Fleshing out the policies

Throughout the coming weeks, we want to highlight in more detail the policies on which I'm campaigning. We'll be inviting guest writers and policy advisers who are experts in each policy field to explain the background to the particular issues that we're dealing with and to set out the policy proposals in more detail. We want to draw on the expertise of policy analysts and the organisations campaigning on each policy.

We start with what some see as a contentious issue, the Trade Union Freedom Bill, explaining what it will contain, why it's necessary, and what its purposes are. John Hendy, Chair of the Institute of Employment Rights has written an invaluable briefing on this proposed Bill which you can read here.

As we continue to publish these useful policy briefings, I'd welcome your thoughts on the issues that they raise.

Challenging Brown Over Public Sector Pay

Today I have written to Gordon Brown to warn him of dire political consequences if the Government follows through on its threat to impose a pay cut on over a million NHS workers.

In their evidence to the Pay Review Body that sets NHS staff pay, the Government have sought to impose an increase of just 1.5%. NHS staff unions have rightly pointed out that with inflation pushing on towards 4% the Government's position represents a significant pay cut for health care staff.

This is madness. The Government seems to have launched itself on an electoral suicide mission. We appear to be sleepwalking into a winter and spring of discontent with possible industrial action being provoked right across the public sector early in the New Year, just before the local, Scottish and Welsh elections.

Polls this week show that Labour's rating is at its lowest in over 20 years. They also show that the public and NHS staff are furious with the Government's cuts and privatisation policies which are ripping through our health care and other essential public services.

Imposing a pay cut on health care workers and across the public sector next year will fuel the anger amongst NHS staff and other public servants who already feel betrayed by the Government. Telling them that they either accept a pay cut or risk more redundancies and service cuts smacks of bullying to me and will do nothing but alienate hundreds of thousands of core Labour supporters.

My letter to Gordon Brown reads as follows:

Dear Gordon,

I am writing to express my concern regarding the Government’s proposal of a pay award of just 1.5% across the public sector and with particular regard to workers in the NHS and civil service. With inflation nearing 4% (as set out in evidence given to the Pay Review Body), this can only be construed as a pay cut for millions of workers, adding fuel to the growing concern of NHS Staff Unions, civil servants, public sector workers and the general public over this government’s handling of public services.

As I am sure you will agree, public sector workers have very demanding jobs and work hard to provide high quality public services. The imposition of such a pay cut will have a highly detrimental effect on the morale of these dedicated public servants and instead of rewarding them for their professionalism and expertise undermines their work, achievement and potential. Combined with the Government’s ongoing plans to introduce the private sector into the NHS and other public services, such a policy critically threatens the quality of health and public services we are able to provide.

Additionally, in a period when, as I am sure you are only too well aware, it is essential that the Government reconnects with our core supporters, the provision of publicly funded and efficient public services is a key priority for our members, supporters and the electorate in general. The polls this week suggest that the party’s rating is at its lowest level in over 20 years. This programme of public sector cuts is already causing considerable anger throughout the movement and can only alienate hundreds of thousands more of our natural supporters.

Many now fear that the Government seems to have launched itself on an electoral suicide mission in advance of the local, Scottish and Welsh elections. The Government appears to be sleepwalking into a spring of discontent with possible industrial action being provoked across the public sector early in the New Year. I urgently appeal to you to fully reconsider these plans before any further resentment is allowed to grow, and the party and Government are seriously damaged as a result.

Yours sincerely

John McDonnell MP
Member of Parliament for Hayes and Harlington

A Change in the Government's Strategy in Iraq will only come with a Change of Leader.

Whilst Iraq descends day by day into deepening bloody chaos, the Prime Minister and Government appear to be looking on frozen by the enormity of the tragic consequences of their error of judgement in supporting the US invasion.

Nobody in Government, including Blair and Brown, seems to have a clue what to do next.

Bizarrely the Bush regime is now publicly comparing the situation in Iraq with Vietnam.

Only last week Blair rejected the early withdrawal of British troops, arguing that Britain will not "cut and run." Within less than a week this has now changed to a withdrawal in possibly 12 months.

Apparently without even informing the Blair government Bush is preparing for the withdrawal of US troops at least to base. The aim of the Bush regime is to minimise US losses whilst maintaining sufficient presence to protect the flow of oil into US oil company coffers.

Isn't it time that the Prime Minister admits that the decision to support the US invasion of Iraq was the greatest political misjudgement since the second world war?

There are rumours leaking out that supporters of the Chancellor of the Exchequer are using the tragic, disaster of Iraq as a lever to speed the Prime Minister's retirement. The argument being deployed is that a change of strategy on Iraq requires a change of leader.

Many agree with this assessment. However many will also judge that changing to someone who voted for and actively supported the dreadful mistake of invading Iraq is both futile and irrational.

Surely the changes that are needed are a change in policy from war to peace and a change in leader from someone who failed our party and our country by supporting this misguided war to someone who had the judgement and principle not to.

Extradition by Order of the USA

The Police and Justice Bill returns to the House of Commons today from the House of Lords. The Lords have amended the bill on a number of issues. One of the most important amendments is to insist that if a person is to be extradited to a foreign country a British court must have the right to decide whether it is in the interests of justice that the extradition goes ahead.

This sounds a reasonable enough safeguard given that it is the primary duty of any state to protect its citizens. Not for New Labour though. John Reid is refusing to budge on this question and will demand that Labour MPs vote to overturn the Lords' amendment.

An extraordinary alliance has been formed to lobby Parliament to maintain the safeguards inserted into the bill by the Lords. The alliance includes Liberty, Justice, the CBI and the Institute of Directors.

The alliance is based upon the fear of the wide reach of the Government's extradition proposals which though designed to counter terrorism is also drawing in businesspeople accused of any felony in the US or with even the vaguest connection with the US.

With the emergence of global business communications it is often the case that more than one state will have jurisdiction over an alleged crime. The effect of the Government's proposals is that a person can be plucked from their home country and transported abroad to be tried and face a long period in custody before the case comes to court even if the British authorities do not believe that there are grounds for a prosecution.

The Lords' amendment to the bill allows a British court to determine whether the trial in the state requesting extradition would be in the interests of justice. This sort of condition is common in most extradition treaties.

New Labour ministers and whips have been touring the Commons arguing that there is nothing controversial in the bill and that the Government is simply tidyng up the law.

Far from it, this bill in fact threatens a fundamental principle of British justice that a British citizen can look to a British court to protect his/her rights.

Surely it is for British courts to determine the guilt or innocence of a British citizen or failing this whether there are sufficient grounds for a British citizen to be held to account in a foreign court.

It is hardly surprising that many view this as an abject failure of New Labour to protect British citizens and dancing once again to the tune of the Bush regime.