Tag: Labour

Happy birthday, Bedroom Tax?

North & Leith MP joins anti-bedroom tax protest

Mark Lazarowicz - Labour pledges to scrap the poll tax - 9 April 2014

On the first anniversary of the introduction of the so-called  ‘Bedroom Tax’, Mark Lazarowicz MP has reiterated the pledge that a future Labour government will scrap the legislation altogether. The Welfare Reform Act, to give it it’s proper name, has hit over 4,600 people in Edinburgh and over 71,000 people across Scotland.

Mr Lazarowicz spoke at a protest organised by Unite trade union outside Westminster to mark the anniversary earlier today.

The Scottish Labour and the SNP Scottish Government reached agreement in February over funding to protect tenants in the social rented sector in Scotland from eviction as a result of the Bedroom Tax alone but that is only an interim solution as the extra funding has to come from elsewhere in the overall budget.

Mark Lazarowicz MP said: “Getting on for 5,000 people in Edinburgh have been hit by this cruel and costly tax with arrears totalling £5 million according to the Scottish Housing Regulator.

“Those affected are often amongst the most vulnerable people in society: Citizens Advice Scotland found that two-thirds of people coming to them for help because of the Bedroom Tax were disabled and another one in ten cared for a disabled person.

“Scottish Labour took the lead in campaigning for the Scottish Government to provide additional funding, and I am glad that the SNP government eventually agreed to do so. It should have done so earlier, but I nevertheless welcome the fact that it did so. The long-term answer, however, is to axe the Bedroom Tax, and Labour is fully committed to do that.

“The Government said the Bedroom Tax would save money but the housing benefit bill continues to rise. It won’t listen to reason, Labour is clear: we will scrap the Bedroom Tax.”

Malcolm Chisholm to step down

Lesley Hinds to contest North and Leith

mchisholm

Popular Labour MSP and former health minister Malcolm Chisholm has confirmed that he will step down at the next Holyrood election. The member for North and Leith said that representing his local area for over twenty yeats has been the ‘greatest privilege of his life’.

It’s been known for some time that the former teacher – who has represented the constituency at both Holyrood and Westminster for over twenty years – has been planning to retire, and  he’s now officially confirmed that he will not contest the next Holyrood election.

Macolm Chisholm said:: “”Politicians sometimes say they want to spend more time with their family, and in this case it is true, as I have young grandchildren who play a big part in my life.

“I have served as the MP and then MSP for our area for over 20 years, and we’ve seen huge progress in that time but there is still a great deal more to do.

“I can think of nobody who is better placed than Lesley Hinds to campaign on the issues that matter to local people and hopefully to represent the constituency in the Scottish Parliament in due course.”

Inverleith councillor and former city Lord Provost Lesley Hinds has been selected to contest the Holyrood seat for Labour in 2016.

She said: “Malcolm Chisholm has been an outstanding public servant for our area, both as our MP and MSP, and we wish him a long and happy retirement when he steps down in 2016. I know he will be working hard every single day until then.”

Anchor

Local group’s fury over ‘Bedroom Tax’ vote

North Edinburgh Women’s International Group has written to Labour leader Ed Miliband following a vote in the House of Commons last week:

Dear Mr Miliband

I am writing to you on behalf of North Edinburgh Women’s International Group  regarding reports in the  news that  46 Labour MPs failed to  turn up to the House of Commons  to vote for a motion  which  could have led to the scrapping of the bedroom tax.

We are unable to understand  how this situation could have come about.  We can only assume that the 10 Scottish MP’s who failed to vote were unaware of the 150% increase in people using foodbanks in Scotland during the last year as a result of the current programme of welfare reforms.    They  must also be unaware of  the warning from Shelter  that “for many, the safety and security of a home is under threat like never before.”

We understand that  Labour’s motion on  the scrapping of the bedroom tax was defeated by only 26 votes.  We would have thought that the  recommendation by the UN  Special Rapporteur  on Housing  calling for the bedroom tax to be suspended immediately would have had an impact on  members of the Labour Party.   This does not appear to have been the case.

We were under the impression that an important part of an MP’s job involves turning up to their workplace (ie the House of Commons) and  voting on issues  which affect the people  they represent.  We  believe that 46 of your Party’s MPs   have not been doing their job and we find this completely unacceptable.

The inaction of these MP’s demonstrates  that the Labour Party does not represent the interests of ordinary people.  It also suggests that the Labour Party does not care about the suffering and hardship experienced by many families as a result of the bedroom tax.

We are interested in finding out what the Trade Union Movement’s response is to the inaction of  the 46 MP’s who represent the Party which they fund.

We are disgusted, angry and disheartened at what has become of the Labour Party. It  is no longer the Party of  ordinary people.   Your Party has taken working class people’s votes for granted.  You  have insulted our intelligence by assuming that people would  forgive and forget  this terrible betrayal.  This is a serious error which will cost the Labour Party at election time. The excuse of Labour MPs having been paired will not be accepted.

We look forward to your reply

Your sincerely

Anna Hutchison

On behalf of North Edinburgh Women’s International Group 

One week on, the group is still awaiting a response.

Cammy Day Ward 4 Forth Ward

Forth Labour Councillor Cammy Day comments:

Responding to letter by the Edinburgh North International Women’s group

I agree with the Edinburgh North International Women’s Group in their letter dated 19th Nov in their deploring of the evil bedroom tax. As the deputy convenor of the Council’s Health, Social Care and Housing Committee I have seen first hand the damage it’s done,  but I think your letter unfairly puts the blame of the existence of the bedroom tax on the Labour Party. It was the Labour Party who voted against the introduction of the bedroom tax from the beginning. It was the Labour Party who has campaigned to bring an end to it and promised that a Labour government would scrap it right away. This policy was brought in by the Coalition Government, the Liberal Democrats and the Conservatives. They are the ones who made this unfair and pernicious tax, a law.
At Council level the Labour Party has prevented evictions in cases caused by the bedroom tax, something I was proud to be a part of in Edinburgh. At Holyrood they have voted against it and sought to bring in legislation to prevent it. I feel your letter leads people astray in their thinking, last week’s opposition debate by the Labour Party sought to highlight and reverse the government’s position. You are correct when you say that some Labour MPs did not vote for the motion. This was a result of pairing – where MPs from both opposition and government are paired when they cannot attend (either because they are ill, or because they have constituency or foreign business). This is part of our parliamentary system.
I hope you will reconsider your verdict on the Labour Party’s position on the bedroom tax. Only a Labour government in 2015 has committed to scrapping the bedroom tax and only a Labour government will continue the fight for the ordinary working class people you speak for. That’s why I am a member of the Labour Party and the trade union movement. We must stay together in this battle for a fairer society and show the coalition government of Liberal Democrats and Conservatives for what they damage the have done by legislating for the bedroom tax to exist in the first place and their wider attack of welfare reforms.
Cammy Day
Councillor – Forth Ward
Readers – it’s over to you! 

Local MP backs Living Wage

This is Living Wage Week and Mark Lazarowicz MP has backed Labour’s plans to raise wages for thousands of low-paid workers in Edinburgh. 

If the party wins power at  the next General Election, Labour says it will introduce new tax breaks for employers that commit to paying the living wage – currently set at £7.65 in Scotland.  As well as making sure work really pays, it will also help cut benefit bills through savings in lower tax credits and benefit payments.

The North and Leith MP (pictured below) said: “In-work poverty has risen sharply so that many families that are being forced to turn to food banks or take out pay-day loans actually have a wage coming in. It is simply wrong that almost 60% of children in poverty in the UK come from households where at least one person is working.

“I know there are already councils like the City Council here in Edinburgh and private employers as well who are doing the right thing by their staff and paying the living wage. I strongly support Ed Miliband’s plans to encourage more employers to do the same so that hard-working staff are treated decently and paid a fair wage.”

As well as the City of Edinburgh Council, Fife, East Lothian, Falkirk and Scottish Borders Councils have also committed to paying the living wage.

Under Labour’s plans, firms that commit to paying their employees the living wage in the first year of the next Parliament will be offered a 12 month tax rebate of up to £1,000 for each individual worker that receives a pay rise. The money would be funded directly from increased income tax and National Insurance revenues.Mark Lazarowicz MP

Lararowicz: ‘Good employers have no interest in Government attack on rights at work’

Mark Lazarowicz MP has strongly criticised Government plans for employees to trade in basic rights at work such as statutory redundancy pay in return for shares in the business they work for.

In a Westminster speech yesterday the North and Leith MP (pictured below) said: “I am a strong supporter of employee share schemes to enable them to benefit from the growth of their company and participate in the way it is run. However, these Government plans would produce exactly the opposite result since employees would lose basic employment protection in return for shares that can always go down as well as up in value. A number of leading businesses have already said they want nothing to do with the scheme – good employers realise there are much better ways to motivate their workforce than a bribe to give up basic employment rights.”Mark_Lazarowicz[1]

The Government proposes that in return for shares in the company they work for, employees would lose the right to statutory redundancy pay, request flexible working and training, challenge unfair dismissal (apart from where this relates to anti-discrimination law) or be required to give longer notice to return from maternity or adoption leave.

Mr. Lazarowicz was the author of the Employee Share Schemes Bill which became law in 2002. That sought to encourage employee share ownership and long term involvement by them in the running of the business, but he believes these latest plans would make it easier to sack them.

The House of Lords initially voted to delete this part of the The Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill, with several former Conservative Ministers voting against the Government. However the Government reinserted the proposals for the Bill to be debated in the House of Commons and won yesterday’s vote. The Bill will now return to the Lords for further discussion.

Should Scotland be an independent country? That is the question!

The Electoral Commission has published its assessment of the Scottish Government’s proposed independence referendum question and has also given its advice on what campaign spending limits in the run-up to the poll should be.

John McCormick, Electoral Commissioner for Scotland said: “Voters are entitled to a referendum which produces a result they can have confidence in. The recommendations we have made today are an important part of giving voters that confidence. But it is of course for the Scottish Parliament to have the final say.”

The Commission was asked to test the following question by the Scottish Government:

“Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country? Yes/No”

The Commission’s established question assessment process involved talking to people across Scotland, asking for advice from accessibility and plain language experts, and writing to people and organisations, including the main political parties represented in the Scottish Parliament and campaigners to seek their views.

We found that the language in the proposed question is clear, simple and easy to understand. However, we also concluded that the words ‘Do you agree’ potentially encouraged people to vote ‘yes’ and should be replaced by more neutral wording.

The Electoral Commission recommends the question should be altered to:

“Should Scotland be an independent country? Yes / No”

The research also showed that voters want factual information ahead of the referendum. In the event of a “Yes” vote there would be a range of issues to be resolved within the UK and internationally about the terms of independence.

Although we would not expect the terms of independence to be agreed before the vote, clarity about how the terms of independence will be decided would help voters understand how the competing claims made by campaigners before the referendum will be resolved.

The Commission has therefore recommended that the UK and Scottish Governments should clarify what process will follow the referendum, for either outcome, so that people have that information before they vote. To avoid confusion we have asked the Governments to agree a joint position if possible.

John McCormick, Electoral Commissioner for Scotland said: “We have rigorously tested the proposed question, speaking to a wide range of people across Scotland. Any referendum question must be, and be seen to be, neutral. People told us that they felt the words ‘Do you agree’ could lead voters towards voting ‘yes’.

“People had a clear understanding that ‘independent country’ meant being separate from the UK. But they did want factual information in advance about what will happen after the referendum. We’re asking the UK and Scottish Government to provide that clarity and we’ll then make sure it gets to voters as part of our public awareness campaign.”

The Scottish Government has welcomed the announcement, and confirmed it will accept all of the Electoral Commission recommendations on the referendum question and campaign spending limits.

Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said she was delighted with the recommended question – ’Should Scotland be an independent country? Yes/No’ – and confirmed that it will be this question that is put before the Scottish Parliament. The Deputy First Minister also said she was satisfied with the recommended spending limits as they provide a level playing field for both sides of the debate.

In line with established practice in referendums throughout the UK, the Scottish Parliament will take the final decision on the wording of the question and campaign spending limits as part of its consideration of the Referendum Bill, which will be introduced in March.

Ms Sturgeon also welcomed the Electoral Commission’s calls for clarity around what a ‘No’ vote will mean for Scotland and its recommendation that the Scottish and UK governments work together to give clarity to the process that will follow a ‘Yes’ vote. She called on the UK government to accept these recommendations.

Ms Sturgeon said: “I would like to thank the Electoral Commission for the work they have done on testing our proposed referendum question and giving advice on campaign spending limits. I am pleased to confirm we will accept their recommendations in full.

“I am particularly delighted with the conclusion the Electoral Commission has reached on the question. While its view is that our proposed question was clear, simple and easy to understand, I am nevertheless happy to accept their recommended change.

“Their advice is based on rigorous testing and we will submit the Electoral Commission’s recommended question – ‘Should Scotland be an independent country?’ – to the Scottish Parliament as part of the Referendum Bill.

“I am also pleased with the spending limits proposed by the Electoral Commission – they deliver a level playing field and will allow a fair and balanced debate on both sides.  I am also pleased that the Commission has modified the position set out in their response to our consultation in March, as this would have resulted in an imbalance between the two sides of the campaign.

“We have always said that Scotland’s referendum will be run to the highest international standards of fairness and transparency, and the Electoral Commission plays a vital role in that.

“The Scottish Parliament will take the final decision on the wording of the question and campaign spending limits as part of its consideration of the Referendum Bill which reinforces that this is truly a referendum made in Scotland.

“I also welcome the Electoral Commission calls for both the Scottish and UK Governments to clarify what process will follow the referendum if most voters vote ‘Yes’ or most voters vote ‘No’ vote.  The Electoral Commission rightly point out this is in line with the Edinburgh Agreement.

“I have been calling for the UK Government to enter discussions to allow the voters to be better informed, but so far they have refused.  This would not be pre-negotiation on the terms of independence but vital information for voters that will allow them to make an informed choice in autumn 2014.  Given the Scottish Government is accepting all recommendations from the Electoral Commission I would hope that the UK Government is prepared to do the same.”

The leader of the Labour Party in Scotland Johann Lamont MSP has also welcomed the EC’s findings. Responding to the Electoral Commission report on the proposed referendum question and campaign financing, she said: “We welcome the Electoral Commission’s findings and will, of course, vote for them to e accepted in full. We did not get everything we asked for, but the most important people in this process are the people of Scotland and we believe that in the interests of clarity and certainty all parties should agree to these proposals which have been arrived at independently.

“We also welcome the suggestion that both sides of this debate clarify what will happen after the referendum. The Scottish Labour Party plans to set out before autumn 2014 proposals for how devolution can be developed and extended after Scotland has reaffirmed our place in the United Kingdom in the referendum. I believe it is only right that we set out the process by which such a development of devolution can be achieved after the referendum in which I am confident Scotland will vote to remain in the UK.

“I hope that the Scottish and UK governments, civic Scotland and all interested parties can at least outline how this can be achieved before we go to the polls. The people of Scotland deserve to have as much clarity and certainty in this process as possible.”

Campaign spending limits

As part of the Edinburgh Agreement the Electoral Commission was asked to provide advice on the spending limits for the referendum campaign.

In deciding what advice to give the Commission has applied its established principles for well-run referendums, taking into account the specific circumstances of this referendum, including the Edinburgh Agreement and information we now have about the likely shape and scale of campaigning.

The Commission invited views from campaigners and political parties on what the limits should be, and has considered what campaigners will need in order to put their arguments to voters.

John McCormick, Electoral Commissioner for Scotland said: “The campaign spending limits we have recommended are designed to ensure there are no barriers to voters hearing from campaigners in what will be a historic vote for the people of Scotland.

“We have listened carefully to the views of the Scottish Government and to campaigners, and have set out proposals based on our principles that spending limits should allow effective campaigning for all outcomes, deter excessive spending and encourage transparency.”

The Electoral Commission recommends that campaign spending limits for the independence referendum should be:

Designated lead campaigners: £1,500,000

Political parties represented in the Scottish Parliament:

Scottish National Party: £1,344,000
Scottish Labour: £834,000
Scottish Conservative & Unionist Party: £396,000
Scottish Liberal Democrats: £201,000
Scottish Green Party: £150,000

Other registered campaigners: £150,000

Threshold for registration: £10,000

Holyrood

Lazarowicz attacks government for ‘betrayal’ of disabled workers

Mark Lazarowicz MP has condemned the betrayal of Edinburgh Remploy workers by Government and calls on all sides to work together to support workers made redundant.

The North and Leith MP was reacting to news that the Edinburgh Remploy factory in South Gyle is to close. Mark Lazarowicz MP for Edinburgh North and Leith has attacked the betrayal by the UK Government of disabled workers at the factory and called on Remploy, the Department of Work and Pensions, Scottish Government and the City Council to work together to help find the workers alternative employment.

Mr Lazarowicz (pictured below) said: “The news makes me wonder whether the Government was genuinely seeking to find bids to keep factories open or whether it was simply offering false hope. One of the stated aims of its welfare changes is to support disabled people into work wherever possible – laudable in principle but it is hard to square that with the way that it has treated Remploy workers. Staff will now find themselves out of work at a time when unemployment in Scotland is almost two and a half million. I call upon Remploy, the Department of Work and Pensions, Scottish Government and the City Council to make a concerted effort to help them find alternative employment.”

The factory was reprieved from closure along with other factories in July as the Remploy Board deemed that there was a potentially viable business plan to secure its future, but those hopes have now been dashed.

A spokeswoman for the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) confirmed that there had been an expression of interest in the factory, but that it had gone no further. She added: “We have followed the advice of disability expert Liz Sayce to use the £320m protected budget for disability employment more effectively, to support more disabled people into mainstream jobs instead of loss-making segregated factories. We have put in place an £8m package of employment support for those affected, including a Personal Case Worker to help individuals with their future choices, as well as access to a personal budget.”

Lazarowicz attacks government for 'betrayal' of disabled workers

Mark Lazarowicz MP has condemned the betrayal of Edinburgh Remploy workers by Government and calls on all sides to work together to support workers made redundant.

The North and Leith MP was reacting to news that the Edinburgh Remploy factory in South Gyle is to close. Mark Lazarowicz MP for Edinburgh North and Leith has attacked the betrayal by the UK Government of disabled workers at the factory and called on Remploy, the Department of Work and Pensions, Scottish Government and the City Council to work together to help find the workers alternative employment.

Mr Lazarowicz (pictured below) said: “The news makes me wonder whether the Government was genuinely seeking to find bids to keep factories open or whether it was simply offering false hope. One of the stated aims of its welfare changes is to support disabled people into work wherever possible – laudable in principle but it is hard to square that with the way that it has treated Remploy workers. Staff will now find themselves out of work at a time when unemployment in Scotland is almost two and a half million. I call upon Remploy, the Department of Work and Pensions, Scottish Government and the City Council to make a concerted effort to help them find alternative employment.”

The factory was reprieved from closure along with other factories in July as the Remploy Board deemed that there was a potentially viable business plan to secure its future, but those hopes have now been dashed.

A spokeswoman for the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) confirmed that there had been an expression of interest in the factory, but that it had gone no further. She added: “We have followed the advice of disability expert Liz Sayce to use the £320m protected budget for disability employment more effectively, to support more disabled people into mainstream jobs instead of loss-making segregated factories. We have put in place an £8m package of employment support for those affected, including a Personal Case Worker to help individuals with their future choices, as well as access to a personal budget.”

Local MP backs action on pre-payment meters

Mark Lazarowicz MP (pictured above) backs action on fuel poverty to help cut bills of pre-payment meter users

With steep rises in energy prices on the way this winter, Mark Lazarowicz MP for Edinburgh North and Leith, is backing a new Bill to make it easier for customers who use pre-payment meters (PPMs) for their gas and electricity to switch suppliers.

Currently, users can switch providing they are not more than £200 in debt – the Bill would raise that to £300 benefitting over 200,000 people.  Mark said:  “This Bill matters because pre-payment meter users pay more for their gas or electricity even though they are over twice as likely to be in fuel poverty than those who pay by direct debit.  People often use PPMs because they are trying to budget responsibly – in some cases precisely because they were in debt – but debts for fuel bills can take a long time to pay off when someone can only afford to pay off a small amount each week. The Government is always urging consumers to switch – this Bill would make it easier for PPM users to do so and they are the people who could benefit most.”

The number of pre-payment users has risen steadily in recent years either as a conscious choice or because suppliers install a meter where someone is in debt to them. Last year over 15% of electricity customers in the UK used PPMs (4.1 million) and 13% of gas customers (2.9 million).

A recently published study by Consumer Focus found that one in six pre-payment users cut off their own energy supply in order to make ends meet – a measure of how carefully they are budgeting.  Traditionally pre-payment users have paid much more for their gas and electricity than those who pay by direct debit or standard credit.

There have been improvements more recently due to action by the regulator, Ofgem, so that the prices PPM users pay better reflect the costs of installing and maintaining the meters, but further action is needed to ensure PPM users get a fair deal.

Letter – Thank You

Dear Editor,

We would like to thank the residents of Forth Ward for electing us at the election to represent them at the Council.

Two of our priorities are housing/fuel poverty, and the regeneration of the area.  We have already approached Council Officers to start this process and we will keep you informed of our progress.

Since being elected in 2008 Cammy has done much for the community and attended many community meetings and events but it was difficult when events clashed.  Now that there are two of us we can attend events more often.

Councillor surgeries will continue as advertised for the time being but from August this year, instead of fortnightly surgeries, there will be weekly surgeries at the Muirhouse Millennium Centre, The Prentice Centre and at the Royston Wardieburn Community Centre.

This is just an indication of how we will be working for the residents of North Edinburgh.

 

Councillor Cammy Day and Councillor Vicki Redpath

Labour Councillors, Forth Ward