I’ve signed up to the Royal British Legion’s ‘Do Your Bit’ campaign, including the Legion’s general election pledge.

I fully support the Legion’s campaign and steps the Government has taken to address some of the key areas of concern, including the review headed by Admiral the Lord Boyce on the Armed Forces Compensation scheme and the aspiration to reduce the number of cases where servicemen and women are asked to go beyond the harmony guidelines (the frequency at which we ask individuals to deploy).

Our servicemen and women deserve high-quality, comfortable healthcare support. I’m pleased therefore to learn of improved welfare support for casualties in hospitals and the substantial investment in facilities at the Headley Court rehabilitation centre. Recent additions include new 58-bed staff & patient accommodation block and a new Cognitive and Mental Health Unit. We now have six regional community-based mental health pilot schemes operating in collaboration with the NHS, on top of 15 regional rehabilitation centres. We have also extended our mental health assessment programme at St Thomas’s Hospital.

Last year the Government published the Service Personnel Command Paper, which the Royal British Legion welcomed. Among the 40 commitments in the paper are steps to ensure that:

• Service dependents can retain their place on an NHS waiting list when they move to a new area.
• Injured personnel can access grants of up to £30,000 to adapt their homes, without their compensation payments being means-tested.
• Seriously injured personnel are entitled to privileged access to affordable housing schemes in England.
• Service personnel in England and Wales can claim a local connection in housing applications like any other applicants – we hope Scotland will follow suit this year.
• Priority status is given to service personnel in affordable housing schemes, including an ability to apply 12 months after discharge.

The key objectives of the Legion’s campaign can be found here.

Share on Facebook

My heart goes out to Jacqui Janes for the loss she has suffered. She is a mother grieving the death of her son, a brave young soldier who died in the service of his country. We must all have faith that Guardsman Jamie Janes’ sacrifice was made in the noble cause of bringing peace and security to a conflict-torn nation, and in doing so securing the streets of Britain too.

But The Sun’s manipulation of Jacqui Janes, who is understandably raw with grief, is as outrageous and cynical as it is grubby and vindictive. I agree with former Sun political editor, George Pascoe-Watson, who asserted on BBC Radio 5 Live this morning that Gordon Brown “cares passionately about the care of our troops.” The Prime Minister’s note of condolence was heartfelt, its errors demonstration of its authenticity. Let us not forget that Gordon Brown’s sight is extremely limited, making a seemingly straightforward task such as handwriting a letter more difficult than for most. And of course the letter was not ‘proofed’ by an aide. This was a personal communication from the Prime Minister to a fallen soldier’s family; a private expression of condolence, which was sealed by Gordon Brown as the ink dried on his signature.

It is clear that The Sun will stop at nothing to bring down this Labour government, but the newspaper is increasingly engaged in a more sinister, personal campaign directed against Gordon Brown himself. If Rupert Murdoch, as stated on Sky News Australia, does regard Gordon Brown as a friend, and if it’s true The Sun’s editor does not take directions from the media mogul, perhaps it’s time for Murdoch to put a call into Wapping and tell Dominic Mohan (editor of The Sun) to lay off the personal vitriol and stick to real politics.

Despite being grubby journalism, The Sun runs the risk of outraging the British sense of fair play and decency, with public opinion turning critical of its personal vendetta against Gordon Brown.

Share on Facebook

Born in Scotland of a Scottish mother and Irish father, raised in northern England and now living in the south of England, I feel a sense of ‘Britishness’ that often eludes others. That’s why I read with horror in this morning’s Guardian the analysis of how Cameron’s pandering to the Tory euro-extremist right is threatening the Union. I’ve been of the view for a long time that Labour is now the ‘One Nation’ party; active and competitive across Britain. Labour continues to defend a Union strengthened by devolution to the nations and regions of our country.

As the Conservatives meet in Manchester today, David Cameron’s dithering over his policy on a Lisbon Treaty referendum has opened up old wounds. Not content with banishing Britain to the fringes of Europe through coalition with extremists in the European parliament, Cameron’s lack of political judgment has already effected a downgrading of links between the Tories and their counterparts in Paris and Berlin. It was with a delicious schadenfreude that I watched William Hague protest that he would lobby the French and Germans to prevent Tony Blair becoming the first permanent President of the European Council, just 24 hours after Angela Merkel’s ruling CDU in Germany had announced that links with the Conservatives were to be mothballed.

But it is the impact of Cameron’s Europe policy on the United Kingdom that worries me most. If London is banished to the margins of EU decision-making, the SNP will take advantage to push a renewed case for a Scotland ‘independent in Europe.’ As Ireland and Iceland have shown, in times of difficulty small nations find solace and security under the EU’s wing. And George’s Osborne’s planned spending cuts will provide fertile campaign ground for the SNP to assert that London is not governing in Scotland’s interests. The Scottish are instinctively more pro-European than their cousins south of the border and no doubt Alex Salmond will take advantage of an irrelevant Tory government in London to drive a dagger through the heart of the Union. Of questionable quality as first minister, Salmond has to be respected as a consummate political tactician. As Jackie Ashley points out, Salmond’s call for a referendum will be remade on 30 November, St Andrew’s Day, when he’ll push for a vote in the spring or autumn of 2010, just as news of a Tory government’s public spending cuts would be causing maximum outrage.

Many commentators are already suspicious of a Faustian pact in the offing between the SNP executive in Edinburgh and a potential Tory administration in London. It’s doubtful the Tories will ever recover their post-war electoral position in Scotland and independence would make it difficult for Labour to form a majority at Westminster without a left-wing coalition. Electoral expediency may gift Cameron a blind eye to SNP manoeuvrings. It would be a great irony indeed if David Cameron – leader of the Conservative and Unionist Party – proved to be the last prime minister of the United Kingdom.

This article has also been published on Progress Online

Share on Facebook

Share on Facebook

I’ve just left the conference hall in Brighton after watching Gordon Brown’s keynote speech to the Labour Party. Surpassing my expectations, particularly after Lord Mandelson’s electrifying speech yesterday, I was struck by the clear message that the PM communicated: our country faces the biggest choice for a generation – a choice between a change that benefits all of us, or a change that benefits the privileged few.

The PM’s bold address reasserted Labour’s fight and aspiration to be the party of ambitious change for the many and not the few:

– Change for a new society with new measures to tackle anti-social behaviour and ensure our public services meet new challenges – expanding free childcare for two year olds, a new offer on social care for older people, and additional funding to local authorities to help keep people in their homes.

- Change for a new economy with tough new rules for bankers and investing for growth, with a new legal obligation for fiscal responsibility.

- And change for a new politics so we ensure that MPs guilty of gross financial misconduct are recalled and we modernise our democracy with a new voting system.

Given my particular interest in reconnecting Britons with Westminster through electoral reform, I was delighted to hear the Gordon announce a commitment to a referendum on the ‘alternative vote’ system in the next parliament.

And the Prime Minister challenged all of us to not just listen to what Labour’s opponents say, but to demand what they would do. If, like me, you’ve been feeling the pinch recently then just ask the next Tory canvasser or candidate you see: “if you care about me, why is your first priority to give a £200,000 tax cut to each of the 3,000 wealthiest estates?’

Labour is on the side of the British people on the fundamental choices our country faces in the years ahead. Conference signalled a fight back – a fight back not just against the Tories, but a fight back for Britain to energise our collective journey of progress.

Gordon Brown’s speech to Labour Party Conference on Tuesday, 29 September 2009 can be viewed here.

Share on Facebook

Progress has today launched their campaign for primaries to select future Labour parliamentary and mayoral candidates. I’m in favour of the principle of holding primaries. The success of the Tory trial in Totnes, where 24% of the electorate participated in the country’s first open primary, demonstrates public appetite for a direct say in candidate selections. I do, however, have concerns about the cost of holding primaries. The Totnes ballot is reported to have cost the Conservative Party over £40,000. However, assuming costs could be minimised, I’m beginning to be convinced that the benefits of increased voter engagement are worth the additional cost.

A lot of commentators are resisting a move towards primaries as a step in undermining the traditional structure of political parties, where candidate selection is a privilege reserved for members. I have some sympathy with this view, as selecting a candidate is often the most important – and motivating – duty for activists who otherwise spend their time trudging the streets to varying degrees of thanklessness. There is a place for local parties in primaries, however; either shortlisting or post-selection ‘endorsement’ should remain with party members.

Check out Progress’ campaign here.

Will Straw has written a pamphlet for Progress, which makes the case for primaries here

And Luciana Berger argues the case against primaries on her blog.

Share on Facebook

I was very surprised to be alerted yesterday to an article in the Independent which features me on a list of six potential future Prime Ministers. Definitely a bit previous, but it’s nice to be acknowledged as “hard working and committed.” And, of course, it made my mum’s day…

You can read a scanned copy of the article here

Share on Facebook