resources Survey 2022–23 and TAXBEN, the IFS tax and benefit microsimulation model.
The two-child limit has an (even more) outsized impact on children living in low-income households, as, by definition, a household affected by the two-child limit has at least three children. It affects 23% of households with children in the poorest fifth of the income distribution, but 38% of children in the poorest fifth of the income distribution.
The two-child limit also has varied impacts across families of different ethnicities. We estimate that 43% of children in households with one adult of Bangladeshi or Pakistani origin (400,000 children) would be affected by the policy when fully rolled out, compared with 17% of children in other households (2.4 million children). This reflects both these families having more children and them being more likely to be on low income.
The two-child limit would be even more targeted at the poorest households if it was not for a separate policy: the benefit cap. The benefit cap limits the total amount that a family with no adults in work can claim to £22,020 a year outside London and £25,323 a year inside London (lower amounts are applied for single adults without children). 110,000 households are not directly affected by the two-child limit as the benefit cap already limits their entitlements. Almost all these households are in the poorest fifth of households.
Figure 2 shows relative child poverty rates, defined as being in a household with an income (after housing costs) below 60% of median income, split by the number of children in the household.
Since 2014–15, relative poverty rates have declined for families with one or two children, but they have increased for families with three or more children5 .
Absolute poverty rates have also diverged: they have fallen for small families but remained unchanged for large families. So, in absolute terms, low-income large families are about as well off as they were in 2015, but their incomes have fallen further behind relative to other households, including small families.
Figure 2. Relative child poverty rates after housing costs, 2008–09 to 2022–23
Note: The fall in poverty rates in 2020–21 is at least partly due to benefit expansions in that year, including raising maximum housing support and a temporary £20 per week uplift to universal credit.
The two-child limit is likely one driver of this recent increase in relative child poverty rates for larger families. However, it is not the only explanation. Other benefit cuts are likely to affect larger families more as they on average receive more of their income from benefits (the benefit cap also disproportionately affects larger families); and broader economic trends may also play a role.
Nevertheless, removing the two-child limit would certainly go some way to reversing the recent increase in poverty rates for large families. We estimate that removing the two-child limit would reduce relative child poverty by approximately 500,000 (4% of all children)6 .
The two-child limit has a relatively small effect on work incentives. One statistic that helps explain work incentives is replacement rates: the household’s income if an individual was out of work as a percentage of their in-work household income. The lower someone’s replacement rate, the more incentive they have to remain in work.
With the two-child limit, an average working parent with three or more children has a replacement rate of 62.1%; without it, they would have a slightly higher replacement rate of 63.0%.
This average difference is small for two reasons. First, 28% of these workers are unaffected entirely, as they would not be able to claim universal credit even if they lost work, due to having more than £16,000 in assets or their partner having a sufficiently high income.
Second, for 22% of these workers, the two-child limit actually increases their replacement rate, as it decreases their income when in work but does not affect them when they are out of work, as they would be benefit capped if out of work.
For those who when out of work are eligible for universal credit but not benefit capped – 50% of working parents with three or more children – their replacement rate falls by 4 percentage points.
Naturally, removing the two-child limit would come at a cost. We estimate that removing the two-child limit would cost the government about £3.4 billion a year. For a sense of scale, this is equal to roughly 3% of the total working-age benefit budget; it is also approximately the same cost as freezing fuel duties for the next parliament, or cutting the basic rate of income tax by half a penny.
The indirect fiscal impacts of the two-child limit are more uncertain. Previous research has found that investments in young children can sometimes partly or even entirely pay for themselves by causing better outcomes for those children in later life.
If the same is true of benefit spending in the UK, removing the two-child limit may be less costly in the long run than its up-front cost suggests. However, there is very little evidence on this issue in the UK, though ongoing IFS research is looking to study it.
David Jacobsen is the Socialist Labour Party Genera Election candidate for Edinburgh North & Leith Constituency.
David has 20 years experience as a healthcare worker in the NHS and is committed to a National Health service available to all at the time of need, on demand and free of all charges – including prescriptions, dental care, and eye care.
The Socialist Labour Party wants all NHS workers to receive wages and terms and conditions that reflect the social importance of their jobs.
Our objectives include the provision of NHS nursing homes free of charge for people who need them and care homes owned and operated by local authorities and not by private companies chosen by a centralised power controlled by the Scottish government.
On 29th February 2024 the Scottish Parliament passed the National Care Service Bill. This allows Scottish ministers to transfer social care responsibility from local authorities. This could include adult and children’s services as well as areas such as justice and social work.
Mr Jacobsen urges consituents to stop the transfer of healthcare functions from the NHS to the new centralised National Care Service.
Vote Socialist Labour on July 4th!
EDINBURGH NORTH & LEITH CANDIDATES:
Scottish Liberal Democrats – ANDERSEN, Mike
Scottish National Party (SNP) – BROCK, Deidre
Scottish Family Party – Defending Traditional Values – DEEPNARAIN, Niel
Scottish Labour Party – GILBERT, Tracy
Socialist Labour Party – JACOBSEN, David Don
Reform UK – MELVILLE, Alan Gordon
Scottish Conservative and Unionist – MOWAT, Joanna
Scottish Greens – O’NEILL, Kayleigh Ferguson
Communist Party of Britain – SHILLCOCK, Richard Charles
Three mental health charities will host a General Election hustings event in Edinburgh for a lively discussion on mental health policies with the five main Scottish political parties.
Change Mental Health, Penumbra Mental Health and Health in Mind have all joined forces to organise the hustings event, taking place at the Augustine United Church in Edinburgh on Tuesday 18th June.
Despite mental health being devolved to the Scottish Parliament, all three charities are emphasising that political parties must prioritise and improve mental health.
Nick Ward, CEO of Change Mental Health, said: “We are in the middle of a mental health crisis. Mental health services aren’t getting the funding they need and people aren’t getting the support that they need, when they need it most.
“It’s time for politicians to tell us what they are going to do about this. We need the mental health of our communities to be at the top of the agenda for this election and we need to make sure that the voices of people affected by mental health are heard so that we can build a future where no one faces mental illness alone.”
Mike Burns, Chief Executive of Penumbra Mental Health, said: ““Each of the main political parties will have a chance to outline how they will challenge the inequalities which impact our mental health.
“People in the audience will rightly be looking to candidates for a commitment to creating a society that supports good mental health for everyone.”
Wendy Bates, Chief Executive of Health in Mind, said: ““Over recent years, our mental health has been affected by events locally, nationally, across the UK and globally.
“People accessing our services tell us that they continue to feel the impacts of the Covid pandemic, conflict across the world, the cost of living crisis and the climate crisis. With over one in four of us now dealing with mental health issues, and support services stretched increasingly thin, we need mental health to be at the top of the agenda for our next government.
“Although health is a devolved matter in Scotland, decisions made in Westminster will have knock-on effects for us here.
“We are delighted to be hosting this hustings together with Change Mental Health and Penumbra Mental Health to open up this vital conversation ahead of next month’s election, hear more about candidates’ commitments, and create space for them to share how they plan to improve our nation’s mental health – which will impact us all both directly and indirectly.”
A recent survey from Change Mental Health’s sister charity, Rethink Mental Illness, found that 4 in 10 people say mental health will be important in shaping their decision on which party to vote for at the General Election on 4th July 2024.
The hustings event on mental health will be an opportunity for people to have their voice heard on improving and prioritising mental health and wellbeing across the country.
Representatives will be available from the SNP, Labour, Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and the Greens.
With an extra NINE MILLION older people, a population the size of London, set to populate the UK by 2050, Hourglass is calling on all Westminster hopefuls to underline their Safer Ageing plans – and take the OATH, a new campaign to increase awareness of the social care timebomb.
Hourglass, the only UK-wide charity dedicated to ending the abuse and neglect of older people, has launched its own manifesto entitled ‘A Safer Ageing Society by 2050’ and is urging the political elite and general public alike to sign up to support it HERE:
The campaign, OATH (Older Age Tomorrow’s Hope) is a pledge to support their 2050 target and to work alongside older people, the age sector and Hourglass itself in raising the profile of this often-unspoken issue.
The charity points to the creation of a London-sized city, full of over sixties by 2050. That’s 9.6 million more older people in the UK. And, they say, for the first time they’ll be more over 60s than under 16s. The charity underlines that this is a social care timebomb waiting to explode.
As the charity’s Policy Director and Deputy CEO, Veronica Gray, illustrates, Hourglass’s big ask isn’t quite as unreachable as it first appears: “Let’s think about it from the opposite perspective.
“If we knew there was to be nine million extra bouncing babies in the next twenty-five years, governments across the UK would be planning now. There would be a strategy to accommodate and ensure their safe arrival into the world.
“There would be new schools, nurseries, perhaps maternity hospitals and safeguarding teams. Early years planning, investment into midwives and ante-natal units would be on the horizon. Our parliamentary representatives would be falling over themselves to promise a safe future for the impending influx of babies. Not just kissing them for the cameras.
“This is unquestionably a population boom – just at the other end of the spectrum. This ageing population needs to be celebrated, safe, independent and free from abuse. This seems like a fairly obvious step and worthy of support and understanding. Hence the Hourglass target of creating a Safer Ageing Society by 2050.”
Therefore, Hourglass is also scrutinising what plans the political parties in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have outlined in their manifesto. And so far, in terms of protecting older people from abuse, harm, exploitation and neglect, the charity believes there has been precious little forward planning at all.
Richard Robinson, CEO of Hourglass, explains:“Hourglass believes, with the impending older population surge and 2.5 million people affected by the abuse of older people annually, we need as many active voices as possible to make the case. The political dial now needs to move to address this significant upsurge and the social care needs of this population shift.
“We are working to analyse, with a variety of indicators, how seriously each political party is taking the notion of a Safer Ageing future. We will be announcing the results next Friday (21st June) and this, Election Safer Ageing Index, will also be used to scrutinise performance as the new parliamentary term takes shape.”
Hourglass, which has been working to support older-victims of abuse and neglect since 1994, has a unique 24/7 helpline, instant messenger and Knowledge Bank service. These services are already under threat due to delayed decision-making on future funding mechanisms.
Richard Robinson continues: “Whoever comes to power after 4th July, has to urgently secure service provision and agree funding for charities like Hourglass. This will go some distance in paving the way for a Safer Ageing future – but this is the bare minimum.
“The Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) commitments, whilst inspirational and much-needed, need to be replicated for older victim-survivors. This is another key consideration for the next Downing Street resident.”
The charity was recently in the headlines for working to develop and script the story of Yolande Trueman, in BBCs EastEnders. This, along with many other factors has seen the charity’s calls hit over 700 a week and with a likely 50,000 contacts per year.
The Times, The Sunday Times and Times Radio announces 2024 election marketing plans
Times Radio is hitting the road with an Election Bus tour
The Times, The Sunday Times and Times Radio launch “From Westminster to your World” marketing campaign
As the British General Election on July 4th approaches, Times Radio is excited to announce the launch of the Times Radio Election Bus tour.
Broadcasting live from a studio within the giant branded tour bus, Times Radio will travel across the country to listen to the voices of local communities and highlight the political issues that matter most to them.
Starting its journey travelling from Dover to London, the bus will visit key battlegrounds and politically significant areas up until polling day, including Glasgow, Cardiff, Bournemouth, Birmingham, and more.
At each location, Times Radio will provide real-time updates, expert analysis, lively debates, and must-hear interviews, ensuring listeners are fully informed on every twist and turn of the election campaign.
Along the way, the British public will be able to record messages for the next Prime Minister against a realistic No.10 Downing Street backdrop. Messages will then be incorporated into Times Radio’s programmes.
Tim Levell, Programme Director of Times Radio, said; “The General Election is the one moment when power flows to every individual person across the United Kingdom.
“We are delighted that the Times Radio Election Bus, complete with its state-of-the-art on-board radio studio, will be visiting communities right across the country, to hear the concerns and opinions of the voters who will decide our next government.”
The tour bus was supplied by Empire RV, the design, advertising and activation was created by The Tenth Man and produced by Extreme Productions.
Gethin Evans, UK Managing Director, The Tenth Man, added: “It’s been pretty exciting working with the team at one the worlds best known media brands as our founding client for the London office.
“It’s not very often you get the chance to help brands that are almost 250 years old – and we are delighted to help them promote Times Radio across the UK in a pivotal political period for the country.
“We’re taking current affairs on the road, without the boring bits.”
Coinciding with the launch of the tour, The Times, The Sunday Times and Times Radio have today also unveiled a new election marketing campaign. Created by News UK’s dedicated agency, Pulse Creative, the integrated campaign, “From Westminster to your World,” illustrates how these brands help customers better understand the real-life impact of the election on the issues that matter to them.
The striking hero social films feature British political icons – the red budget box, green Commons bench, Big Ben, and the door to Number 10 – in relatable scenarios, symbolising that Times journalism brings everyday context to Westminster politics.
These films are supported by a series of insightful social videos, created in partnership with The Times, The Sunday Times, and Times Radio’s editorial teams, that take a closer look at the key political issues set to shape the 2024 election.
Louise Agran, Marketing Director of Times Media, said; “This campaign demonstrates what sets The Times, The Sunday Times and Times Radio apart – insightful journalism that helps our subscribers and listeners understand the consequences of the election, and politics more broadly, so that they can make the right decisions for themselves and their families.”
Russell Ramsey, ECD of Pulse Creative London, said: “There’s a lot of negativity about Westminster party politics at the moment, so we wanted to tell a more relatable story about the election.
“This campaign highlights the real value of The Times by focusing on what truly matters in an election – the lives of the voters.”
Social media will be an important battleground for this election, so ‘From Westminster to Your World’ is designed to be social-native.
The campaign leverages a diverse array of social formats across various platforms, delivering multiple touchpoints with politically engaged audiences, ensuring The Times is active wherever opinions are shaped and debated.
The details for Edinburgh are:
Times Radio Election Bus x Edinburgh and the Lothians
Date: Friday 14th June
Time: 6am – 5pm
Location: Register Square, Edinburgh (next to Starbucks at St James Quarter entrance)
Topics to be discussed include:
The investigations into SNP finances and its impact on SNP performance in the capital
The morning after the general election, 5 July, will be a historic moment for the UK. Whether it is delivered by a re-elected or newly elected Prime Minister, their speech to the nation will be a moment of national significance.
It’s a moment that should be accessible to every voter in the UK, including the 87,000 members of the Deaf community who use British Sign Language (BSL).
The Deaf community has continually been excluded during these key broadcasts from No. 10 because of the lack of a BSL interpreter. RNID has long tried to work with the Government to ensure that access is provided for the Deaf community.
A public service announcement is just that, but by not including deaf people the Prime Minister is removing their right to have the information at the same time as everyone else.
RNID has written to both Sir Kier Starmer and Rishi Sunak offering them the use of our interpreter for their victory speech on 5 July. Their speech to the nation will be the start of a new chapter in our country’s history and they cannot lock the Deaf community out.
I encourage all your readers to join our call and sign our letter to make this election inclusive of everyone at rnid.org.uk
