Latest news with #StefanRousseau
The National
15 hours ago
- Politics
- The National
Scottish Labour is a fiction, nothing more than a branding
The SNP have urged Anas Sarwar to whip Labour's Scottish MPs to vote against the Government's planned benefits cuts, which the British Government's own analysis estimates will push 250,000 disabled and chronically ill people into poverty, including 50,000 children. However, disability rights campaign group Disability Rights UK, anti-poverty charity and think tank Trussel, and economics think tank WPI Economics all calculate that the Government's analysis significantly underestimates the number of disabled people who will be pushed into poverty as a consequence of these cuts. They believe that the true number is in excess of 400,000. Thousands of disabled people are expected to lose their entitlement to Personal Independence Payment (PIP), the main benefit for disabled people in England and Wales, under Labour's plan to change the eligibility criteria for the benefit. The plan will introduce a new eligibility requirement which will mean that only those who score a minimum of four points in at least one activity will be eligible for the daily living component of PIP. To be eligible for PIP, claimants must score a minimum of eight points assessed on the help they need across a range of daily living activities such as food preparation, bathing and showering, toileting, dressing, eating, and taking medication. Many people make up the eight points by scoring one or two across different categories, but under the new plans only those scoring four in one category will be eligible. If a claimant does not score four in a single category, the points they score in other categories will be discounted. Note that this change does nothing to help disabled people into work, the stated aim of the Government's cuts; it merely reclassifies disabled people as no longer being disabled for the purposes of eligibility for PIP. The needs of disabled people remain the same. (Image: Stefan Rousseau/PA) One of the more pernicious effects of this change follows from the fact that PIP is a so-called passport benefit – eligibility for other benefits depends on eligibility for PIP. Carers Allowance is paid to those who care for a disabled person in receipt of PIP, or Attendance Allowance, its equivalent for retired people. If the disabled person loses their eligibility for PIP, eligibility for Carer's Allowance is lost too. Far from providing an incentive to the disabled person to find work, this will make it far more difficult for them to cope with daily living and far more difficult to get into work. Disability campaigners have warned that the cuts will not save the Government money as they will simply force disabled people, whose very real needs remain unchanged, to turn to other services such as the already over-stretched NHS and adult social services. Any politician with a social conscience or a basic understanding of disability should vigorously oppose these harmful and damaging cuts, but with the honourable exception of Alloa and Grangemouth MP Brian Leishman, Labour's Scottish contingent in Westminster are a supine bunch of careerists whose contribution to Commons debates consists of attacking the Scottish Government on devolved issues. Of course Anas Sarwar, the nominal leader of the Labour party in Scotland, should instruct Labour's Scottish MPs to vote against these cruel and counterproductive cuts, but he won't, because he too is a supine careerist, installed in his current job by the right wing of the Labour party precisely because he'd do Keir Starmer's bidding. Sarwar defends the cuts, because he believes what Starmer tells him to believe. But even if Sarwar finds a backbone and opposes the cuts, he has no authority over Labour's Scottish MPs in Westminster and no means of enforcing how they vote in the Commons. "Scottish Labour" is a political fiction, nothing more than a branding exercise. Labour MPs elected in Scotland are subject to the UK Labour whip. They do not constitute a cohesive voting bloc in the Commons. They are part and parcel of the UK Parliamentary Labour Party. Anas Sarwar couldn't whip up a cream cake, never mind Labour's Scottish MPs. At First Minister's Questions today, John Swinney tore into Sarwar's attacks on him as "the performance of a weak man" after asking two rather desultory questions about Alexander Dennis moving bus production to England and suggesting that Swinney's leadership was under threat. Sarwar accused Swinney of pressing the "big panic independence button" to "save his skin", after the First Minister made a speech on his desire for self-determination this week. (Image: Andrew Milligan) Swinney retorted: "Isn't it interesting that Mr Sarwar's interest in the workers of Alexander Dennis lasted two questions and then he gets on to his usual posturing in this Parliament of little substance that is before us. Israel discovers war crimes Meanwhile, Israel has suddenly discovered that launching missiles into hospitals is a war crime after an Iranian missile struck a hospital in the southern Israeli city of Be'er Sheva. Iranian state media has claimed that the missile targeted a military site next to the hospital and not the medical facility itself. Israel's deputy foreign affairs minister Sharren Haskel has called Iran's strike on the hospital "deliberate" and "criminal", while the Israeli health minister Uriel Buso said it was a war crime. But apparently, it's perfectly fine for Israel to bomb hospitals in Gaza on the supposed grounds that they are targeting Hamas operations in or near the hospital.
Glasgow Times
a day ago
- Health
- Glasgow Times
Campaigners make case for assisted dying Bill ahead of crucial Commons vote
Kim Leadbeater is expected to re-state her argument that dying people must be given choice at the end of their lives, but opponents of her Bill have warned it fails to guarantee protections for society's most vulnerable. Friday will be the first time the Bill has been debated and voted on in its entirety since last year's historic yes vote, when MPs supported the principle of assisted dying for England and Wales by a majority of 55. MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill, meaning they decide according to their conscience rather than along party lines. MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill (Stefan Rousseau/PA) The relatively narrow majority means every vote will count on Friday, to secure the Bill's passage to the House of Lords for further debate and voting. An an example, the Bill would fall if 28 MPs switched directly from voting yes to no, but only if all other MPs voted exactly the same way as they did in November, including those who abstained. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has indicated he will continue to back the Bill, as he did last year, saying earlier this week that his 'position is long-standing and well-known' on assisted dying. Health Secretary Wes Streeting, while describing Ms Leadbeater's work on the proposed legislation as 'extremely helpful', confirmed in April that he still intended to vote against it. While supporters of the Bill say it is coming back to the Commons with better safeguards after more than 90 hours of parliamentary time spent on it to date, opponents claim the process has been rushed and that changes to the Bill mean it is now weaker than it was when first introduced. Significant changes since it succeeded in the initial vote in Parliament include the replacement of the High Court safeguard with expert panels, and a doubling of the implementation period to a maximum of four years for an assisted dying service to be in place should the Bill pass into law. Academic and disability campaigner Miro Griffiths has sent an open letter to MPs, asking them not to endorse the 'perilous piece of legislation' even if they support assisted dying in principle. He wrote: 'I would ask you to devote your energy to improving ethical and progressive forms of support: blanket suicide prevention, palliative care, and measures that create a more just and inclusive society for disabled people. This is the better way forward.' Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, who would have a vote should the Bill make its way to the House of Lords, said: 'We are constantly being told that this Bill is not for disabled people and there will not be coercion. 'Coercion is an absolute reality in today's society, and in every jurisdiction where assisted dying has been brought in, it has expanded either through legislation, the court system or practice. 'It is very easy to see that this route will be suggested to disabled people who will be made to feel a burden.' The Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) stated last month that it has 'serious concerns' about the safeguarding of people with mental illness and said it cannot support the Bill in its current form. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has indicated he will continue to back the Bill (Suzanne Plunkett/PA) Ahead of Friday's vote, Dr Annabel Price from the college said that as it stands the involvement of psychiatrists in expert panels is 'deeply troubling' as they would not have 'enough space or time to carry out proper, holistic assessments' and warned of the 'risk (of) making irreversible decisions based on treatable suffering'. Countering this, a number of psychiatrists recently expressed their support for the assisted dying Bill, voicing concern and distancing themselves from the opposition stance taken by their professional medical body. Seven RCPsych members, including a former college president and vice-president, wrote to MPs to voice their backing for the Bill, describing it as 'workable, safe and compassionate' with a 'clear and transparent legal framework' they argue is 'far preferable to the unjust status quo, where we know dying people seek to exercise choice at the end of life, but without any upfront safeguards, routine oversight or support from relevant clinicians'. Meanwhile, Dame Esther Rantzen's daughter Rebecca Wilcox said she is 'really hopeful' the Bill can pass the major vote, as she warned against 'scaremongering' by opponents.
Glasgow Times
5 days ago
- Business
- Glasgow Times
Procurement rules set to be overhauled as ministers lay out infrastructure plans
The strategy to overhaul infrastructure over the next decade comes as Rachel Reeves has said the country's schools and hospitals have been 'left to crumble'. The Treasury has promised hundreds of billions over the next decade for projects such as roads, railways and homes. Under proposals put forward in a Cabinet Office consultation, public bodies would have to give more weight to firms which can prove they will boost British jobs when they are bidding for contracts. Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves delivered her spending review on Wednesday June 11 (Stefan Rousseau/PA) The change is set to apply to major projects such as transport, as well as other schemes including hospital and school building. Firms looking to work on public sector projects could also be rewarded if they can show benefits they will bring to a community, such as apprenticeships, opportunities for care leavers, or helping people into work. Pat McFadden, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, has said that the proposals will reward firms that 'put money in working people's pockets'. 'Whether it's building roads, railways or schools, we want to open up opportunities on major infrastructure projects for firms that boost British jobs and skills,' he said. 'The new rules will deliver on our plan for change by rewarding companies that put money in working people's pockets as we invest in the country's future.' According to the Treasury, the infrastructure strategy will lay out Government plans on prioritised policy areas such as upgrading transport networks, building new homes, modernising public services such as hospitals, and assisting the transition to green energy. Ministers are pledging that at least £725 billion will be spent on infrastructure over the next 10 years. The Chancellor outlined a raft of infrastructure investment as part of last week's spending review. According to Wednesday's announcement, there will be £39 billion over the next 10 years to build affordable and social housing, and spending is due to reach £4 billion a year in 2029-30. There was also a £30 billion commitment to nuclear power, including £14.2 billion to build the Sizewell C plant in Suffolk and £2.5 billion for small modular reactors, as well as £15 billion for public transport projects in England's city regions and a four-year settlement for Transport for London worth £2.2 billion. Ms Reeves said: 'The British people voted for change – and this is how we deliver it. For too long, our infrastructure – our schools and hospitals, or our roads and bridges – have been left to crumble, holding back communities and stunting economic growth. 'This was a dereliction of duty by previous governments overseeing an era of managed decline, but it ends with this one. 'We are investing in Britain's future, brick by brick, road by road and track by track.'
The Herald Scotland
5 days ago
- Business
- The Herald Scotland
Procurement rules set to be overhauled as ministers lay out infrastructure plans
The Treasury has promised hundreds of billions over the next decade for projects such as roads, railways and homes. Under proposals put forward in a Cabinet Office consultation, public bodies would have to give more weight to firms which can prove they will boost British jobs when they are bidding for contracts. Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves delivered her spending review on Wednesday June 11 (Stefan Rousseau/PA) The change is set to apply to major projects such as transport, as well as other schemes including hospital and school building. Firms looking to work on public sector projects could also be rewarded if they can show benefits they will bring to a community, such as apprenticeships, opportunities for care leavers, or helping people into work. Pat McFadden, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, has said that the proposals will reward firms that 'put money in working people's pockets'. 'Whether it's building roads, railways or schools, we want to open up opportunities on major infrastructure projects for firms that boost British jobs and skills,' he said. 'The new rules will deliver on our plan for change by rewarding companies that put money in working people's pockets as we invest in the country's future.' According to the Treasury, the infrastructure strategy will lay out Government plans on prioritised policy areas such as upgrading transport networks, building new homes, modernising public services such as hospitals, and assisting the transition to green energy. Ministers are pledging that at least £725 billion will be spent on infrastructure over the next 10 years. The Chancellor outlined a raft of infrastructure investment as part of last week's spending review. According to Wednesday's announcement, there will be £39 billion over the next 10 years to build affordable and social housing, and spending is due to reach £4 billion a year in 2029-30. There was also a £30 billion commitment to nuclear power, including £14.2 billion to build the Sizewell C plant in Suffolk and £2.5 billion for small modular reactors, as well as £15 billion for public transport projects in England's city regions and a four-year settlement for Transport for London worth £2.2 billion. Ms Reeves said: 'The British people voted for change – and this is how we deliver it. For too long, our infrastructure – our schools and hospitals, or our roads and bridges – have been left to crumble, holding back communities and stunting economic growth. 'This was a dereliction of duty by previous governments overseeing an era of managed decline, but it ends with this one. 'We are investing in Britain's future, brick by brick, road by road and track by track.'
South Wales Argus
5 days ago
- Business
- South Wales Argus
Procurement rules set to be overhauled as ministers lay out infrastructure plans
The strategy to overhaul infrastructure over the next decade comes as Rachel Reeves has said the country's schools and hospitals have been 'left to crumble'. The Treasury has promised hundreds of billions over the next decade for projects such as roads, railways and homes. Under proposals put forward in a Cabinet Office consultation, public bodies would have to give more weight to firms which can prove they will boost British jobs when they are bidding for contracts. Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves delivered her spending review on Wednesday June 11 (Stefan Rousseau/PA) The change is set to apply to major projects such as transport, as well as other schemes including hospital and school building. Firms looking to work on public sector projects could also be rewarded if they can show benefits they will bring to a community, such as apprenticeships, opportunities for care leavers, or helping people into work. Pat McFadden, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, has said that the proposals will reward firms that 'put money in working people's pockets'. 'Whether it's building roads, railways or schools, we want to open up opportunities on major infrastructure projects for firms that boost British jobs and skills,' he said. 'The new rules will deliver on our plan for change by rewarding companies that put money in working people's pockets as we invest in the country's future.' According to the Treasury, the infrastructure strategy will lay out Government plans on prioritised policy areas such as upgrading transport networks, building new homes, modernising public services such as hospitals, and assisting the transition to green energy. Ministers are pledging that at least £725 billion will be spent on infrastructure over the next 10 years. The Chancellor outlined a raft of infrastructure investment as part of last week's spending review. According to Wednesday's announcement, there will be £39 billion over the next 10 years to build affordable and social housing, and spending is due to reach £4 billion a year in 2029-30. There was also a £30 billion commitment to nuclear power, including £14.2 billion to build the Sizewell C plant in Suffolk and £2.5 billion for small modular reactors, as well as £15 billion for public transport projects in England's city regions and a four-year settlement for Transport for London worth £2.2 billion. Ms Reeves said: 'The British people voted for change – and this is how we deliver it. For too long, our infrastructure – our schools and hospitals, or our roads and bridges – have been left to crumble, holding back communities and stunting economic growth. 'This was a dereliction of duty by previous governments overseeing an era of managed decline, but it ends with this one. 'We are investing in Britain's future, brick by brick, road by road and track by track.'
