Jess Phillips is still the go to woman for how Labour may exploit Tory tax embarrassment

Standard

There is the content for a hard hitting Labour Party Political Broadcast in this piece, In the Name of the Father, the Son and the Spirit of the Law!

Why is Labour’s leadership, especially Seamus Milne, incapable of putting the point over in the manner of a Jess Phillips?

Too middle class?

Too fond of calling tax fraud, tax evasion?

Too out of touch with the concerns and prejudices of average voters?

Too distracted by thoughts of Ikea kitchens when planning a Party Political Broadcast?

Tax being the price we pay to live in a civilised society is a nice homily, but most of us, most of the time, want to live in one at the cheapest possible price. We are only human, after all.

However, we also resent people benefiting at our expense. Tell us that, if others, like Cameron, paid more tax then we could pay less then you will get our attention!

Tell us that the smartly dressed guy in the expensive suit, next to us in the queue at A&E, pays next to no tax and that we are paying for his treatment then you will get our attention!

Appealing to people’s self interest, to get their attention, may be distasteful to some now in the Labour Party, but it is a way of starting conversations that will result in winning votes. It is, in part, why the Tory Party has been in power for much of the last 300 years or so.

Incidentally, I do say, could pay less …

Get the voters’ attention and we might persuade them to forego the temptations of a tax cut in favour of an increase in public spending.

Update from Jess Phillips, Labour MP for Birmingham Yardley

If I Were King of the Forest – The Tale of a Cowardly Lion

The past another country, time for #Labour, & not just that bit which idolises #Corbyn, to move on …

Standard

“To fend off a Brazilian rival, Tata had to pay a 70% premium over the stock price.  This was hefty for a company already in financial trouble with a large debt burden.  And Tata paid only $4bn (£2.8bn) of the estimated $14bn final price out of its own funds – the rest was borrowed, mainly from Indian public sector banks.”

“Why were taxpayer-funded banks so willing to lend to a big conglomerate to buy up an overpriced European company, even as they denied loans to Indian farmers and small-scale producers?  The sense of reversal of colonial roles might well have played a role.  The deal was lauded by politicians as a sign that Indian industry had come of age as a global player, and so prudent considerations were simply cast aside.

Repayment of those loans was supposed to be made out of the profits of Tata Steel Europe.  But those profits never came.”

 Tata tried to turn the tables on Britain.  It failed

 “In 2014 the UK imported 687,000 tonnes of steel from China, up from 303,000 tonnes in 2013.

It is true that the UK’s steel imports from the rest of the EU are much higher than this, they were 4.7 million tonnes in 2014, but crucially China is selling its steel at much lower prices.

Steel imports into the UK from the rest of the EU cost on average 897 euros a tonne in 2014, while Chinese steel imports were just 583 euros a tonne, says the EU’s statistics agency, Eurostat.  This has led to accusations that China is selling at unfairly low prices.”

 Britain’s steel industry: What’s going wrong?

 “Notably, in Tata Steel’s 2014/15 annual report, UK energy costs are not mentioned.  Instead, its focus is on high pension liabilities, the strong pound and weak domestic demand.”

 Factcheck: The steel crisis and UK electricity prices

Tata “has taken more than £700m in free carbon allowances and offsets, according to analysis of emissions trading scheme data.”

Tata Steel benefited from EU climate policies, studies show

“Ten” Tata “staff including two executives have been suspended after an internal audit uncovered allegedly falsified quality certificates, prompting criminal inquiry.”

” “Right now the problem is that the English (?) facilities are underinvested [and] overmanned,” Tata was quoted as saying by the Financial Times.

He said a potential buyer at Port Talbot would need to “cut back on the size and the scale of the operations and make them profitable”.  This would be “extremely challenging” but not impossible.”

Tata Steel crisis deepens with senior staff suspended amid SFO probe

As for the business rates, it looks like Tata has a lot of underutilised space at places like Port Talbot.  Land that might be redeveloped, if one were in it for the long haul:

“Tata Steel has rightly decided to put a stop to investing in these loss-making assets, as structural issues such as high labour, energy and regulatory costs make them unviable even over the longer term”.

Tata Steel: potential Port Talbot bidder says he is yet to decide on offer

Green Steel is an Opportunity not a Threat

I like the cut of Sanjeev Gupta’s jib, but I fear some of the purists may be uncomfortable with the switch to green steel:

“He was doubtful about Gupta’s proposal to scrap Port Talbot’s blast furnace in favour of arc furnaces to recycle scrap steel.  He said the blast furnace was technologically advanced and its energy could be reused for other purposes.”

Port Talbot MP says lower Tata losses improve chance of deal

“The Labour MP Stephen Kinnock, whose constituency covers Port Talbot, welcomed Gupta’s interest but questioned the credibility of his plan. Kinnock told the BBC’s Today programme that the blast furnaces at Port Talbot are technologically advanced and replacing them would lead to job losses.”

Tata Steel: potential Port Talbot bidder says he is yet to decide on offer

“Gupta has put forward a plan to revitalise Port Talbot.  This involves converting its blast furnaces into electric arc furnaces that use scrap steel.  However, this would lower production capacity and the government and unions are keen to preserve the blast furnaces.”

Who might rescue Port Talbot?

Alex Salmond, never one to miss an opportunity to polish up the green credentials of the SNP, recently highlighted the green steel aspect of their rescue operation.

One might be drawn to the conclusion, from the above quotes, that Stephen Kinnock finds the idea of recycling steel in some way unmanly in contrast with smelting steel.  A hark back to the days when men were men and drank many pints of beer a day to stay hydrated whilst working in the presence of fiery furnaces.

Labour’s, understandable, response to the problems of the steel industry, has harked back to the party’s past.  Compare and contrast with the party leadership’s relatively lacklustre reaction to the impact of the UK Government’s changes in support for renewable energy.  Changes that endangered at least as many jobs in the renewable energy sector as are currently under threat in the steel industry.

The renewable energy sector is a growing part of the UK economy and it consumes steel products.  However, steel is currently only ever going to maintain its current contribution to the UK economy.  Whereas promoting energy efficiency, reducing energy usage and switching to greater generation of energy from renewable sources promise so much more (and more business for the steel industry):

  • Promoting energy efficiency and reducing energy usage cuts energy bills for individuals and businesses whilst also creating jobs
  • Promoting energy efficiency, reducing energy usage and switching to greater generation of energy from renewable sources increases energy security, leaving us less at the mercy of Johnny Foreigner, whether Canadian or Saudi Arabian, as we reduce energy imports and in doing so create jobs
  • Investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy will create a home market for companies linked to the industrial sector and create the capacity so that they may export renewable energy and energy efficiency knowledge, semi-manufactured and manufactured products, whilst creating jobs
  • Investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy may well allow us to export energy to Europe thereby improving our balance of payments
  • Investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency will help reduce pollution.

All the Labour leadership candidates spoke of the opportunities posed by the Green Industrial Revolution.  However, the response by the current leadership to problems with a smokestack industry suggests that more thinking needs to be done as to how to grasp those opportunities, whilst, at the same time, seeking to preserve jobs in mature sectors of the economy.

Moreover, a leader, heavily reliant on support within his party’s membership from former Green Party voters, members and candidates, needs to quickly work out how to balance the concerns of that group, which he has personally attracted to the party, with those of Labour’s core voters who are well to the right of the membership.

Free tip for the Corbyn Boys, a Government that implements policies that will cut  energy bills; reduce pollution; create businesses, jobs and exports; will, sotto voce, be helping to reduce carbon emissions.

I think the voters will buy tackling Man Made Global Warming, if we talk less about the fact that we are doing it and more about what doing it will do for them.  In that way, the expectations of Labour’s membership may be reconciled with the concerns of those whose votes Labour is seeking.

Tata Steel merger with Thyssenkrupp under threat (Monday 17th April 2017)

orange-glowing molten metal at the blast furnace

Thyssenkrupp’s steel plant in Duisburg, Germany. Photograph: Friedemann Vogel/EPA

Sanjeev Gupta: from college dorm deals to UK steel’s great hope

Port Talbot steel crisis: why we can’t just blame Brussels

More articles from the Guardian about the Steel Industry

More articles from the Guardian about Tata

Other articles:

Tata Steel: No, thank you!

Tata Steel: ‘Nationalisation not the answer’ says Javid

Sajid Javid: Tata Steel sale process to begin by Monday

Please sign petition calling on George Osborne to remove the 20% VAT on vet’s bills #LabourDoorstep

Standard

Paul Streeting is a pet owner, who lives on a small income.

Paul’s dog has helped him in lots of ways.  Helped him through some tough times.

Paul finds the 20% VAT on vet operations, a rip off for many pet owners and also many of those who are on small pensions.

Pets are a great comfort to many, including those who live alone, the elderly and people suffering from poor mental health.  Sometimes taking Winston Churchill’s Black Dog for a walk really means going out for a stroll with a four legged friend.

Please spend a couple of minutes and sign Paul’s petition.  And, if you are happy to do that then Paul would be very grateful, if you would encourage other people to put their names to the petition, too.

Thanks!

Jess Phillips Shows How to Exploit Tory Tax Avoidance Discomfort to Electoral Advantage #InOurBritain

Standard

There is the content for a hard hitting Labour Party Political Broadcast in this piece, In the Name of the Father, the Son and the Spirit of the Law!

Why is Labour’s leadership, especially Seamus Milne, incapable of putting the point over in the manner of a Jess Phillips?

Too middle class?

Too fond of calling tax fraud, tax evasion?

Too out of touch with the concerns and prejudices of average voters?

Too distracted by thoughts of Ikea kitchens when planning a Party Political Broadcast?

Tax being the price we pay to live in a civilised society is a nice homily, but most of us, most of the time, want to live in one at the cheapest possible price. We are only human, after all.

However, we also resent people benefiting at our expense. Tell us that, if others, like Cameron, paid more tax then we could pay less then you will get our attention!

Tell us that the smartly dressed guy in the expensive suit, next to us in the queue at A&E, pays next to no tax and that we are paying for his treatment then you will get our attention!

Appealing to people’s self interest, to get their attention, may be distasteful to some now in the Labour Party, but it is a way of starting conversations that will result in winning votes. It is, in part, why the Tory Party has been in power for much of the last 300 years or so.

Incidentally, I do say, could pay less …

Get the voters’ attention and we might persuade them to forego the temptations of a tax cut in favour of an increase in public spending.

Update from Jess Phillips, Labour MP for Birmingham Yardley

If I Were King of the Forest – The Tale of a Cowardly Lion

UPDATED! There are lies, damned lies & reasons why Tata UK has foundered … #SaveOurSteel #PanamaPapers

Standard

“To fend off a Brazilian rival, Tata had to pay a 70% premium over the stock price.  This was hefty for a company already in financial trouble with a large debt burden.  And Tata paid only $4bn (£2.8bn) of the estimated $14bn final price out of its own funds – the rest was borrowed, mainly from Indian public sector banks.”

“Why were taxpayer-funded banks so willing to lend to a big conglomerate to buy up an overpriced European company, even as they denied loans to Indian farmers and small-scale producers?  The sense of reversal of colonial roles might well have played a role.  The deal was lauded by politicians as a sign that Indian industry had come of age as a global player, and so prudent considerations were simply cast aside.

Repayment of those loans was supposed to be made out of the profits of Tata Steel Europe.  But those profits never came.”

 Tata tried to turn the tables on Britain.  It failed

 “In 2014 the UK imported 687,000 tonnes of steel from China, up from 303,000 tonnes in 2013.

It is true that the UK’s steel imports from the rest of the EU are much higher than this, they were 4.7 million tonnes in 2014, but crucially China is selling its steel at much lower prices.

Steel imports into the UK from the rest of the EU cost on average 897 euros a tonne in 2014, while Chinese steel imports were just 583 euros a tonne, says the EU’s statistics agency, Eurostat.  This has led to accusations that China is selling at unfairly low prices.”

 Britain’s steel industry: What’s going wrong?

 “Notably, in Tata Steel’s 2014/15 annual report, UK energy costs are not mentioned.  Instead, its focus is on high pension liabilities, the strong pound and weak domestic demand.”

 Factcheck: The steel crisis and UK electricity prices

Tata “has taken more than £700m in free carbon allowances and offsets, according to analysis of emissions trading scheme data.”

Tata Steel benefited from EU climate policies, studies show

“Ten” Tata “staff including two executives have been suspended after an internal audit uncovered allegedly falsified quality certificates, prompting criminal inquiry.”

” “Right now the problem is that the English (?) facilities are underinvested [and] overmanned,” Tata was quoted as saying by the Financial Times.

He said a potential buyer at Port Talbot would need to “cut back on the size and the scale of the operations and make them profitable”.  This would be “extremely challenging” but not impossible.”

Tata Steel crisis deepens with senior staff suspended amid SFO probe

As for the business rates, it looks like Tata has a lot of underutilised space at places like Port Talbot.  Land that might be redeveloped, if one were in it for the long haul:

“Tata Steel has rightly decided to put a stop to investing in these loss-making assets, as structural issues such as high labour, energy and regulatory costs make them unviable even over the longer term”.

Tata Steel: potential Port Talbot bidder says he is yet to decide on offer

Green Steel is an Opportunity not a Threat

I like the cut of Sanjeev Gupta’s jib, but I fear some of the purists may be uncomfortable with the switch to green steel:

“He was doubtful about Gupta’s proposal to scrap Port Talbot’s blast furnace in favour of arc furnaces to recycle scrap steel.  He said the blast furnace was technologically advanced and its energy could be reused for other purposes.”

Port Talbot MP says lower Tata losses improve chance of deal

“The Labour MP Stephen Kinnock, whose constituency covers Port Talbot, welcomed Gupta’s interest but questioned the credibility of his plan. Kinnock told the BBC’s Today programme that the blast furnaces at Port Talbot are technologically advanced and replacing them would lead to job losses.”

Tata Steel: potential Port Talbot bidder says he is yet to decide on offer

“Gupta has put forward a plan to revitalise Port Talbot.  This involves converting its blast furnaces into electric arc furnaces that use scrap steel.  However, this would lower production capacity and the government and unions are keen to preserve the blast furnaces.”

Who might rescue Port Talbot?

Alex Salmond, never one to miss an opportunity to polish up the green credentials of the SNP, recently highlighted the green steel aspect of their rescue operation.

Labour’s, understandable, response to the problems of the steel industry, has harked back to the party’s past.  Compare and contrast with the party leadership’s relatively lacklustre reaction to the impact of the UK Government’s changes in support for renewable energy.  Changes that endangered at least as many jobs in the renewable energy sector as are currently under threat in the steel industry.

The renewable energy sector is a growing part of the UK economy and it consumes steel products.  However, steel is currently only ever going to maintain its current contribution to the UK economy.  Whereas promoting energy efficiency, reducing energy usage and switching to greater generation of energy from renewable sources promise so much more (and more business for the steel industry):

  • Promoting energy efficiency and reducing energy usage cuts energy bills for individuals and businesses whilst also creating jobs
  • Promoting energy efficiency, reducing energy usage and switching to greater generation of energy from renewable sources increases energy security, leaving us less at the mercy of Johnny Foreigner, whether Canadian or Saudi Arabian, as we reduce energy imports and in doing so create jobs
  • Investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy will create a home market for companies linked to the industrial sector and create the capacity so that they may export renewable energy and energy efficiency knowledge, semi-manufactured and manufactured products, whilst creating jobs
  • Investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy may well allow us to export energy to Europe thereby improving our balance of payments
  • Investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency will help reduce pollution.

All the Labour leadership candidates spoke of the opportunities posed by the Green Industrial Revolution.  However, the response by the current leadership to problems with a smokestack industry suggests that more thinking needs to be done as to how to grasp those opportunities, whilst, at the same time, seeking to preserve jobs in mature sectors of the economy.

Moreover, a leader, heavily reliant on support within his party’s membership from former Green Party voters, members and candidates, needs to quickly work out how to balance the concerns of that group, which he has personally attracted to the party, with those of Labour’s core voters who are well to the right of the membership.

Free tip for the Corbyn Boys, a Government that implements policies that will cut  energy bills; reduce pollution; create businesses, jobs and exports; will, sotto voce, be helping to reduce carbon emissions.

I think the voters will buy tackling Man Made Global Warming, if we talk less about the fact that we are doing it and more about what doing it will do for them.  In that way, the expectations of Labour’s membership may be reconciled with the concerns of those whose votes Labour is seeking.

Vote of confidence in UK steel as Liberty plans to reopen Kent plant

Sanjeev Gupta: from college dorm deals to UK steel’s great hope

Port Talbot steel crisis: why we can’t just blame Brussels

More articles from the Guardian about the Steel Industry

More articles from the Guardian about Tata

Other articles:

Tata Steel: No, thank you!

Tata Steel: ‘Nationalisation not the answer’ says Javid

Sajid Javid: Tata Steel sale process to begin by Monday

My Response to #Corbyn4All’s Request for My Views on Syria @UKLabour #ImWithCorbyn #InOurBritain

Standard

My response to Jeremy Corbyn’s request for my views on Syria:

I think that Jeremy Corbyn is a moral coward. He wants the prerogative of the harlot down the ages, power without responsibility, but he cannot have it. To govern is to choose. And, although sometimes the only choices you have are bad ones you still have to choose. If he cannot accept that then he must ask himself what is best for the future of the Labour Party. As Tony Benn once said, no one is bigger than the party.

We are engaged in combat with ISIS in Iraq, therefore, we are at war with them and they will not exempt us from any future attacks, just because we are bombing them after our help was sought by the Iraqi Government and, only given, after a vote in the affirmative by the House of Commons. ISIS has declared war on all who do not share its narrow, intolerant interpretation of Islam. They strike out as easily at co-religionists, with whom they disagree, as they do those of other faiths or no faith. ISIS destroys our shared history and culture, when not selling it for hard cash, without a qualm.

If Corbyn really wants advice from me, rather than my joining his claque, I would suggest he put down a reasoned amendment that, whilst Labour will not support the extension of air strikes in Iraq to Syria, Labour will support British military forces replacing French troops operating under the flag of the United Nations (and, if appropriate, in France’s Overseas Departments and Territories) so that they may be redeployed where they may do the most good. We would then, as Corbyn has himself promised, be providing practical support to the French Government. Moreover, Labour would support the despatch of naval units and auxiliaries to the Eastern Mediterranean to support humanitarian aid activities as well as the deployment, where possible and appropriate, of UK land forces, in particular, medical, logistics and catering troops to assist, support and protect those providing help to refugees.

The Leader of the Labour Party should be looking to find a way to unite our party around a series of actions that are more than a gesture and that will make a difference to the men, women and children, who are, as I type, being killed, maimed, tortured, raped, forced to change their faith or die, sold into slavery or sent out in the world with just the clothes on their backs by ISIS.

I think that as every day passes, Jeremy Corbyn and a fair few of his supporters, particularly those not part of the Labour Party, display a frightening lack of emotional intelligence. Their seeming lack of concern about the plight of the victims of ISIS is only exceeded by their view, that no matter how hard the Tories make life for their fellow citizens, it is better to have a principled and unbending, but unelectable man leading the Labour Party than someone who is electable, but in their opinion unprincipled, at the party’s helm. Someone who, after the next General Election, will be able to begin to reverse the damage of 10 years of Tory misrule. I do not want to have to explain to voters after the next General Election that Labour losing for its principles is somehow a better outcome than putting their interests first and winning in an ‘unprincipled’ way.

Who set up Corbyn and his claque to have the final say that no loaf is better than even a few slices? A Prime Minister, born into the working class, once said, you may keep your principles shining bright and not get your hands on the levers of power or get them a bit tarnished, get your hands on the levers of power and do something (for the condition of the working class). I share that sentiment. Does Jeremy Corbyn, who comes from an affluent, middle class background, do too? And, if he does not, why does he thinks he speaks for me and my family, that he may include us in his definition of our people?

My Facebook page with the above post and comments!