THE 111 U-TURNS OF DAVID CAMERON'S COALITION GOVERNMENT

Many of these U-turns are for the better, however that does not disguise the fact that the policies were ill-conceived in the first place. Time after time, this calamitous coalition has announced off-the-cuff policies that have been poorly researched and hastily proposed with scant regard for the impact of their implementation.

THE 110 U-TURNS OF DAVID CAMERON'S COALITION GOVERNMENT

also available on Flipboard

•••

1.  NHS Direct 'not being scrapped' - http://bit.ly/lAdTjv

2.  Government confirms re-think on school sport funding - http://bit.ly/mtyFFH

3.  Downing Street rejects child milk scheme cut suggestion - http://bbc.in/k1NoGE

4.  Sale of forests in England scrapped - http://bbc.in/jCmqmT

5.  Plans to grant anonymity to rape case defendants scrapped - http://bit.ly/ketJd1

6.  Government backtracks on Bookstart - http://bit.ly/j1AvuP

7.  Housing benefit cap to be postponed until January 2012 - http://bit.ly/iIrrD1

8.  Government admits defeat on immigration target - http://bit.ly/lU5nHV

9.  Military covenant to be enshrined in law after months of criticism - http://bit.ly/mQKfUC

10. UK coastguard station closure plans 'scaled back' - http://bbc.in/lE0VHs

11. Government 'abandons' plans for weekly rubbish collection - http://bit.ly/mveDsv

12. Cameron tears up Ken Clarke's "soft" sentencing policies - http://bit.ly/iFGA0a

13. David Cameron denies 'humiliating U-turn' on NHS - http://tgr.ph/kryKEU

14. Treasury backtracks on Danny Alexander's pension reform plan - http://bit.ly/lVocDX

15. Ken Clarke forced to abandon 50% sentence cuts for guilty pleas - http://bit.ly/iz4qZA

16. Key localism reform axed from Bill - http://bit.ly/iMIg5l

17. BBC World Service receives government funding boost - http://bbc.in/iQsaGN

18. Ministers scale back coastguard closure plans further (see 10) - http://tgr.ph/opfqyK

19. Ministers accused of DNA database U-turn - http://bbc.in/nbvRvY

20. Grant Shapps backtracks on two-year tenancy limit - http://bbc.in/r6IboJ

21. NHS launches bowel cancer campaign after U-turn over advertising - http://bit.ly/qjflEn

22. Minister unveils revised cuts to UK coastguard centres - http://bbc.in/rAhSll

23. Clarke U-turn over scrapping of chief coroner - http://bbc.in/rwrfh1

24.  Youth Justice Board saved from quango cull - http://bbc.in/sEhtNq

25. Labour's future jobs fund revised and reinstated - http://bit.ly/tj42nf

26. Mobility benefit for people in care homes to stay - http://bit.ly/tH3rCc

27. Rethink on £26,000 benefits cap - http://ind.pn/w68nWz

28. Government in new climbdown over benefit cap - http://ind.pn/xYZRBM

29. American-backed private universities plan dropped - http://tgr.ph/xhQ8Zc

30. Means testing of suspects held in police stations dropped - http://bit.ly/A4bHKV

31. Cameron in U-turn over fiscal policing of eurozone - http://bit.ly/ws3cw7

32. Ministers drop benefit sanctions threat from work experience scheme - http://bit.ly/AkXTia

33. Legal aid U-turn for babies and domestic violence victims - http://bit.ly/x9IHoj

34. NHS redundancy costs force government u-turn - http://bit.ly/I1oQXH

35. Cameron halts compulsory green deal policy on home improvements - http://bit.ly/I1oobT

36. U-turn opens up legal aid to domestic abuse victims - http://ind.pn/I0QXXE

37. U-turn signalled over no-notice inspections for schools - http://bbc.in/JaVuqU

38. Government forced into U-turn over Royal Navy fighter jets -  http://bit.ly/K3V9E4

39. Cable forces Tory U-turn on workers' rights - http://ind.pn/Kt6ZWD

40. George Osborne backs down on pasty tax - http://tgr.ph/KAw59E

41. Secret courts bill U-turn fails to silence critics - http://bit.ly/KYBmpF

42. Buzzard capture plans abandoned after 'public concerns' - http://goo.gl/RPTdg

43. Tax relief limit on charity to be axed - http://bbc.in/KMe47Z

On 1st June, HMRC redefined the U-turn. We have therefore redefined our brief to include "clarifications".

44. HMRC clarifies landfill charges after row over 'skip tax' - http://bit.ly/KxuVwR

45. Government cancels planned 3p fuel duty increase - http://bbc.in/MmNFB6

46. David Cameron is now prepared to consider an EU referendum - http://bit.ly/Njho8L

47. Coalition abandons crucial vote on reform of House of Lords - http://bbc.in/RWXjtW

48. A14 to become first existing road to exact toll under coalition plans  - http://bit.ly/LBXgUq

49. Cameron retreats on House of Lords reform - http://bit.ly/OJSHbV

50. Government prepares £2m green deal publicity campaign - http://bit.ly/OPm4bt

51. U-turn on money for elderly care - http://ind.pn/NCYXPA

52. U-turn on curbing payments to victims of minor criminal assaults - http://bit.ly/TL898j

53. U-turn on plans to force cancer patients to actively seek work - http://bit.ly/UeV2wo

54. David Cameron "reconsiders" £140 state pension reform - http://bit.ly/V819C6

55. West Coast main line rail contract halted in shock move - http://bit.ly/Vf52Id

56. Energy policy chaos as Cameron's 'lowest tariffs' row deepens - http://bit.ly/RX2CZT

57. Badger cull postponed until 2013 - http://bit.ly/TvXO2C

58. Number 10 backtracks on section 106 pledge - http://bit.ly/Tw0sFm

59.  Treasury to defer planned increase in fuel duty - http://bit.ly/UDVu4g

60. David Cameron forced into U-turn on flood defence spending cuts - http://bit.ly/192rk7n

61. Disarray as child care tax break is put on hold - http://bit.ly/VOdb5G

62. Government retreats from plan to help families with childcare - http://ind.pn/XfK9bi

63. More cash for Tory shires after revolt - http://bit.ly/10JoCQB

64. Michael Gove forced into U-turn on GCSE replacement plan - http://bit.ly/14TqqWs

65. Mary Seacole to remain on the Curriculum - http://ind.pn/11ttnOL

66. Nuclear power: ministers offer reactor deal until 2050 - http://bit.ly/136eOvA

67. Osborne forced into U-turn as borrowing forecast fails - http://bit.ly/15yQsyK

68. Government scraps private finance plan for Crossrail trains - http://reut.rs/Xtrfl0

69. NHS private sector climbdown a 'humiliating U-turn' - http://bit.ly/W2r8gS

BONUS: Just one day in the life of this coalition of clowns -  http://bit.ly/YbPgKz

70. Bedroom tax 'in chaos' after IDS announces exemptions - http://bit.ly/YYwAy0

71. Government to shelve plans for minimum price on alcohol - http://ind.pn/16pQUzF

72. Tory ‘U-turn’ on devolution - http://bit.ly/14nIBFi

73. Eric Pickles amends home extension plans - http://bbc.in/11mGwGg

74. Caste discrimination to be outlawed by Equality Act - http://bbc.in/ZG3rwa

75. Cameron drops foreign aid pledge - http://bit.ly/18lZdgX

76. Clegg says nursery ratio changes are being scrapped - http://bbc.in/11rUqru

77. Child heart surgery reform suspended - http://bbc.in/17GMMOm

78. Government rethink over level of difficulty for disability benefit claims - http://ind.pn/13R8eMr

79. Michael Gove redrafts new history curriculum after outcry - http://bit.ly/19c2jao

80. Speed limit rise for motorways hits the brakes - http://bit.ly/14parxQ

81. Grayling signals legal aid climbdown over 'client choice' - http://bit.ly/18qZpO2

82. Gove abandons plans to drop climate change from curriculum - http://bit.ly/15kwMim

83. UK plans for plain cigarette packaging to be shelved - http://bit.ly/18du6Hf

84. Post-Olympic arts festival plan dropped - http://bbc.in/18dufdD

85. Minimum unit price for alcohol proposal shelved - http://bit.ly/12HItz9

86. Home Office backs down over 'go home' vans after legal complaint - http://bit.ly/17jBk7l

87. Government U-turns on criminal justice pledge - http://bit.ly/1bAq6hQ

88. U-turn on legal aid price competition - http://bbc.in/1fAvlyh

89. Government to amend lobbying regulation plans - http://bbc.in/19CKKfn

90. Plan to divert benefits of troubled families scrapped - http://bbc.in/15y4SCm

91. 'Epic U-turn' as Cameron announces GPs to provide 7-day service - http://bit.ly/19k4x0Z

92. Ministers u-turn on slimmer standards regime - http://bit.ly/163Izop

93. Anger over government U-turn on 15-minute care visits - http://bit.ly/15WSJVy

94. Visitor bond scheme to be scrapped by government - http://bbc.in/16XAuNf

95. U-turn over retired miners' fuel allowance - http://itv.co/18AHrEr

96. Payday loans U-turn represents 'intellectual collapse', says Ed Miliband - http://bit.ly/1966bV8

97. U-turn could result in plain packaging on cigarettes by 2015 - http://bit.ly/17WMvWG

98.  Mark Carney forces George Osborne into U-turn - http://bit.ly/1aXZ857

99. Coalition reverses policy of growth in higher education sector - http://bit.ly/1ik95zo

100. Plan to use tolls to fund A14 improvements abandoned - http://bbc.in/1cjIJs7

101. Defence procurement privatisation plan axed - http://bbc.in/1gmd0Kn

102. Why the sudden Tory U-turn on the minimum wage? - http://bit.ly/1eQWL5O

103. Tories ditch pledge to let voters sack their MP - http://ind.pn/Mh1Wl4

104. Giant NHS database rollout delayed - http://bbc.in/1cVYy5D

105. David Cameron drops plans to ease fox-hunting restrictions - http://bit.ly/OVZNNg

106. U-turn over human rights protection for home care - http://bit.ly/QIYmCd

107. Cameron ditches foreign aid pledge - http://dailym.ai/1pA36WZ

108. Ministers intervene to prevent relaxation of checks at Passport Office - http://bit.ly/1jlR0wo

109. Land Registry privatisation plans abandoned by ministers - http://bit.ly/Woo1n4

110. Cable announces abandonment of student loans sale - http://bit.ly/Wooc1B

111. David Cameron in humiliating U-turn as he deploys Royal Navy flagship to save drowning migrants - http://bit.ly/1bmEO0R

•••

This list does not include pre-election promises and manifesto pledges, many of which were torn up as the coalition agreement was written.

The short link for this article is - http://bit.ly/coalitionUturns

10% rise in people sleeping rough on the streets of London

There has been a near 10% increase in the total number of people seen sleeping rough in London compared to last year, according to homelessness charity Broadway. In 2010/11 the total number of people seen sleeping on the streets of London rose by eight percent from the previous year, it said. However, Outreach teams continued to help people to leave the streets, it said, moving 1,372 people into accommodation and assisting 326 people to return to a home area or an area where they could access appropriate services.

These figures are contained in the annual report on rough sleeping figures in London released today. The report, Street to Home Bulletin 2010/11, presents information about people seen rough sleeping by Outreach teams in London and those who have accessed accommodation for rough sleepers in London in 2010/11. Information is from the ‘Combined Homelessness and Information Network’ (CHAIN), a database commissioned and funded by the Greater London Authority and managed by Broadway.

The headline findings from the Street to Home Report 2010/11 include:

~ 3,975 people were seen rough sleeping in 2010/11

~ 28% of those seen sleeping rough were from Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries that joined the EU in 2004 and 2007.

~ Just 4 people under 18 were contacted and only 8% of those seen sleeping rough throughout the year were under 25.

~ Amongst UK nationals, 3% (36 people) were known to have served in the armed forces at some point.

The statistics in the report are based on information collected by outreach workers and recorded on the CHAIN system over a 12-month period.

Richard Blakeway, Mayor of London's Housing Advisor said: "Ending rough sleeping in London by 2012 is a tough challenge but one which the Mayor is more determined than ever to achieve. Today's CHAIN figures clearly show we have work to do but they also show that significant progress has been made.

“There has been a 75 per cent drop in the number of the most entrenched rough sleepers living on London's streets and the introduction of a new rapid response project now means more than half of all rough sleepers spend just one night on the street.  With the £34m recently secured by the Mayor from Government to tackle rough sleeping, we will now be able to support even more rough sleepers off London's streets to rebuild their lives over the coming year."

Howard Sinclair, Chief Executive of Broadway, said: “We know exactly the size of the task facing us if we want to reduce rough sleeping to as near to zero as possible by the end of 2012.  We believe that as long as resources are used in the right way and we continue to work together towards this common aim then we can continue to make a positive and long-lasting difference in the lives of people who end up having to sleep rough in London.”

Ross Macmillan for 24dash.com

Tory MP Philip Davies: disabled people should work for less than minimum wage

Shipley MP then goes on to describe criticism of his remarks as 'leftwing hysteria'

A Tory MP sparked anger by suggesting that disabled people should work for less than the minimum wage to increase their chances of being taken on by employers. Philip Davies told the Commons: "If an employer is looking at two candidates, one who has got disabilities and one who hasn't, and they have got to pay them both the same rate, I invite you to guess which one the employer is more likely to take on.

"Given that some of those people with a learning disability clearly, by definition, cannot be as productive in their work as somebody who has not got a disability of that nature, then it was inevitable that, given the employer was going to have to pay them both the same, they were going to take on the person who was going to be more productive, less of a risk.

"My view is that for some people the national minimum wage may be more of a hindrance than a help. "If those people who consider it is being a hindrance to them, and in my view that's some of the most vulnerable people in society, if they feel that for a short period of time, taking a lower rate of pay to help them get on their first rung of the jobs ladder, if they judge that that is a good thing, I don't see why we should be standing in their way."

Mental health charity Mind dismissed the Shipley MP's comments as "preposterous". Richard Hawkes, chief executive of disability charity Scope, said the MP had got it "seriously wrong". "This reveals a lot about how we value disabled people – and what we think they have to offer when it comes to work," he said. "In fact disabled people can contribute as much to a workplace as anyone else.

Davies has a history of making controversial statements out of sync with his party high command. A Conservative party spokesman said: "These comments do not reflect the views of the Conservative party and do not reflect government policy." In the debate, Davies was challenged over his remarks by fellow Tory MP Edward Leigh, who told him: "Why actually should a disabled person work for less than £5.93 an hour. It is not a lot of money, is it?"

But Davies said criticism of his remarks was "leftwing hysteria". He said he had talked to people with mental health problems when he met recently with the charity Mind and he said they agreed with his analysis. Labour's Anne Begg, chair of the work and pensions select committee, called the remarks "outrageous and unacceptable". "To suggest that disabled people should be treated as second class citizens is shocking and shows just what a warped world some Tories demonstrate they inhabit," she said.

The Guardian

Caveat Emptor

Steve Bell, the Guardian

Pensions workers reject 'mutual' plan with a strike

Staff who work for the government agency My Civil Service Pension (MyCSP) and who administer the pensions of 1.5 million existing and retired civil servants, have said they do not want to be part of a mutual arrangement and have voted overwhelmingly to strike. The union says this makes a mockery of the government's plans and exposes their true nature of being privatisation by another name because it does not involve any genuine co-ownership.

In a ballot of the union's 250 members across MyCSP sites in Basingstoke, Cheadle Hulme, Liverpool, Newcastle and Worthing, 77% voted for a strike and 87% voted for other forms of industrial action, on a 46.5% turnout. Unlike the government, PCS has consulted MyCSP staff in all the offices and the overwhelming view was that they do not want to go down this route, and want to retain their civil service status. Ministers have refused to allow this, which would mean staff would no longer have access to the civil service pension schemes they administer.

The strike comes a day after the union announced more than 250,000 of its members will be on strike over cuts to jobs, pensions and pay with teachers and lecturers on 30 June. PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka (pictured above) said: "It is ironic that the first attempt by the government to set up a so called 'mutual' is being met by a total rejection by staff. But it is not surprising, because ministers have been rumbled about their true intentions. There is a chasm between the government's rhetoric about co-operation and mutualism and what they are actually planning to do, which is to impose a decision on staff that rips up their civil service contracts."

PCS Union website

Conservative MP attempts to undermine minimum wage with Private Members' Bill

The Union of Construction, Allied Trades and Technicians (UCATT) has warned that a Conservative MP's Private Members' Bill is a thinly disguised attempt to undermine the minimum wage. The Employment Opportunities Bill, which is being sponsored by Christopher Chope MP, is due to have its second reading tomorrow, Friday 17th June. 

The bill will allow employees "the right" to opt out of the minimum wage. George Guy, Acting General Secretary of UCATT, said: "This bill is a covert attack by the Conservatives on the minimum wage. Their aim is to create a race to the bottom, where workers opt out of the minimum wage in a desperate attempt to undercut each other to secure work. This highlights the true nature of the Conservatives, soft on the bankers but tough on the workers."

The bill's preamble describes it as introducing "more freedom, flexibility and opportunity for those seeking employment in the public and private sectors". Under its proposals the request to be paid below the minimum wage is made by the employee but both the employee and the employer sign the agreement. There is nothing in the bill which prevents employers indicating at interview that an applicant could be successful if they agreed to work for less than the minimum wage.

Mr Guy, added: "Christopher Chope suggests that his proposals will create, freedom, flexibility and opportunity for job seekers. He has all the sincerity of Uriah Heep. His bill, if it ever became law, would create misery for thousands of low paid workers, who would be forced to work for poverty wages."

The bill will be the first to be debated tomorrow in the House of Commons with proceedings commencing at 9.30am. There will be live coverage on the BBC's Democracy Live website.

Westminster Tories let developers off nearly £900,000 in affordable housing contributions

Conservative Councillors on Westminster Council’s Planning Applications Sub Committee have voted to let two property developers off paying nearly £900,000 in affordable housing contributions as part of luxury housing developments. The two planning decisions, agreed on Thursday 9th June, were:

1. Oriental Club, 11 Stratford Place – The Conservatives granted planning permission to add 8 more bedrooms, plus other improvements, to improve the viability of the private members Club. The Council’s Planning officers calculated a payment of £288,000 was due as a contribution to the Council’s Affordable Housing Fund to offset the increase in commercial space and recommended refusal because the applicants had declined to pay.

2. 3 Down Street Mews, Mayfair – The Conservatives granted planning permission for 2 luxury houses, one with an underground swimming pool, and waived the required payment of £588,000, because the developer challenged the Council’s Planning officer’s calculation of size of the development and the viability of the project, even though no viability report was submitted by the developer.

Councillor Barbara Grahame, Labour’s member on the four person Planning Applications Sub-Committee voted against both decisions, and said; “What is the point of the Council having Affordable Housing policies if the Conservatives are prepared to ignore them? Both these development could have made a substantial contribution to meeting housing need in Westminster, but nearly £900,000 has now been lost and local residents living in overcrowded conditions will have to pay the price of the Conservatives’ failure to follow their own planning policies.”

via Labour Matters

Boris Johnson and Peter Andre launch literacy project

London mayor and pop singer join scheme to improve reading and writing skills of young children across the capital

Boris Johnson and Peter Andre formed an unlikely double act on Tuesday as they joined forces to promote a literacy project for young children [once there were libraries – Ed]. The mayor of London and the Mysterious Girl singer took turns to read passages from Julia Donaldson's The Gruffalo to a group of schoolchildren at the launch of the scheme, run by the National Literacy Trust.

Because nothing says literature quite like a media whore

The project aims to improve the literacy of children in London aged three to five and prepare them for school. The initiative is part of Team London, the mayor's strategy to recruit volunteers to deliver key projects that enhance opportunities for residents of the capital. The mayor hopes to sign up 500 volunteers from across London to work with more than 2,000 families in the city, encouraging parents to read to their children regularly and participate in reading workshops.

Speaking at Botwell Green library in Hayes, west London, Johnson said: "This is incredibly important because we are trying to encourage volunteers to come and help parents to get the confidence they need to read to their kids. The difference needs to be made at a very early stage in their lives. Once you've cracked reading at an early age then you'll never look back, but if you don't get it then it's very hard to recover. That's why it's very important to crack it early on. This is not just economics, it is not just about people getting jobs. If you can read, you will open for yourself the door to a most unimaginable treasure house of riches. It is very, very important that people do acquire this skill."

Andre said: "Reading to your children is very important. One-on-one with your children, it's all about bonding, and these are the things you remember."

Ed, what are you doing?

Dave Brown, Independent

Welfare reforms will plunge people with cancer into poverty, charity claims

Government plans for welfare reform will plunge cancer patients into poverty simply "because they have not recovered quickly enough", campaigners have claimed. 

Macmillan Cancer Support has calculated that 7,000 cancer patients will lose their employment and support allowance (ESA) under plans to cap entitlement to some claimants' benefit at one year. Those who receive ESA on the basis of their national insurance contributions, as opposed to their income, and are deemed to have some prospect of work will only be able to claim for a year, under government proposals. ESA pays up to £94 a week for those assessed as capable of returning to work with support or training.

Ciarán Devane, chief executive of Macmillan Cancer Support, said: "This proposal in the Welfare Reform Bill will have a devastating impact on many cancer patients. We are urging the government to change their plans to reform key disability benefits to ensure cancer patients and their families are not pushed into poverty."

"In my experience one year is simply not long enough for many people to recover from cancer," said Professor Jane Maher, chief medical officer at Macmillian Cancer Support. "The serious physical and psychological side-effects of cancer can last for many months, even years, after treatment has finished. It is crucial that patients are not forced to return to work before they are ready."

A spokesperson for the Department for Work and Pensions pointed out that those on low incomes or those placed in the support group of ESA – meaning they too ill to have any prospect of work – would would not see any time limit on their entitlement. 

Since the bill was introduced into Parliament it has been amended to automatically place people on certain types of chemotherapy in the support group.

Benefits cap plan to be relaxed, says minister

Scheme to prevent benefit claimants getting more than £26,000 will be waived for 'exceptional circumstances'

A benefit cap of £26,000 is to be relaxed in "exceptional circumstances" – such as for large families, the welfare reform minister Lord Freud said. In what will be seen as a concession to the Liberal Democrats, Freud said that changes would be introduced later in the year ahead of the introduction of the cap in 2013.

The cap is designed to ensure no family receives in benefits more than the average net income of a working household. "We're looking at exceptional circumstances which some people may find themselves in and we're going to be putting out arrangements for that later in the year," he told the Politics Show on BBC1. Asked what form the changes would take, Freud said: "Wherever we think that there's something happening that is undesirable and we're looking very carefully at how to draw up those protections."

George Osborne announced the £26,000 cap in his speech to the Tory conference last year in which he unveiled other welfare reforms, including the removal of child benefit from higher rate taxpayers. The chancellor said: "So, for the first time a cap on benefits. No family on out of work benefits will get more than the average family gets by going out to work."

Osborne said that benefits of workless families would be capped at £500 per week – £26,000 a year – which is the median net income of a working household. The cap will be applied in part by reducing housing benefit, affecting about about 50,000 families.

Freud said there were already exemptions. "We have got quite a lot of protections in this cap. Firstly of course, if you are in work, you are not affected. Secondly if you're a disabled person or there's a disabled person in the household, you're not affected. If you're a war widow or a widower, you're not affected." If you’re a Tory you’re not affected.

The Guardian

Feuds, fraud and fury

Martin Rowson, the Guardian

No country for ordinary folk

More and more, Britain is run by the rich and well-placed on behalf of the rich and well-placed, writes Simon Hoggart in the Guardian

Ghastly that so many Olympic tickets have gone to corporates, and to the appalling people who run so much of international sport. While the toads of Fifa will be whisked in stretch limousines to the men's 100 metres final (one million applications for tickets), the people who have paid for all this – the taxpayers of Britain and especially the council taxpayers of London – find they can't even get seats into the heats of the handball, an event which, if it were taking place outside the Olympics, would probably attract seven people and a dog.

But that's the way Britain works these days. Bankers wreck our economy, do nothing by way of reparation, give themselves the same huge bonuses and refuse to lend money to businesses while thousands wait to lose their jobs. Network Rail makes a multimillion pound profit, while ordinary folk who need to travel in the mornings have to fork out more than £120 to go standard class from London to Manchester.

More and more this is a country run by the rich and well-placed on behalf of the rich and well-placed. Which is how they organised things in Soviet Russia, until people realised they were being conned.

Fire, walk with me

Steve Bell, the Guardian

Sussex LRC launch, 7.00pm Tuesday 7 June, Brighton

The original Labour Representation Committee was formed in 1900 to fight for political representation for the Labour Movement. In Britain today we face a similar crisis of representation. The LRC has been re-formed to secure a voice for socialists within the Labour Party, the unions, and Parliament.

Never in the history of the Labour Party has the need been so great to make the case for peace and socialism. The advocates of global capitalism and war have taken control of the political agenda. The task for today’s LRC, founded in 2004, is to fight for power within the Labour Party and trade unions and to appeal to the tens of thousands who have turned away from Labour in disillusion and despair. Therefore we are calling upon all socialists, Labour Party and trade union members, constituency Labour parties and union branches to join our campaign and join or affiliate to the LRC.

The LRC is a democratic organisation committed to fighting for a socialist future:

We need a foreign policy based upon peace, justice and solidarity

Britain is a more unequal society than at any time since the Second World War. The LRC is fighting for a living wage, a decent state pension, council housing and public services run to meet our needs not sold off for private profit

All people are equal. We believe in fighting all forms of prejudice and discrimination

With global capitalism in control of the political agenda, there is an urgent need for a major shift of wealth and power in favour of ordinary people

The LRC was setup to fight for workers’ rights, civil liberties and political representation

With the planet on the brink of environmental catastrophe the ConDem’s answer is more nuclear power and an expansion of aviation. We need a green energy policy based on renewable and the development of public transport

This is an exciting time to join the LRC – we are continuing to grow rapidly as Labour supporters, trade unionists and other socialists look to develop a radical agenda around which the movement can unite in the face ConDem cuts, the like of which we have not seen since the 1930s.

The LRC has local groups, like this one, right across the country, bringing together socialists and trade unionists to fight local campaigns. We invite you to attend on Tuesday 7 June to hear Labour’s socialist alternative to the Tory-led Government and how, together, we can fight its misguided, unfair and unnecessary cuts.

The main speakers at this meeting will be LRC National Chair John McDonnell MP, Katy Clark MP, Christine Shawcroft (Labour Party NEC), a representative from the local FBU and Luke Cooper (LRC, Workers’ Power & Sussex student).

The meeting starts at 7pm on Tuesday 7 June at the Brighthelm Centre Auditorium, North Road, Brighton BN1 1YD. We look forward to seeing you.

Find us on Facebook here, Twitter here or visit our website here.

When you wished upon a star, were gay days at Disney World an option?

Today sees the end of the annual Gay Days event at Disney World in Orlando, Florida. But just in case people hadn’t noticed thousands of gayers at the venue, a homophobic group hired an aeroplane to fly a banner over the area warning families. The Florida Family Association contracted the plane on Friday and Saturday to fly a banner that read: “Warning Gay Day At Disney 6/4.”

In a statement it said: “Thanks to the generosity of many supporters, Florida Family Association contracted this aircraft company to fly a seven foot high banner for ten hours the day before and ten hours the day of Gay Pride Day at Disney World. Florida Family Association wants to warn these families about this offensive event before they arrive at the Magic Kingdom on Saturday. This airplane banner is our best effort to accomplish that goal.”

The ‘offensive event’ that the group referred to included people wearing pro-gay T-shirts, same sex couples hugging, holding hands, “groping each other” and some punters were even “dressed in drag”. The event is in its twentieth year and brings in around $150m to Disney, hotel owners, restaurants, bars, clubs and other local businesses.

“The economy is improving because of what Gay Days bring into it,” said Gay Day President Chris Alexander-Manley. “Our crowd behaves better than most convention crowds, so come on out and see what it’s really about.

Pink News

 

UPDATE: Even better is this hate-filled page from Jesus-is-Savior.com - I mean, there were even cases of “group urination in public restrooms,” for God’s sake. Can you imagine?

God bless America!

England 2 - 2 Switzerland

 
“Some will say Wilshere's energetic display exposed the fallacy of Arsenal's protestations about his weariness but the reverse applies. This game showed him to be an automatic starter for the senior XI who has progressed beyond U21 level and should not go back.”  The Guardian

And thus the leader of global morality spake: "Don't shit on my doorstep, for Christ's sake!"

The Catholic Church is once again reeling as the latest scandal to rock its foundations unfolds in the archdiocese of the very Cardinal who was brought in by Pope Benedict XVI to oversee reforms in the wake of the sex abuse scandals. It centres on Father Riccardo Seppia, a 51-year-old parish priest in the village of Sastri Ponente, near Genoa, who was arrested on 13th May and charged with paedophilia and drug offences.

Investigators say that during tapped mobile phone conversations, Seppia asked a Moroccan drug dealer to arrange sexual encounters for him with young, vulnerable boys. "I don’t want 16-year-old boys but younger,”  Seppia is alleged to have said. “14-year-olds are OK - look for needy boys who have family issues.”

According to investigators, Seppia later told a friend - a former seminarian and barman who is also under investigation - that the town's shopping centres were the best places to entice minors. During the tapped phone conversations the two friends swore and blasphemed. The priest is charged with attempting to kiss and touch an underage altar boy as well as exchanging cocaine for sexual intercourse with boys over eighteen.

Seppia's defence lawyers are expected to argue that the conversations - monitored since 20th October 2010 - were just playful words, crude games that were played by adults. According to the defence, it was also just a game when, it is claimed, he "kissed on the mouth" a 15-year-old altar boy.

Southern Cross and Winterbourne View have tested public tolerance to the limit

The care homes scandal shows just what happens when financiers are free to make a profit out of the most vulnerable, writes Polly Toynbee in the Guardian

David Cameron's regular railing against "excessive regulation and bureaucracy" rings embarrassingly hollow in this week's care homes crisis. So does his promise that "the grip of state control will be released" from "the enemies of enterprise" as he stops the "dead hand of the state getting in the way".

Writing in the Telegraph back in February, he was two weeks away from publishing an open public services white paper which would, he promised, "create a new presumption … that public services should be open to a range of providers competing to offer a better service". Everything would be up for sale and any civil servants getting in the way would be punished. "If I have to pull those people into my office to argue this out myself and get them off the backs of business then, believe me, I'll do it."

But that oft-delayed white paper still cowers in the long grass. Now it will slip out in "mid-July", those dog days before parliament breaks when a rush of embarrassments emerge with no time for debate. Why? Because too many voters have woken up to how the "any willing provider" edict threatens the NHS, and would jeopardise every other public service too.

Cameron's privatising zeal looks even less enticing in the wake of this week's two care home scandals. The "dead hand of the state" looks rather more welcoming than the grasping hand of private equity. Southern Cross has shown how, as with the banks, privatised services that are too essential to fail make profits while relying on the state to pick up the pieces if they run into trouble, without paying the taxpayer for that hidden insurance. How will the public view predators circling many more services – especially in the NHS – now they see how Blackstone separated property value from the riskier running of the care business?

Are our most vulnerable people really safe in the care of these men?

It is a long way from Ireland's Coolmore Stud to Winterbourne View in Bristol. But the two are linked by a fat trail of cash, writes Ben Chu in the Independent

JP McManus and John Magnier (pictured below), the two Irish investors who turn out to own a stake in the Bristol care home at the centre of this week's abuse scandal, are best known for going to war with the Manchester United manager, Alex Ferguson, over the bloodstock rights to the racehorse, Rock of Gibraltar. It's a safe assumption that the pair, who made their fortunes out of racing, did not invest in the disabled care sector with philanthropy foremost in their minds.

The same is probably true of Stephen Schwarzman, head of the private equity firm Blackstone, which acquired the elderly-care-home provider Southern Cross in 2004. Such is the Blackstone founder's obsession with the bottom line that when Barack Obama mooted increasing the risibly low personal tax rate paid by private equity moguls, Schwarzman compared the suggestion to Hitler's invasion of Poland.

Private equity firms like Blackstone present themselves as managerial wizards, who add value to their companies by finding efficiencies and new revenue streams. But more often than not their skill lies in a combination of financial engineering and ruthless cost-cutting. The financial engineering that took place at Southern Cross under Blackstone's ownership is now suspected of helping to push the company to the brink of bankruptcy – a prospect that leaves its 31,000 elderly residents facing an uncertain future. There will now be an investigation into whether the management in charge of Winterbourne View was reckless. Was cost-cutting one of the reasons staff in Bristol were able to get away with behaving in such an appalling way towards residents for so long? Where was the supervision? Where was the training?

There is a bigger picture here. Research by the Financial Times this week suggests that the standard of care in homes that are run for a profit is, on average, lower than in those which are run by charities and local authorities. That certainly fits with the idea that, in private care home, profits come before people.

In fairness, not all privately owned homes are dens of abuse and neglect. Some provide excellent and compassionate care. And we have seen enough abuse scandals in the NHS over the years to know that public ownership does not always equal compassionate treatment of the vulnerable. None of this should let the official regulators off the hook either. The Coalition, which seems determined to leave the care home inspectors at the Care Quality Commission under-resourced, needs to face up to its responsibilities, too. Council cuts to care their home expenditure budgets do not help either.

But ownership does matter. There needs to be a fit and proper persons test for those who want to make money out of providing services for the vulnerable and elderly. When private investors seek to buy into the care home sector we must ask ourselves a simple question before giving the green light: would we entrust our own grandmother with these people?

Better the devil you know

Dirt Devil-The Exorcist from MrPrice2U on Vimeo.

Fatal consequences of benefit changes

An open letter to the Guardian suggests changes to the welfare system are having a 'devastating' impact, driving some to suicide attempts

“Reform of the welfare system is steaming ahead, and already we're hearing about the devastating effects this is having on the mental health of hundreds of thousands of people across Great Britain. While much is made of the impact that changes to benefits will have on people with physical disabilities, it is vital that those with "invisible" issues such as mental health problems are not forgotten. Reassessments of people on incapacity benefit (IB) via the deeply flawed work capability assessment are due to start next month, and the new personal independence payment test is being trialled over the summer – just some of the changes already alarming many people affected by mental distress.

We've found that the prospect of IB reassessment is causing huge amounts of distress, and tragically there have already been cases where people have taken their own life following problems with changes to their benefits. We are hugely worried that the benefits system is heading in a direction which will put people with mental health problems under even more pressure and scrutiny, at a time when they are already being hit in other areas such as cuts to services.

There needs to be a shift towards a more sympathetic and supportive system that genuinely takes into account the additional challenges people with mental health problems face and can make a real objective assessment of their needs rather than placing them into a situation where their wellbeing is put at risk.”

Paul Farmer Chief executive, Mind
Bill Walden-Jones Chief executive, Hafal
Paul Jenkins Chief executive, Rethink Mental Illness
Professor Bob Grove Joint chief executive, Centre for Mental Health
Billy Watson Chief executive, Scottish Association for Mental Health
Dr Jed Boardman Consultant and senior lecturer in social psychiatry,
Royal College of Psychiatrists

Can Labour win an election with an unpopular leader?

More people will blame Labour than the Tories if the economy gets worse, writes George Eaton in the New Statesman

On the surface, the latest Reuters/Ipsos MORI political monitor should gladden Labour souls. Last month's poll put the Tories level with Labour on 40 per cent but this month's gives Ed Miliband's party a seven point lead. Labour is up two points to 42 per cent and the Tories are down five points to 35 per cent.

But dig deeper and some worrying trends emerge for the red team. Net satisfaction with Miliband, which stood at +1 last month, is back down to -8 (see graph below). More worryingly, just 17 per cent of voters believe the Labour leader is ready to be Prime Minister, compared to 69 per cent who believe he is not. By contrast, 31 per cent of voters say Labour is ready to form the next government, a finding that will again give Miliband's critics cause to ask if the party could be performing better under an alternative leader.

Elsewhere, there's further evidence that voters share George Osborne's belief that the government is clearing up "Labour's mess". Asked who they will blame if the economy gets worse over the next 12 months, 22 per cent of respondents say the last Labour government but just 10 per cent say the Tories. A total of 27 per cent would blame both the Tories and the Lib Dems but that's only 5 per cent more than would blame Labour. Given that the economy was growing at an annual rate of 4 per cent under Labour but has ground to a halt under Osborne, that's some achievement by the Conservatives. As Douglas Alexander recently lamented, Labour's marathon leadership contest allowed the coalition to define the terms of debate from the start.

Miliband's troubles, however, are as nothing compared with those of Nick Clegg. Net satisfaction with the Deputy PM has plummeted from -18 last month to -32 this month. For the first time, Clegg's approval rating is below that of the coalition. By contrast, net satisfaction with Cameron remains at -3, a poor rating but not a terrible one. Miliband, who has led Cameron in every MORI poll since January, is now behind the Prime Minister. Personal approval ratings are often a better long-term indicator of the election result than voting intention. Labour often led the Tories under Neil Kinnock, for instance, but Kinnock was never rated above John Major as a potential prime minister.

Can Labour defy history and win an election with an unpopular leader? That is the question some in the party will be asking today.

Never mind the legacies, just get on with your jobs!

Speaking yesterday in Milton Keynes, Cameron insisted that the Big Society was fundamental to his determination to improve the quality of life in Britain over the next decade.

“Give some to the white kids, for Christ’s sake!”

"As our debts are paid off, this is what I want to endure as the lasting legacy of this administration – helping to build a society where families and communities are stronger, where our nation's wellbeing is higher, and where all these things are accepted as central, not peripheral aspects of what modern governments should hope to achieve," he said.

"So the Big Society is not some fluffy add-on to more gritty and more important subjects. This is about as gritty and important as it gets: giving everyone the chance to get on in life and making our country a better place to live." Yes, he really said that.

The Labour leader, meanwhile, said he wanted to be judged in office by his success in boosting the job opportunities and supply of affordable housing for young adults. Miliband, speaking in London, warned that Britain faced a "jilted generation" of young adults with fewer opportunities than their parents. He insisted: "We must reverse the sense of foreboding that people feel for their children and their future."

The Labour leader said: "David Cameron's benchmark for his government is simply deficit reduction. The benchmark I set for a future Labour government is much more than that. It is about improving the chances for the next generation." He called for a drive to find jobs for young people, improve conditions in the workplace, guarantee "genuine access" to university for aspiring students, halt the "inexorable rise in the average age of home ownership" and tackle climate change.

Mr Miliband said the overwhelming majority of young people were decent and wanted to do the best for their families and communities. "We owe it to them to paint a fairer picture of young people in our country and to celebrate what they do," he said. "But it is a two-way street. The promise of Britain is not just about the promise we make to them, but the promise they must make to themselves and our country to be good citizens."

People across the country carried on with their mundane lives, oblivious to the concerns of their elected stuntmen.

Let's put aside our sectarian differences, we have a world to win

At a special conference in July 1932 the Independent Labour Party voted to disaffiliate from the Labour Party. Aneurin Bevan described their decision as “pure but impotent”. True to form, its membership fell to less than a third of its level at the time of disaffiliation, quickly withering away into political obscurity.

This factionalism remains a persistent problem in the organised British Left.  We have a large number of small groups of activists, who shift backwards and forwards from split to fusion to split. This is extremely damaging for the Left as a whole.

This trend takes place within a wider story of the disintegration of the European Left. In Germany, social democrats split to the Left and remained organised in die Linke, future realignments within the SDP is still a possibility. In Italy, the Left has been comprehensively disarmed, institutionally and ideologically. In France, the PS has failed to recover as a national project from the disappointment of the Jospin years.

Judging from the past few decades, it’s clear that the consequences of this factionalism have been grave – societies have been plagued by all manner of preventable social ills – unemployment, stagnant wages, rising inequality, war, environmental degradation and a democratic deficit that has reached such sinister proportions that a significant proportion of the democratic world do not see the point in the vote.

I can only despair at the prospect of twenty more years under neo-liberal hegemony. There must be an alternative to this desperate state of affairs.

It has always been possible to unite the British Left for common goals such as fighting racists through Unite against Fascism, taking over the GLC and Tony Benn’s campaign for the Deputy leadership. It has been possible, and it still is possible.

Perhaps it is naïve to suggest that Left activists now put aside their various disagreements and embrace the spirit of unity and comradeship that must be the essence of any true left-winger’s aspirations. It is naïve but not quite as naïve as to think that we can stop this Con-Dem government’s destructive policies without co-ordinated action.

The terms of this unity should be based on rational principles, and I will offer some suggestions on which to premise any productive political action.

First, there will be no new mass workers' party. The arguments proclaiming the end of the Labour party as the party of the labour movement are not convincing but rather grounded on sectarian wishful thinking. See beyond the present faces. It is certainly possible that huge shifts in public opinion towards the fundamental issues could be achieved were the bulk of the Labour leadership, a large chunk of the PLP, the unions and activists moving together to campaign for radical socialist policies.

I believe this rallying point for the Left is the Labour Representation Committee, chaired by John McDonnell and affiliated to countless trade unions.

Second, the Labour Party’s almost exclusive reliance on the “white working class” is a great weakness. It’s true but trite to say that parties can only win when they represent a coalition of social forces large enough to defeat those in power. This is the reason why the trade unions set up the Labour Party in the first place. We now need a broad coalition which includes skilled and unskilled workers, the unemployed, women and ethnic minorities as well as the sexually oppressed in our society. This means us changing. I’m opposed to attempts to co-opt different movements just because we can get votes from them. The Labour Party must listen to what they are saying and then change itself.

Finally, the argument that we need to make is that we need to control the flow of capital and the control of the banks and finance houses. This means curbing the speculators in the City of London and an extension of public ownership into the financial sector. It shouldn’t be difficult to explain to people that a Labour Government intends to use the billion pounds a month that currently leaves the country to rebuild the economy and the welfare state. Indeed, everyone I have spoken to has responded overwhelmingly to such a suggestion.

This is just a brief outline of one strategy needed not only to win back those 5 million mainly working class votes that were lost as a result of New Labour’s neo-liberal policies, but also to create a radically different, more equal and humane society.

If we are to bring about this radical social change, then what we need is unity. The alternative is political impotency the price of which no-one on the Left should countenance if they are truly serious about what they believe to be right.

@cravenite

Dig trenches for Britain, Davis tells unemployed

Conservative MP David Davis has called for the government to use unemployed workers to build a nationwide fibre broadband network. Writing in the comfort zone provided by The Times paywall and not even picked up by the Daily Mail who would surely sponsor such a wheeze, Davis admits the government cannot afford to spend £25 billion on a nationwide fibre-to-the-premises (FTTP) network, and says the sum is "more than the ponderous, monopolistic companies in this sector are willing to risk".

However, Davis claims that the biggest cost of installing a fibre network is the physical labour of building the infrastructure - a task he claims could be undertaken by the unemployed. "Building a superfast rural broadband network is largely low-skill - digging trenches, laying pipes, filling them in," Davis writes. "Only a small fraction of the cost is high-tech materials. Why not use use the 2.4 million people who are either jobless or on welfare to build this infrastructure?" Why not just shoot them all now?

Davis claims that the government's current plans to encourage investment in a fibre network are insufficient. "At the moment, the Government intends to direct about £530 million from the BBC licence fee to enable BT to invest £5 billion in laying cable to about 60% of the population, mainly in urban areas," he writes. "This is not enough. There is already a digital divide between rural and urban Britain. There is a real risk that superfast broadband will be an exclusively urban luxury and that rural households and businesses will be left farther behind."

And we wouldn’t want anything resembling a chasm between rich and poor in this country, would we?

Localism Bill: Concern over '142 extra powers for Pickles'

The Government's flagship Localism Bill will help free "local government from the shackles of central government", a Minister told MPs today as the Bill came under renewed pressure for handing Communities Secretary Eric Pickles "more than 100 extra powers".

Junior Communities minister Andrew Stunell said amendments and new clauses to the legislation tabled by the Government were each designed to improve the effectiveness of the Bill. The Localism Bill aims to devolve greater powers to neighbourhoods and councils and give local communities more control over housing and planning decisions.

Speaking during the Bill's report stage in the Commons, Mr Stunell introduced a new clause refining one of the central elements - the general power of competence. He said: "This Government is committed to the radical decentralisation of power and control from Whitehall and Westminster to local government, back to local communities and individuals. We are pushing power back down to the lowest possible level. This Bill is about shaking up the balance of power and revitalising democracy.

“It will give power to councils, it will give power to communities, it will give power to voluntary groups and power to the people. Giving local authorities the power to take decisions that are right for their areas and giving to local people the power to implement those decisions. This Government trusts local authorities to know what's best for their areas, we trust local councils to know what they are doing and we are freeing up local government from the shackles of central government. The Localism Bill does just what it says on the label."

Shadow Minister for Communities and Local Government Barbara Keeley queried whether the proposed extra powers granted to the Secretary of State accorded with the spirit of the Bill. She said: "On new clause 12, clearly the Minister has been talking about the limits on power and we are still very concerned about the 142 extra powers for the Secretary of State in the Bill." Mr Stunell said a local authority could choose whether or not it adopted a code of conduct for its members, but it must be under a duty to publicise whether it had revised or abolished it.

Social care laws face sweeping reform

Government promises reform of laws covering support for older and disabled people and carers after Law Commission report, writes David Brindle in the Guardian

The government is promising "the most significant single reform of social care law for sixty years" after the Law Commission published its final proposals for modernisation and rationalisation of legislation governing care and support for older and disabled people, those with mental health problems and carers. Charities and user groups broadly welcomed the proposals as a singular opportunity to sort out what one called the "dog's breakfast" of statutes and guidance dating back to 1948 and appearing incomprehensible to most non-lawyers.

In addition to simplifying more than forty existing statutes and thousands of pages of guidance, the Law Commission's plans for England and Wales would entitle carers to an assessment of their support needs irrespective of how intensively they provide care, place a duty on councils to investigate abuse and neglect of adults, allow direct payments to be used to fund residential care and improve "portability" of entitlement to care and support services if people move from one council area to another.

Frances Patterson QC, the public law commissioner who led the three-year project to review existing law, said: "Our recommendations will bring much-needed clarity and accessibility to this important area of the law and have a major, beneficial impact on the lives of many of our most vulnerable citizens."

The government has indicated it will incorporate the commission's proposals in a care and support white paper, expected in December, together with the outcome of the Dilnot review of the funding of long-term care. Legislation could follow next year. Paul Burstow, the care services minister, said the Law Commission's final report provided "a strong foundation" for the most significant reform of social care law for sixty years, suggesting the government might not adopt the seventy-six recommendations in their entirety.

Incompetence without a conscience: the Coalition - one year on

It has been one year since the Tories and the Lib Dems thrashed out a 'coalition agreement' with each other, both of them so desperate for power that they would ignore the swathes of Lib Dem votes that had been accrued from people just as desperate to keep the Tories out of power. Most of those people had witnessed the Thatcher years and would do anything within the law to make sure their kids never had to go through that experience. A large amount of Lib Dem votes was gleaned from students hoping for no increase in tuition fees, as pledged by Lib Dem MPs up and down the land. How hundreds of thousands of people would live to regret that vote.

So what have the Lib Dems achieved while they've been under Cameron's over-sized, steel toe-capped jackboot? A replacement for Trident in this parliament, cutting inheritance tax for the wealthiest, re-negotiating fundamental elements of the EU's Lisbon treaty, building more prisons and replacing the Human Rights Act. No, but what have they achieved? In terms of the everyday lives of everyday people - alarm clock Britain, as Clegg calls them. Well, he's come up with a new term for them - alarm clock Britain. That's a start. And it's more marketable than 'mugs'.

By all accounts (Clegg's at least), the Lib Dems have been "punching above their weight" in terms of their contribution to the coalition's policy agenda. They're particularly proud of their support for pensioners, the low paid, nursery education and apprenticeships but they reckon they must "do a better job" of trumpeting their achievements. So, despite the arrangement with the Tories being "stable and durable", it is more a coalition of "necessity not conviction".  Apparently, the two parties are going to show their separate identities more overtly in future - the Lib Dems, for their part, are going to be more "muscular" in government [oh, how we laughed] and their influence will be more "visible", no mean feat when you're ignored more often than Fred Miliband.

Nick Clegg would even go on to say: "There is a reason neither of the two bigger parties won last May - neither of them were really trusted to deliver both a strong, dynamic economy and a fair society. We can be trusted on both counts. I am confident that showing we can combine economic soundness with social justice - competence with a conscience - will make us an even more formidable political force in the future."

I bet Fred's quaking in his slippers.

The Hardest Hit march, rally and lobby of Parliament, 11 May 2011

Thousands of disabled people and their families and supporters will converge on Westminster tomorrow to protest against government cuts and their impact on key benefits such as the disability living allowance and the employment and support allowance. Afterwards they will lobby MPs as the welfare reform bill reaches a critical stage in the House of Commons.

Wednesday's protest, dubbed the Hardest Hit march, is being coordinated by hundreds of disabled people's organisations and charities and groups including Scope, Leonard Cheshire Disability, Mencap, the RNIB and Sense. Organisers say that disabled people will be hit disproportionately hard by the cuts, which, they estimate, could result in families losing £9bn of support over the next four years.

Jaspal Dhani, chief executive of the United Kingdom Disabled People's Council, said the cuts would have an adverse effect on disabled people's rights and their ability to live independently. "We believe that disabled people stand to lose most from these cuts," he said. "We hope to show both the government and the community at large just how fearful disabled people are about the impact the cuts will have. It's about taking direct action because it seems government ministers are simply not listening."

Dhani said the cuts would result in disabled people being institutionalised and treated unfairly as local authorities try to save money by cutting funding to the bodies that support them. Rebecca Rennison, co-chair of the Disability Benefits Consortium's policy group, agreed that disabled people were likely to feel the cuts far more keenly than the rest of the population.

"They're experiencing the same cuts as everyone else and then experiencing additional ones, so it's cuts on top of cuts," she said. "The disability living allowance (DLA) is vital to people's independence. They are taking away the mobility component that pays for things like taxis and allows people to get out of their homes. The impact will be devastating and people are saying enough's enough. That's why people from all over the country are coming to London to make their views known."

The rally will begin on Victoria Embankment on Wednesday morning and move to Westminster. Protesters will then lobby MPs in Westminster Hall and Methodist Central Hall between 13.30 and 17.30.

The Guardian

They’ve only gone and voted me in again!

Greens emerge as largest party in Brighton and Hove

Party wins 23 council seats, a gain of 10, leaving Greens just short of having an overall majority, writes Ben Quinn in the Guardian

The Greens have emerged as the largest party on Brighton and Hove city council after local election gains underlined its importance as a beach-head for the Greens' broader national ambitions. Just over a year after Caroline Lucas made history by becoming the Greens' first MP, the party built on her success by winning 23 council seats in Brighton, a gain of 10, leaving it just short of an overall majority.

Lucas, who leads the party in England and Wales, said: "This is a fantastic result. I am delighted that the voters of Brighton and Hove have once again made history, by voting in the Greens as the largest party on the council. The fact that we held all our seats and gained 10 – with a total of 23 – shows more than ever the scale of Green support in the city. We have offered people a positive and progressive alternative to the older political parties, and they have welcomed it.

"Our councillors are determined to get the best possible deal for Brighton and Hove in these difficult times. And with all the results in, now is the moment for Greens to reach out to the many different groups – community organisations, businesses, unions and others – and local residents so that together, we can find the best solutions for this great city."

The Greens won 33% of the vote and displaced the Tories as the largest party on the council – the first time a local council in the UK has elected the Greens as the largest party. The Labour Party won 13 seats (32%), the Conservatives 18 (29%), and the Liberal Democrats lost their only seat after the party limped in with 5% of the vote.

David Cameron: a lucky man, a blessed career and now a mandate to wreak havoc on the country

David Cameron ordered Tory cabinet ministers to avoid signs of triumphalism after the prime minister led his party to a strong performance in local elections in England and played a decisive role in winning the AV referendum. No 10 sent a message to ministers to avoid gloating as the Conservatives sought to repair relations with the Liberal Democrats, who are enraged by the way the No to AV campaign depicted Nick Clegg as untrustworthy.

Behind the scenes, Tories were ecstatic. One ministerial source said: "Cameron is lord of all he surveys. He finally got a grip of the referendum campaign and ended all the muttering on the Tory right." The prime minister adopted a different tone as he went out of his way to congratulate the Lib Dems for their work in the coalition when he paid an early morning visit to Tory HQ before heading to Birmingham for his latest meeting in the government's NHS "listening exercise".

He said: "I am absolutely committed to make this coalition government, which I believe is good for Britain, work for the full five years of this term. It is then that I believe the coalition and its parties will be judged by the electorate. But I would pay tribute to the work that Liberal Democrats have done, and are doing, in this coalition and will go on doing, because we are absolutely committed to make sure it works hard for the people of Britain."

The Tory party was keen to point out Labour's poor performance in Scotland and a weaker than expected showing in England, but silent on the Lib Dem performance. They declined to mention 11 gains on North Norfolk council, where the Lib Dems had 12 losses. This will be a blow to Norman Lamb, Clegg's senior parliamentary adviser, who used Lib Dem success there to capture a safe parliamentary seat from the Tories in 2001.

This lot want you to say NO to AV

    For God’s sake, do the decent thing
SAY YES TO AV!

Helping more disabled people get into politics

A new scheme aims to encourage more disabled people into politics and develop a cross-party network of ambassadors, writes Mark Gould in the the Guardian

If the House of Commons were truly reflective of the people it represents, at least 65 would be disabled. But, as the country prepares to vote in the local elections tomorrow, it is unlikely that many disabled people will be among those elected. While there are 10 million people registered disabled in the UK, there are no formal figures on the number of disabled election candidates; those standing for local or national office are not obliged to disclose such information.

The little research that does exist includes work by the University of Plymouth's elections centre. It conducted random surveys in 2008 and 2009 with more than 1,000 local election candidates. In 2008, when asked what best described their situation, 2.8% of candidates stated they were permanently sick or disabled. In 2009, the figure was 1.3%.

Given the prejudice and stigma experienced by disabled people, it is easy to imagine how disability might be regarded as a vote loser, or activists might be put off supporting disabled candidates who need extra support. But the government hopes to encourage more disabled people into local and national politics, and to improve public attitudes to disability through a new training and development scheme.

The Access to Elected Office for Disabled People project includes plans for a £1m fund to help disabled politicians meet costs. Political parties will be asked to improve their internal disability policies and to work with the umbrella organisation, the Local Government Association, and disabled organisations to develop a cross-party network of disabled councillors and MPs, who would become ambassadors and role models for aspiring candidates. Consultation on the scheme ends this month and it should start later this year.

David Blunkett, blind since birth, and perhaps the UK's most well-known disabled politician, became a councillor in Sheffield 41 years ago. He says technological advances and legislation have helped to drive equality, and that he was never aware of other politicians or the public feeling that as a blind person he was not up to the job.

"Obstacles arise out of fear or ignorance of disability, people not knowing what is possible or how best to help," he says, "with occasional paternalistic blips where individuals have been disquieted by the thought that someone with a major challenge could work not just on equal terms, but succeed in the same professional sphere that they are in. Much of this is covert rather than overt."

Rosemary Gilligan, elected to Hertsmere borough council, in 2002, has severe arthritis, the chronic fatigue syndrome myalgic encephalopathy (ME), and uses crutches. She benefited from a one-year leadership programme run by the disability charity Radar. Gilligan, a former mayor at the Conservative-run council, says people with physical and learning difficulties can get involved in politics.

"On the leadership programme you meet people with learning disabilities, people who are deaf or blind," she says, "but you start talking to them and you get to know, with a bit of help and technology, they can get over them." Gilligan cites the example of a councillor in Stevenage with severe mobility problems who used telephone canvassing during the last elections.

Wheelchair-using peer Lady Jane Campbell has spinal muscular atrophy and needs help with most tasks. She wants imaginative ideas for overcoming problems. "Many disabled people would want to get out on the street and knock on doors and canvass but, for some, like me, it would be impossible. It might be that we find other ways of engaging the public."

Campbell has already successfully challenged parliament to find one solution: "I am physically unable to make long speeches so I asked if another lord could speak for me," she explains. "They initially said, 'It wouldn't be your speech.' I said that was nonsense, I wrote the speech. They finally agreed. If you can change hundreds of years of tradition you can do anything, and we do need to change to include disabled people because it's not a democracy if we don't."

Mark Gould, the Guardian

Labour loses Scottish campaign battle to SNP

Gordon Brown was hemmed in between the soft fruit and the yoghurt at a supermarket in Livingston. The former prime minister crouched down between two small children while their mother lined them all up in front of her camera phone. "C'mon Gordon," she shouted at him, "You are supposed to smile you know." Mr Brown put on a forced grin but it was clear he was finding it hard to look chirpy. He was not alone. Such has been the atmosphere of desperation and near panic in Labour ranks in Scotland that the blaming and backbiting over this election campaign has already started – and polling day is still 24 hours away.

 
The reason is simple. Labour in Scotland had a solid 10-point lead over the SNP just six months ago. Although its lead had dropped to single figures by the start of the campaign in March, the Labour leaders were still confident of winning. But over the course of the campaign that advantage has not just vanished, it has been turned into such a thumping SNP lead that the latest poll published last night by TNS-BMRB for Scottish Television forecast abject humiliation for Labour tomorrow.

That poll gave the SNP a whopping 18-point lead on the constituency vote and a 13-point lead on the list vote. This was not a one-off, though. It was merely the latest in a series of polls creating "clear tartan water" between the Nationalists and their rivals – according to Alex Salmond. The SNP's 2007 Scottish Parliament victory (by a single seat) was seen by many observers as a blip, an aberration, something which would be righted this year. But if Labour loses again tomorrow and, more importantly, if Labour loses by a substantial margin, then it will be clear that the ground has shifted in Scottish politics, perhaps forever.

Labour strategists acknowledge privately that chief among their problems has been the campaign message. Labour went into the election with a defiant anti-Tory theme: the Conservatives are back in charge at Westminster, so vote Labour to stand up for Scotland against Tory cuts. It was designed to press all those old Scottish working-class buttons about the Tories and invoke bitter memories of Thatcherism. But Labour's message was so ineffectual that the party had to switch tack with just two weeks to go. In a hasty re-launch – devised in frantic calls to concerned party bosses in London – Labour stopped attacking the Tories and turned instead on the SNP. The message became a straightforward if negative warning about the dangers of Scottish independence.

Tax property, not people, for a fairer society

Levies on land values do not depress or distort wealth creation and are easy to assess, cheap to collect and hard to avoid, says Phillip Inman in the Guardian

Amid all the talk of rebalancing the economy, there is little mention of the most powerful lever the government could pull to generate growth, which involves a switch from taxing income to taxing wealth. It is a subject that tends to get little coverage, mainly because its supporters are considered on the fringes of the political spectrum.

Ultra-lefties support wealth taxes for obvious reasons. Ultra-capitalists support them because they understand that allowing the rich to ring-fence much of the nation's assets and protect the mechanisms that allow values to increase without any serious government interference robs their children, and everyone else's, of any incentive to work harder.

And now it is not just the aristocrats who accumulate serious wealth but also increasing numbers of middle income babyboomers – senior teachers, BT engineers, BA airline pilots and local council middle managers. With their million pound homes and million pound pensions, the problem is even bigger. For an ultra-capitalist, the rapid accumulation of wealth over the last 15 years, which in property terms amounts to about £2.5 trillion, is making us fat and lazy. Only a wealth tax can sort it out.

Yet the debate has broadened in recent years with more mainstream groups taking up the cudgels. The OECD, the rich nation's thinktank, has joined the ranks of supporters. Liberal Democrats Chris Huhne and Vince Cable, in their pre-coalition careers, also voiced some sympathy. Andy Burnham adopted the scheme in his pitch for the Labour leadership. Many mainstream economists have also argued the case.

UK ranks behind Slovenia in childhood wellbeing

Six out of 1,000 British children will die before their fifth birthday and only four in five attend pre-school, says Save the Children

Children in the UK are worse off than those in Slovenia, Estonia and Greece, according to Save the Children. The charity today ranked the UK 23rd out of 43 "more developed" countries for child wellbeing in its annual State of the World's Mothers report, and said the result was a "national embarrassment".

The report ranked children's wellbeing according to three main factors: pre-primary enrolment, secondary school enrolment and under-five mortality rate. The charity said it was "particularly concerned" that just 81% of children in the UK were enrolled in pre-primary education. Justin Forsyth, chief executive of Save the Children, said: "We know that pre-school nursery or playgroup access helps all children, but especially the poorest. It is a national embarrassment that the UK lags so far behind other countries of a similar size and wealth."

Mr Forsyth criticised government plans to cut support for childcare costs, which he said would hurt the poorest children even further. "By cutting childcare support, the government is making it harder for low-income parents to return to work but, just as important, more of our poorest children are likely to miss out on pre-school education, a key to later educational achievement," he said.

The charity's report ranked Sweden as the best place for a child's wellbeing, with Italy and Japan in joint second place. Somalia is the worst place on the planet for children's wellbeing. The UK's under-five child mortality rate – at six per 1,000 live births – was the joint 23rd lowest score out of the 43 countries. The lowest rates were three per 1,000. And it found that only 81% of children under five were enrolled in pre-school education. In secondary schools, 99% of children were enrolled.