1st November
There will be a by election on November 11th with Richard Worrall our Labour Party candidate. Help will be gratefully received with espcially help on wednesday 10th November to deliver the last leaflet.
Please contact 641084 and leave a message for Richard
thanks
regards
Ian Robertson
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Saturday, October 23, 2010
what effects of cuts for Walsall?
I think everyone accepts that we have to make sensible cuts in our expenditure while being fair to all , keep up momentum for regeneration and not to tip us back into recession. We have a Tory administration here in Walsall that has said 'let the market decide' as a principle for running Walsall. School swimming pools are at risk with probable closure of 30 of the 40 pools. Cuts in libraries and their opening hours, closure of leisure centres and their opening hours plus maybe attempts to sell them off to be run by private enterprise. there will be staff reductions but cutting will effect front line services. the budget for maintaining open spaces such as parks I am sure will be cut.
we will be checking very carefully what cuts are proposed and challenge where we feel these are unjust and cause hardship to the most vulnerable.
The fact that this Tory Council have spent over £2 Million getting ready for the now cancelled building schools for the future program and over £1 Million on the primary school program preparations .. also cnacleed by this new Government.. all money now gone down the black hole of wasted money .. to add to all the rest of our money lost... the figure of over £1 million lost by not keeping good enough records of european money spend and so not able to reclaim money that was properly spent on regneration... the contiued loss of around £15000 a month paid to compensate for loss of advertising income from street adverts to Amey.. again due to incompetence of officers ... however the buck stops with the councillors who are the ones ultimately responsible to the public.
the first test will be on November 11th when there is a by election in Rushall ward where we not that the Liberals are not even putting up a candidate...this should normally be a safe Tory seat.. we shall see.
Ian Robertson
secretary Walsall South Labour Party
we will be checking very carefully what cuts are proposed and challenge where we feel these are unjust and cause hardship to the most vulnerable.
The fact that this Tory Council have spent over £2 Million getting ready for the now cancelled building schools for the future program and over £1 Million on the primary school program preparations .. also cnacleed by this new Government.. all money now gone down the black hole of wasted money .. to add to all the rest of our money lost... the figure of over £1 million lost by not keeping good enough records of european money spend and so not able to reclaim money that was properly spent on regneration... the contiued loss of around £15000 a month paid to compensate for loss of advertising income from street adverts to Amey.. again due to incompetence of officers ... however the buck stops with the councillors who are the ones ultimately responsible to the public.
the first test will be on November 11th when there is a by election in Rushall ward where we not that the Liberals are not even putting up a candidate...this should normally be a safe Tory seat.. we shall see.
Ian Robertson
secretary Walsall South Labour Party
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Dicing with our futures by gambling with the cuts
Osborne’s cuts unravel – Johnson
NHS promises broken
Coalition wrong to claim CSR is fair
Squeezed middle pay twice as much as banks
Police funding cuts take risks with crime and public safety
Serious questions on frontline redundancies and cost to the taxpayer
Alan Johnson MP, Labour’s Shadow Chancellor, has said that Comprehensive Spending Review has already begun to unravel:
“This Spending Review is unravelling fast and revealing broken promises and empty words. Buried in the detail of the government’s plans are broken NHS promises by David Cameron, a squeeze on families double what the banks are being asked to pay and serious unanswered questions on how many jobs will be lost and how much the redundancies will cost the taxpayer.
“The coalition claim today’s announcement is fair, it is not. The Treasury’s own figures show the poorest in society will pay more to reduce the deficit than almost anyone else.
“This is a reckless gamble with people’s livelihoods and the case for it is unravelling fast.”
Quotes from other Labour Shadow Ministers are below in editor's notes.
David Cameron promised above inflation increases every year for the NHS, but George Osborne has announced a below inflation rise, with no more money at all for next year. That also means a cash standstill for the NHS between 10/11 and 11/12 with no additional funding to allow the NHS to keep up with inflation.
The CSR document also confirms the coalition is scrapping measures the Conservatives had promised to protect, including one-to-one nursing care for cancer patients, free prescriptions for long-term conditions and the guarantee of one-week cancer tests.
The coalition is wrong to claim that today's announcement is fair. Even on the Treasury’s own figures, the poorest 10 per cent in society will pay more to reduce the deficit than almost anyone else.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies has already commented that the CSR is not as progressive as the coalition claim, like the June Budget it depends on measures already announced by Labour Chancellor Alistair Darling.
Analysis by Labour’s Shadow Treasury team shows that families with children will have to pay more than twice the amount, £4.89 billion in total, which banks are being asked to contribute under the CSR.
Police funding cuts of 20 per cent in the CSR will be impossible to achieve without massive cuts to the numbers of police on the street and programmes to fight crime and anti-social behaviour. They go far beyond what can be achieved through efficiency savings and better procurement.
There are serious unanswered questions on how many public sector redundancies there will be and how much the pay offs will cost the taxpayer. Last night a leaked Ministry of Justice memo revealed 14,000 redundancies with the brunt borne by the front line. The coalition must come clean on what the total cost across government will be.
1. Families with children have to pay more than twice the amount that the banks are being asked to contribute.
The total amount taken from Banks
2014/15
+£2.4bn lost from the banking levy (Budget Red Book, Table 2.1)
-£0.4bn saved from the corporation tax cut (Parliamentary answer below)
Total taken from families with children
Budget 2014/15
Lone parents 0.18
Health in pregnancy 0.15
Sure Start Maternity Grant 0.075
Tax credits 3.22
(less elements where households without children can receive) 0.04
CB freeze 0.975
CTC increase -1.995
CTF cut 0.525
Spending Review
CB higher rate taxpayers 2.5
Increase in CTC -0.56
Working tax credit 1.4
Overall total 6.43
(The figures above allocated all of WTC spend to families with children but does not allocate any housing benefit savings to families with children)
See also this Parliamentary Question on Financial Services:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm100726/text/100726w0005.htm#10072715000162
2. The coalition is wrong to claim that today's announcement is fair.
Even on the Treasury’s own figures, the poorest 10 per cent in society will pay more to reduce the deficit than almost anyone else. This group, according to the Treasury’s Table B5 (p98), will see losses above everyone but the richest 10 per cent.
This is a figure for 2012/13 when the full impact of today's announcements will be felt across the country and makes a mockey of the Chancellor's announcement today that "a fair government makes sure that those with the broadest shoulders bear the greatest burden."
As Carl Emmerson from the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies has said, today's announcement is"clearly is not progressive on the Treasury's analysis."
Douglas Alexander MP, Labour's Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, said:
"Welfare has to play its role in any sensible plan to reduce the deficit but it's harder not easier to get the deficit down when you are throwing hundreds of thousands of people out of work.
"We will work the government where they are taking forward our reforms to encourge people into work such as moving people off incapacity benefit but where their plans are unfair or undermining incentives into work we will oppose them.
"We are concered that today's real term cut to Working Tax Credit, cuts for support for childcare and steep rises in train fares affects people's incentives to move into work."
3. The coalition is breaking promises on the NHS.
David Cameron promised above inflation increases every year for the NHS, but George Osborne has announced a below inflation rise, with no more money at all for next year.
The Chancellor has announced a below inflation increase for the NHS over the spending review period. In 14/15 NHS spending will be 109.8, compared to 101.5 in 10/11 as set out in the June Emergency Budget. This is 1.4% below the level needed to keep pace with inflation. The NHS needs at least an extra 1.6BN in 14/15 just to get a real increase. This breaks not just David Cameron's personal election promise but also the coalition agreement.
This is because the Chancellor has fixed the starting point for his spending review at £2.8bn less than he said the NHS is spending this year as set out in his June budget.
That also means a cash standstill for the NHS between 10/11 and 11/12 with no additional funding to allow the NHS to keep up with inflation.
On top of this they have cut NHS capital by 10% over the next 4 years from £5.1bn in 10/11 to £4.6bn in 14/15
P.43 of the Spending Review 2010 also confirms that the Government is scrapping some of the measures it claimed it would protect, including free prescriptions for those with longterm conditions and one-to-one nursing care for cancer patients and the guarantee of one-week cancer tests.
This breaks the commitments made by the Conservatives before the general election to protect the NHS and protect NHS capital.
"We are the only party committed to protecting NHS spending. I'll cut the deficit, not the NHS. And don't for one minute buy the Labour claim that they'll do the same. They won't - and their own figures show they won't. Unlike us, they have not committed to protecting areas of the health budget such as public health and capital investment"
David Cameron, 4 January 2010
“We will guarantee that health spending increases in real terms in each year of the Parliament, while recognising the impact this decision will have on other departments.”
Coalition agreement, p. 24, http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/409088/pfg_coalition.pdf
Table 2.2, page 43, June Budget 2010
Table 2.2, page 43, Spending Review October 2010
John Healey MP, Labour's Shadow Health Secretary, said:
"The figures released today suggest David Cameron has abandoned both his public pledge and the promise in the coalition agreement to protect the NHS from budget cuts. The Government has given the health service a cash standstill from 2010-11 to 2011-12 by shifting the baseline from which they make their calculations. The NHS is now looking at no real-terms increase in its funding over the spending period, at a time when our health service is under ever-increasing pressures from an ageing population."
4. Police funding cuts of 20 per cent are a dangerous risk.
The Spending Review announces that “central government police funding will reduce by 20 per cent in real terms by 2014-15”. (Spending Review 2010, pg.54)
In July 2010 a report from Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary Valuing the Police: policing in an age of austerity said that a “re-design” of the police system could “at best.. save 12% of central government funding, while maintaining police availability. A cut beyond 12% would almost certainly reduce police availability unless it were prioritized over and above everything else the police did”.
“A re-design of the system has the potential, at best, to save 12% of central government funding, while maintaining police availability. A cut beyond 12% would almost certainly reduce police availability unless it were prioritised over and above everything else the police did…. Over time, savings of around £1.15 billion (equating to 12% of central government funding) may be achievable by improving productivity and cuttings costs.”
‘Valuing the Police: policing in an age of austerity’, HMIC report, July 2010, pg.4
Ed Balls MP, Labour’s Shadow Home Secretary said today:
“This Spending Review is not only reckless and dangerous for jobs and the economy but is taking huge risks with the public's safety, crime and national security.
“Deep cuts of 20 per cent to police funding in this Spending Review will be impossible to achieve without massive cuts to the numbers of police on the street and programmes to fight crime and anti-social behaviour. They go way beyond what can be achieved through efficiency savings and better procurement.
“And cuts to the funding of border controls and counter-terrorism policing risk weakening our defences against threats to our national security.
“The Home Secretary has abjectly failed to fight the corner of the police in these Spending Review negotiations and it will fall to the Labour Party to stand up for the law-abiding public against these reckless cuts.
“For the last three years Labour kept crime falling - even during a recession - by supporting people into work and keeping police numbers at record levels. At a time when the coalition's plans risk pulling the rug from underneath growth, jobs and economic recovery, cutting policing and the fight against crime is the most reckless cut of all.”
5. Harriet Harman has responded to the coalition’s decision to freeze the percentage of aid for two years:
“We welcome the government’s commitment to continue with Labour’s target of 0.7% of aid as GNI by 2013 but freezing the percentage of aid for two years will inevitably beg the question about whether they will deliver on that commitment. This makes it all the more urgent that they bring forward the legislation that they promised and enshrine in law the requirement to meet the 0.7% target from 2013.”
6. Channel 4 News has reported on a leaked Ministry of Justice member which reveals 14,000 job losses, with the brunt borne by the front line.
Spending review: "Frontline will bear the brunt" says leaked Ministry of Justice memo announcing 14,000 job losses, Channel 4 News exclusively learns.That means posts like prison officers, probation officers, and magistrates court staff will all be lost. In the memo, a senior Civil Servant says; "The front line will bear the brunt of this with an estimated reduction of 11,000."
The news came ahead of the publication of the long-awaited Comprehensive Spending Review tomorrow. The coalition expects nearly 500,000 public sector jobs to go as a direct result of its efforts to cut spending, it was revealed today.
Economics Editor Faisal Islam explains the Ministry of Justice job cuts:
On the eve of the Spending Review, I have seen a detailed internal memo from one of Whitehall's biggest departments, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). It is dated Friday, and somewhat explodes one the Coalition's great narratives - that these cuts are about backroom management inefficiencies.
As the memo from Friday makes very clear: "the front line will bear the brunt".
The memo is titled "Impact of the SR settlement on staff", and it appears that on Friday the number of jobs lost was expected to be 14,250. I believe that this is even higher now. In an annexe at the back of the memo it shows that 9,940 of these job losses will come from the National Offender Management Service, or Noms, that runs prisons and probation services.
'Shocked and horrified'
Nick McCarthy of the PCS union told Channel 4 News: "We are shocked and horrified at this memo.
"It does show us the reality of the cuts, it is a tragedy for the people who work in the MoJ, seeing thousands of their jobs disappearing, what it also shows is what we've always believed that actually the front line is where the brunt of the cuts will be made".
Colin Moses of The Prison Officers Association said: "This is ill thought out, we have a criminal justice system under strain as never before. This will lead to dangerous people on the streets."
Courts service
Just under 3,000 jobs are expected to go in the courts service. Again this could have increased over the weekend as the Ministry of Justice faced further cuts after other departments were given late reprieves. The memo made reference to plans to cut legal aid, reform prison sentences, and close courts.
Helena Kennedy, chair of Justice, said: "When you let the Justice system take the largest hit, the system itself suffers. The justice system is an essential element of our democracy, and once you undermine that, we all pay the price".
The Ministry of Justice said tonight it would not comment on leaks and speculation.
Channel 4 News, 19 October 2010
http://www.channel4.com/news/ministry-of-justice-to-axe-14-000 jobs?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
7. Meg Hillier MP, Labour's Shadow Energy and Climate Change Secretary has said:
"Today EON announced its withdrawal from investment in carbon capture and storage in the UK leaving the government's policy on carbon capture and storage in disarray.
"We welcome the commitment to a Green Investment Bank but the test will be in detail. The government must provide certainty if we are to succeed in building the green economy we need."
For more information, please contact the Labour Party press office on
020 7783 1393 020 7783 1393 .
NHS promises broken
Coalition wrong to claim CSR is fair
Squeezed middle pay twice as much as banks
Police funding cuts take risks with crime and public safety
Serious questions on frontline redundancies and cost to the taxpayer
Alan Johnson MP, Labour’s Shadow Chancellor, has said that Comprehensive Spending Review has already begun to unravel:
“This Spending Review is unravelling fast and revealing broken promises and empty words. Buried in the detail of the government’s plans are broken NHS promises by David Cameron, a squeeze on families double what the banks are being asked to pay and serious unanswered questions on how many jobs will be lost and how much the redundancies will cost the taxpayer.
“The coalition claim today’s announcement is fair, it is not. The Treasury’s own figures show the poorest in society will pay more to reduce the deficit than almost anyone else.
“This is a reckless gamble with people’s livelihoods and the case for it is unravelling fast.”
Quotes from other Labour Shadow Ministers are below in editor's notes.
David Cameron promised above inflation increases every year for the NHS, but George Osborne has announced a below inflation rise, with no more money at all for next year. That also means a cash standstill for the NHS between 10/11 and 11/12 with no additional funding to allow the NHS to keep up with inflation.
The CSR document also confirms the coalition is scrapping measures the Conservatives had promised to protect, including one-to-one nursing care for cancer patients, free prescriptions for long-term conditions and the guarantee of one-week cancer tests.
The coalition is wrong to claim that today's announcement is fair. Even on the Treasury’s own figures, the poorest 10 per cent in society will pay more to reduce the deficit than almost anyone else.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies has already commented that the CSR is not as progressive as the coalition claim, like the June Budget it depends on measures already announced by Labour Chancellor Alistair Darling.
Analysis by Labour’s Shadow Treasury team shows that families with children will have to pay more than twice the amount, £4.89 billion in total, which banks are being asked to contribute under the CSR.
Police funding cuts of 20 per cent in the CSR will be impossible to achieve without massive cuts to the numbers of police on the street and programmes to fight crime and anti-social behaviour. They go far beyond what can be achieved through efficiency savings and better procurement.
There are serious unanswered questions on how many public sector redundancies there will be and how much the pay offs will cost the taxpayer. Last night a leaked Ministry of Justice memo revealed 14,000 redundancies with the brunt borne by the front line. The coalition must come clean on what the total cost across government will be.
1. Families with children have to pay more than twice the amount that the banks are being asked to contribute.
The total amount taken from Banks
2014/15
+£2.4bn lost from the banking levy (Budget Red Book, Table 2.1)
-£0.4bn saved from the corporation tax cut (Parliamentary answer below)
Total taken from families with children
Budget 2014/15
Lone parents 0.18
Health in pregnancy 0.15
Sure Start Maternity Grant 0.075
Tax credits 3.22
(less elements where households without children can receive) 0.04
CB freeze 0.975
CTC increase -1.995
CTF cut 0.525
Spending Review
CB higher rate taxpayers 2.5
Increase in CTC -0.56
Working tax credit 1.4
Overall total 6.43
(The figures above allocated all of WTC spend to families with children but does not allocate any housing benefit savings to families with children)
See also this Parliamentary Question on Financial Services:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm100726/text/100726w0005.htm#10072715000162
2. The coalition is wrong to claim that today's announcement is fair.
Even on the Treasury’s own figures, the poorest 10 per cent in society will pay more to reduce the deficit than almost anyone else. This group, according to the Treasury’s Table B5 (p98), will see losses above everyone but the richest 10 per cent.
This is a figure for 2012/13 when the full impact of today's announcements will be felt across the country and makes a mockey of the Chancellor's announcement today that "a fair government makes sure that those with the broadest shoulders bear the greatest burden."
As Carl Emmerson from the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies has said, today's announcement is"clearly is not progressive on the Treasury's analysis."
Douglas Alexander MP, Labour's Shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, said:
"Welfare has to play its role in any sensible plan to reduce the deficit but it's harder not easier to get the deficit down when you are throwing hundreds of thousands of people out of work.
"We will work the government where they are taking forward our reforms to encourge people into work such as moving people off incapacity benefit but where their plans are unfair or undermining incentives into work we will oppose them.
"We are concered that today's real term cut to Working Tax Credit, cuts for support for childcare and steep rises in train fares affects people's incentives to move into work."
3. The coalition is breaking promises on the NHS.
David Cameron promised above inflation increases every year for the NHS, but George Osborne has announced a below inflation rise, with no more money at all for next year.
The Chancellor has announced a below inflation increase for the NHS over the spending review period. In 14/15 NHS spending will be 109.8, compared to 101.5 in 10/11 as set out in the June Emergency Budget. This is 1.4% below the level needed to keep pace with inflation. The NHS needs at least an extra 1.6BN in 14/15 just to get a real increase. This breaks not just David Cameron's personal election promise but also the coalition agreement.
This is because the Chancellor has fixed the starting point for his spending review at £2.8bn less than he said the NHS is spending this year as set out in his June budget.
That also means a cash standstill for the NHS between 10/11 and 11/12 with no additional funding to allow the NHS to keep up with inflation.
On top of this they have cut NHS capital by 10% over the next 4 years from £5.1bn in 10/11 to £4.6bn in 14/15
P.43 of the Spending Review 2010 also confirms that the Government is scrapping some of the measures it claimed it would protect, including free prescriptions for those with longterm conditions and one-to-one nursing care for cancer patients and the guarantee of one-week cancer tests.
This breaks the commitments made by the Conservatives before the general election to protect the NHS and protect NHS capital.
"We are the only party committed to protecting NHS spending. I'll cut the deficit, not the NHS. And don't for one minute buy the Labour claim that they'll do the same. They won't - and their own figures show they won't. Unlike us, they have not committed to protecting areas of the health budget such as public health and capital investment"
David Cameron, 4 January 2010
“We will guarantee that health spending increases in real terms in each year of the Parliament, while recognising the impact this decision will have on other departments.”
Coalition agreement, p. 24, http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/media/409088/pfg_coalition.pdf
Table 2.2, page 43, June Budget 2010
Table 2.2, page 43, Spending Review October 2010
John Healey MP, Labour's Shadow Health Secretary, said:
"The figures released today suggest David Cameron has abandoned both his public pledge and the promise in the coalition agreement to protect the NHS from budget cuts. The Government has given the health service a cash standstill from 2010-11 to 2011-12 by shifting the baseline from which they make their calculations. The NHS is now looking at no real-terms increase in its funding over the spending period, at a time when our health service is under ever-increasing pressures from an ageing population."
4. Police funding cuts of 20 per cent are a dangerous risk.
The Spending Review announces that “central government police funding will reduce by 20 per cent in real terms by 2014-15”. (Spending Review 2010, pg.54)
In July 2010 a report from Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary Valuing the Police: policing in an age of austerity said that a “re-design” of the police system could “at best.. save 12% of central government funding, while maintaining police availability. A cut beyond 12% would almost certainly reduce police availability unless it were prioritized over and above everything else the police did”.
“A re-design of the system has the potential, at best, to save 12% of central government funding, while maintaining police availability. A cut beyond 12% would almost certainly reduce police availability unless it were prioritised over and above everything else the police did…. Over time, savings of around £1.15 billion (equating to 12% of central government funding) may be achievable by improving productivity and cuttings costs.”
‘Valuing the Police: policing in an age of austerity’, HMIC report, July 2010, pg.4
Ed Balls MP, Labour’s Shadow Home Secretary said today:
“This Spending Review is not only reckless and dangerous for jobs and the economy but is taking huge risks with the public's safety, crime and national security.
“Deep cuts of 20 per cent to police funding in this Spending Review will be impossible to achieve without massive cuts to the numbers of police on the street and programmes to fight crime and anti-social behaviour. They go way beyond what can be achieved through efficiency savings and better procurement.
“And cuts to the funding of border controls and counter-terrorism policing risk weakening our defences against threats to our national security.
“The Home Secretary has abjectly failed to fight the corner of the police in these Spending Review negotiations and it will fall to the Labour Party to stand up for the law-abiding public against these reckless cuts.
“For the last three years Labour kept crime falling - even during a recession - by supporting people into work and keeping police numbers at record levels. At a time when the coalition's plans risk pulling the rug from underneath growth, jobs and economic recovery, cutting policing and the fight against crime is the most reckless cut of all.”
5. Harriet Harman has responded to the coalition’s decision to freeze the percentage of aid for two years:
“We welcome the government’s commitment to continue with Labour’s target of 0.7% of aid as GNI by 2013 but freezing the percentage of aid for two years will inevitably beg the question about whether they will deliver on that commitment. This makes it all the more urgent that they bring forward the legislation that they promised and enshrine in law the requirement to meet the 0.7% target from 2013.”
6. Channel 4 News has reported on a leaked Ministry of Justice member which reveals 14,000 job losses, with the brunt borne by the front line.
Spending review: "Frontline will bear the brunt" says leaked Ministry of Justice memo announcing 14,000 job losses, Channel 4 News exclusively learns.That means posts like prison officers, probation officers, and magistrates court staff will all be lost. In the memo, a senior Civil Servant says; "The front line will bear the brunt of this with an estimated reduction of 11,000."
The news came ahead of the publication of the long-awaited Comprehensive Spending Review tomorrow. The coalition expects nearly 500,000 public sector jobs to go as a direct result of its efforts to cut spending, it was revealed today.
Economics Editor Faisal Islam explains the Ministry of Justice job cuts:
On the eve of the Spending Review, I have seen a detailed internal memo from one of Whitehall's biggest departments, the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). It is dated Friday, and somewhat explodes one the Coalition's great narratives - that these cuts are about backroom management inefficiencies.
As the memo from Friday makes very clear: "the front line will bear the brunt".
The memo is titled "Impact of the SR settlement on staff", and it appears that on Friday the number of jobs lost was expected to be 14,250. I believe that this is even higher now. In an annexe at the back of the memo it shows that 9,940 of these job losses will come from the National Offender Management Service, or Noms, that runs prisons and probation services.
'Shocked and horrified'
Nick McCarthy of the PCS union told Channel 4 News: "We are shocked and horrified at this memo.
"It does show us the reality of the cuts, it is a tragedy for the people who work in the MoJ, seeing thousands of their jobs disappearing, what it also shows is what we've always believed that actually the front line is where the brunt of the cuts will be made".
Colin Moses of The Prison Officers Association said: "This is ill thought out, we have a criminal justice system under strain as never before. This will lead to dangerous people on the streets."
Courts service
Just under 3,000 jobs are expected to go in the courts service. Again this could have increased over the weekend as the Ministry of Justice faced further cuts after other departments were given late reprieves. The memo made reference to plans to cut legal aid, reform prison sentences, and close courts.
Helena Kennedy, chair of Justice, said: "When you let the Justice system take the largest hit, the system itself suffers. The justice system is an essential element of our democracy, and once you undermine that, we all pay the price".
The Ministry of Justice said tonight it would not comment on leaks and speculation.
Channel 4 News, 19 October 2010
http://www.channel4.com/news/ministry-of-justice-to-axe-14-000 jobs?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
7. Meg Hillier MP, Labour's Shadow Energy and Climate Change Secretary has said:
"Today EON announced its withdrawal from investment in carbon capture and storage in the UK leaving the government's policy on carbon capture and storage in disarray.
"We welcome the commitment to a Green Investment Bank but the test will be in detail. The government must provide certainty if we are to succeed in building the green economy we need."
For more information, please contact the Labour Party press office on
020 7783 1393 020 7783 1393 .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)