• Kingstone Branch
    • Kingstone Ward profile
  • Ward Councillors
    • Surgeries
    • Complaints against a Councillor
  • Dan Jarvis MP
    • Track Dan Jarvis’ voting record in Parliament
    • Dan Jarvis wary of standing for election under anti-nuclear policy
    • Dan Jarvis: Why I voted for air strikes
    • Public Tide Turning Towards Bombing Syria, Says Dan Jarvis
    • Tackling Child Poverty in Barnsley
    • Concerns about potential fracking sites in Barnsley
    • Dan Jarvis: My vote to oppose the Welfare Reform & Work Bill
  • Our Labour MEPs
    • Linda McAvan Labour MEP for Yorkshire and The Humber
    • Richard Corbett Labour MEP for Yorkshire & Humber
    • Doorstep EU app
  • Shadow Cabinet line-up in full
  • How the Labour Party works
  • Join Labour
    • Membership FAQs
  • General elections: A Guide
    • Voting in Barnsley
    • Making politics more accessible through Love Your Vote
    • Alternative languages and formats of electoral registration forms and letters
    • Voting: People with no fixed address
  • Get involved
    • Labour Policy Forum
    • NEW: Young Labour Toolkit- Your guide to getting involved
    • Disability Access ACCESSIBLE MATERIALS
    • Can you stand for election?
      • Be a Labour Councillor: A guide for disabled members and local parties
      • Be a Councillor: Stand up for what you believe in.
      • Have you got what it takes to be a Councillor?
      • Finding your way as a Local Councillor
      • Becoming a Councillor – Alex’s Story
      • Top 10 tips for new Councillors
    • Get involved with parliament
      • Introduction to the House of Commons
      • Tours of the Houses of Parliament
  • Local Links
    • 148 (Barnsley) Squadron Air Cadets
    • Barnsley & Rotherham Chamber of Commerce
    • Barnsley Business and Innovation Centre (BBIC)
    • Barnsley Citizens Advice Bureau
    • Barnsley Church Action on Poverty
    • Barnsley College
    • Barnsley Community Build
    • Barnsley Foodbank
    • Barnsley Joint Strategic Needs Assessment (JSNA)
    • Barnsley Model Railway Club
    • Barnsley Recovery College
    • Barnsley Riding for the Disabled
    • Barnsley Sea Cadets
    • Barnsley Starter Packs
    • B-Chilled
    • Blue Badge Scheme
    • Guide to local Barnsley NHS services – Choose Well
    • DIAL Barnsley (Disability Information Advice Line)
    • The Dining Room Cafe
    • Energise Barnsley
    • Enterprising Barnsley
    • EXODUS Youth Clubs
    • Experience Barnsley
    • A guide to older people’s services in Barnsley
    • The Herbert Protocol
    • Home-Start
    • Horizon Community College
    • Independent Training College
    • Joseph Locke Primary School
    • Knits and Bits
    • The Lamproom Theatre
    • The Live arts café
    • Making Space
    • Men in Sheds
    • Neighbourhood Resolutions
    • Phoenix Futures
    • Restorative Justice South Yorkshire
    • Shaw Lane Aquaforce Football Club
    • Shawlands Primary School
    • South Yorkshire Credit Union
    • SportFX South Yorkshire
    • Together
    • Trinity Players
    • Walking Football at Oakwell
    • Women and Children’s Forum
    • Worsbrough Common Primary School
  • National Links
    • BAME Labour Friends Groups
    • Higher Education Statistics Agency
    • The Institute for Fiscal Studies
    • Labour List
    • The Migration Observatory
    • Migration Yorkshire
    • National Citizen Service (NCS)
    • Office for National Statistics
    • Progress
    • Special Effect: The Gamers Charity
    • The Robin Hood Tax
    • Turn2us Online benefits checker

Supporting Labour in Barnsley

Supporting Labour in Barnsley

Tag Archives: Europe

This map shows what white Europeans associate with race – and it makes for uncomfortable reading

06 Sunday Aug 2017

Posted by Kingstone Labour in Europe, Racism

≈ Comments Off on This map shows what white Europeans associate with race – and it makes for uncomfortable reading

Tags

Europe, Project Implicit, Racism

By Tom Stafford, Lecturer in Psychology and Cognitive Science, University of Sheffield

file-20170425-12650-16jxfww

A European map of implicit racial bias. Author provided.

This new map shows how easily white Europeans associate black faces with negative ideas.

Since 2002, hundreds of thousands of people around the world have logged onto a website run by Harvard University called Project Implicit and taken an “implicit association test” (IAT), a rapid-response task which measures how easily you can pair items from different categories.

To create this new map, we used data from a version of the test which presents white or black faces and positive or negative words. The result shows how easily our minds automatically make the link between the categories – what psychologists call an “implicit racial attitude”.

Each country on the map is coloured according to the average score of test takers from that country. Redder countries show higher average bias, bluer countries show lower average bias, as the scale on the top of the map shows.

Like a similar map which had been made for US states, our map shows variation in the extent of racial bias – but all European countries are racially biased when comparing blacks versus whites.

In every country in Europe, people are slower to associate blackness with positive words such as “good” or “nice” and faster to associate blackness with negative concepts such as “bad” or “evil”. But they are quicker to make the link between blackness and negative concepts in the Czech Republic or Lithuania than they are in Slovenia, the UK or Ireland.

No country had an average score below zero, which would reflect positive associations with blackness. In fact, none had an average score that was even close to zero, which would reflect neither positive nor negative racial associations.

file-20170426-2848-91puix

A screeshot from the online IAT test. IAT, Project Implict

Implicit bias

Overall, we have scores for 144,038 white Europeans, collected between 2002 and 2015, with sample sizes for each country shown on the left-hand side.

Because of the design of the test it is very difficult to deliberately control your score. Many people, including those who sincerely hold non-racist or even anti-racist beliefs, demonstrate positive implicit bias on the test. The exact meaning of implicit attitudes, and the IAT, are controversial, but we believe they reflect the automatic associations we hold in our minds, associations that develop over years of immersion in the social world.

Although we, as individuals, may not hold racist beliefs, the ideas we associate with race may be constructed by a culture which describes people of different ethnicities in consistent ways, and ways which are consistently more or less positive. Looked at like this, the IAT – which at best is a weak measure of individual psychology – may be most useful if individuals’ scores are aggregated to provide a reflection on the collective social world we inhabit.

The results shown in this map give detail to what we already expected – that across Europe racial attitudes are not neutral. Blackness has negative associations for white Europeans, and there are some interesting patterns in how the strength of these negative associations varies across the continent.

North and west Europe, on average, have less strong anti-black associations, although they still have anti-black associations on average. As you move south and east the strength of negative associations tends to increase – but not everywhere. The Balkans look like an exception, compared to surrounding countries. Is this because of some quirk about how people in the Balkans heard about Project Implicit, or because their prejudices aren’t orientated around a white-black axis? For now, we can only speculate.

Open questions

When interpreting the map there are at least two important qualifications to bear in mind.

The first is that the scores only reflect racial attitudes in one dimension: pairing white/black with goodness/badness. Our feelings about ethnicity have many more dimensions which aren’t captured by this measure.

The second is that the data comes from Europeans who visit the the US Project Implicit website, which is in English. We can be certain that the sample reflects a subset of the European population which are more internet-savvy than is typical. They are probably also younger, and more cosmopolitan. These factors are likely to underweight the extent of implicit racism in each country, so that the true levels of implicit racism are probably higher than shown on this map.

This new map is possible because Project Implicit release their data via the Open Science Framework. This site allows scientists to share the raw materials and data from their experiments, allowing anyone to check their working, or re-analyse the data, as we have done here. I believe that open tools and publishing methods like these are necessary to make science better and more reliable.

This article was updated on July 18 2017 to correct the number of white Europeans whose scores were used in the study. The number was 144,038, not 288,076 as previously stated.

Source: https://theconversation.com/this-map-shows-what-white-europeans-associate-with-race-and-it-makes-for-uncomfortable-reading-76661

Advertisements

As US turns its back on refugees, Europe should step up

02 Thursday Feb 2017

Posted by Kingstone Labour in Immigration, Refugees, US politics

≈ Comments Off on As US turns its back on refugees, Europe should step up

Tags

David Miliband, Donald Trump, Europe, Immigration, Refugees

SERBIA-EU-MIGRANTS-HEALTH-WEATHER

Thousands have found themselves stuck in limbo in the Balkan countries since European countries closed their borders last year | Andrej Isakovic/AFP via Getty Images

Donald Trump’s executive order to limit immigration means Europe will have to do more.

 

By David Miliband

The U.S. government’s decision to suspend the United States’ refugee resettlement program for 120 days and to ban indefinitely the arrival of Syrian refugees is an abandonment of America’s role as a humanitarian leader and a cruel blow to desperate people fleeing war and terror.

But President Donald Trump’s decision is also Europe’s opportunity to demonstrate leadership on refugee resettlement. Now that the U.S. administration has abdicated a huge part of its responsibility to refugees, it is time for Europe to step up.

Until now, the U.S. has been a global leader on refugee resettlement. With the support of NGOs including the International Rescue Committee, North America has been resettling refugees successfully for decades, including 800,000 since 9/11.

While the U.S. administration has chosen to turn its back on refugees, the rest of the world cannot. Supporting refugees is not just a moral obligation; it is a vital part of maintaining global stability in a world where more and more people are on the move, including an unprecedented 65 million refugees and people displaced within their own countries. European leaders now have an opportunity to make a bold and powerful statement of their intent to fill the void left by President Trump.

He has just slammed the door in the face of 60,000 refugees who were due to be resettled in 2017, many of whom had already been vetted by U.S. authorities. When they meet in Valletta for a migration summit this Friday, European leaders should announce that they will fill this void and offer safe haven to 60,000 refugees this year. This must be the first step toward increasing significantly the number of refugee resettlement places available in Europe. Countries that currently do not participate in resettlement schemes should be forced to cooperate, and those that have reduced their quotas, such as Denmark, should be made to reverse their decision.

TOPSHOT-SERBIA-EU-MIGRANTS-HEALTH-WEATHER

Migrants stand in line for food in Belgrade | Andrej Isakovic/AFP via Getty Images

The reasoning is simple — and not just from a humanitarian point of view. Unless there is a legal route to hope in the form of refugee resettlement, the only people who gain are the people smugglers who profit from misery. The choice for Europe is simple: orderly and organized refugee resettlement that is part of a coherent migration and asylum policy, or disorderly and illegal movement of people. The Western world must show it is not slamming the door in the face of Muslims fleeing war. Trump’s executive order is a propaganda gift to extremists — but it’s not too late for European action to forestall its power.

The Valletta summit is set to focus on closing the routes into Europe from North Africa, but even the strictest measures will not stop desperate people being driven from their homes. The only sustainable and responsible way to address migration flows is to offer safe and legal routes to protection.

The U.N. refugee agency estimates that 10 percent of the world’s refugees are in need of resettlement. These are the most vulnerable of the world’s refugees, including children who have lost their parents during conflict and severely injured people with acute medical problems. Currently, the EU resettles around 9,000 refugees a year. Based on a calculation of Europe’s share of global GDP and population, the International Rescue Committee proposes that European nations resettle at least 540,000 people over the next fives years, equivalent to 108,000 people per year.

Much poorer countries already host many, many more refugees than this. While EU member countries host around 8 percent of the world’s refugees, Ethiopia hosts 700,000 refugees and more than 1 million Syrian refugees live in politically fragile Lebanon. Most refugees will remain in developing countries like these — in fact 85 percent of the world’s refugees are in such places. But refugee resettlement allows Europe to share responsibility with those countries that already host more than their fair share of refugees and now face greater strains because of Trump’s executive order.

It is vital that European vetting and integration arrangements are effective. In IRC’s experience in the U.S., four in five refugees who enroll in our employment programs become economically self-sufficient within six months, and many go on to contribute significantly to the U.S. economy, including by starting their own businesses.

Berlin Holds Jobs Fair For Refugees

Young women from Syria attend the second annual jobs fair for refugees in Berlin | Sean Gallup/Getty Images

Events in the U.S. are moving quickly but the EU is not starting from scratch. There is already a mechanism in place to increase refugee resettlement in EU member countries, in the form of a proposed EU-wide resettlement scheme — the Union Resettlement Framework — that is now making its way through the European Parliament and the Council. European leaders must now fast-track this scheme, starting with a reinforced commitment to resettlement at the summit in Malta on Friday.

Refugees are fleeing terror, violence and persecution at the hands of terrorist groups such as ISIL and Boko Haram. They are seeking sanctuary and a peaceful life. Europe must do the decent thing and help them, abroad through intelligent overseas aid and at home through a proper refugee resettlement program for the most vulnerable.

David Miliband is a former British foreign secretary and president and CEO of International Rescue Committee.

Source: http://www.politico.eu/article/as-us-turns-its-back-on-refugees-europe-should-step-up-migration-donald-trump/

Jeremy Corbyn speech to the Party of European Socialists Council in Prague

03 Saturday Dec 2016

Posted by Kingstone Labour in Brexit, Europe

≈ Comments Off on Jeremy Corbyn speech to the Party of European Socialists Council in Prague

Tags

Europe, Jeremy Corbyn, Party of European Socialists Council, Populist right

_92818694_cb912936-c33a-4393-ab1a-6269d78e5ea7

Jeremy Corbyn, in a speech to the Party of European Socialists Council in Prague today, said:

Colleagues and comrades, I want to thank you for inviting me here today, and for the reception we have received from our hosts in this magnificent city.

It is fitting we are in Prague to discuss the challenges ahead for democracy in Europe.

This is a city which has been at the heart of the history of our continent and the convulsions of the past century – of war, revolution and the struggle for democracy and social justice.

We are in a city that also suffered the scourge of Nazi occupation and the horror of its genocidal crimes.

Today I will also be visiting the Terezin memorial which commemorates the victims of Nazi political and racial persecution in the Czech Republic, a permanent testimony to the threat posed by far right politics, anti-semitism and racist scapegoating.

On behalf of the British Labour party I will be paying tribute and remembering those who died, whose suffering is a reminder of the scars left by the far right, not just on this country or this continent, but on the whole world.

Today, we live in a different time with different pressures and opportunities.

But it is clear, across Europe and beyond there has been an alarming acceleration in the rise of the populist right.

Whether it be UKIP in Britain, Donald Trump in the United States, Jobbik in Hungary or Marine Le Pen’s National Front in France.

Politics has been shaken across the world and, as socialists and progressives,  we know very well why the populist right is gaining ground. But we are finding it increasingly hard to get our message heard and it is up to us to offer the political leadership needed for a real alternative.

We know the gap between rich and poor is widening. We know living standards are stagnating or falling and insecurity is growing. We know that many people feel left behind by the forces unleashed by globalization – powerless in the face of deregulated corporate power.

Often the populist right do identify the right problems but their solutions are the toxic dead ends of the past, seeking to divert it with rhetoric designed to divide and blame.

They are political parasites, feeding on people’s concerns and worsening conditions, blaming the most vulnerable for society’s ills instead of offering a way to take back real control of our lives from powerful elites who serve their own interests.

But unless progressive parties and movements break with that failed economic and political establishment it is the siren voices of the populist far right that will fill the gap

It can be difficult to convince the long-term unemployed that the reason there is no work is not that immigrants are stealing their jobs but the result of the economic programme of the right that has failed to deliver sustainable growth, security and rising living standards for all.

Or It can be hard to make clear that our public services are being run down because of years of austerity and predatory privatisation, rather than overspending and government waste, but it is vital that we do.

We cannot abandon our socialist principles because we are told this is the only way to win power. That is nonsense.

The reason we are losing ground to the right today is because the message of what socialism is and what it can achieve in people’s daily lives has been steadily diluted.

Many people no longer understand what we stand for.

Too often in recent years the left in Europe has been seen as apologists for a broken system rather than the answer to how to deliver radical social and economic reform for the 21st century.

Too often the left has been seen as the accomplice to reckless, unfettered capitalism rather than a challenge to it.

Too often the left has been seen as standing up for the privileged few rather than for the many we exist to represent and defend.

If we are only seen as protectors of the status quo how can we expect people to turn to us when they can see that status quo has failed?

We must stand for real change, and a break with the failed elite politics and economics of the past.

If we do, I have every confidence that the principles of solidarity, internationalism and socialism that we stand for can be at the heart of European politics in the 21st century.

That’s why it is vital that our rhetoric cannot be used to legitimise the scapegoating of refugees or migrant workers.

When we talk about refugees we need to talk about them as human beings, not as numbers, or as a burden, but instead as children, mothers, fathers, sons, daughters.

And when we face the challenge of migration we need to work together to halt the exploitation of migrant labour to undercut pay and conditions in a race to the bottom across Europe. We cannot allow the parties of the right to sow divisions and fan the flames of fear.

When it comes to Britain’s referendum vote to leave the European Union we in the Labour party respect that decision, and we want to work together with Socialist and progressive parties across Europe to find the best possible solution that benefits both Britain and the EU in the Brexit negotiations.

Labour is calling on the British Government to guarantee the rights of all EU Citizens before Article 50 negotiations begin, and not to use them as a bargaining chip in negotiations.

Labour is pushing for Brexit negotiations to be carried out in a transparent manner, in a spirit that aims to find a deal that works for all across our the continent.

That is why I am inviting leaders from socialist and progressive parties and movements across Europe to a special conference in London in February.

I believe our movement has the new ideas to take on and beat the populist right.. But we must harvest those ideas and that energy, allow a space within our parties for new ideas to be heard and build a movement with a democratic culture at its very heart.

It is when people lose faith in the power of politics to improve people’s lives that the space opens up for the far right to scapegoat and blame. Our task is harder, to restore people’s confidence that we have both the vision and an understanding of the lives of those we represent to change them for the better.

As we head towards 2017 many people are worried about the direction that Europe is taking. Well now is time for us to turn the tide. To put the interests of working people front and centre stage and  to fight for our values, of social justice, solidarity, equality and internationalism.

If we do that together, and break with the failed politics of the past, I am confident we can overcome the challenge from the populist right.

Source: http://press.labour.org.uk/post/153983095494/jeremy-corbyn-speech-to-the-party-of-european

EU immigration has no negative impact on British wages, jobs or public services, research finds

17 Tuesday May 2016

Posted by Kingstone Labour in Europe, European Union, Immigration, Migration, Referendum

≈ Comments Off on EU immigration has no negative impact on British wages, jobs or public services, research finds

Tags

Centre for Economic Performance (CEP), Education, Europe, European Union, Health, Housing, Immigration, Jobs, London School of Economics, LSE, Migration, Taxes

150326-OE-Blog-Cost-Benefit-Brexit

Brexit and the Impact of Immigration on the UK

New analysis by the Centre for Economic Performance

A reduction in immigration from the European Union (EU) following a vote for Brexit would not lead to any improvement in living standards for those born in the UK. Cuts in EU immigration would not offset the big fall in UK living standards caused by the reduction in trade and investment that would result from Brexit.

These are among the conclusions of new research by the Centre for Economic Performance (CEP) at the London School of Economics. The fifth in a series of #CEPBrexit reports – co-authored by Professor Jonathan Wadsworth, a former member of the Home Office’s Migration Advisory Colmmittee – analyses the impact of EU immigration on the UK, an issue that lies at the heart of the referendum campaign.

The researchers highlight the empirical evidence showing conclusively that EU immigration has not had significantly adverse effects on average employment, wages, inequality or public services at the local level for people born in the UK. Falls in average real wages of UK-born workers are more closely associated with the biggest economic crash for more than 80 years.

Ending free movement of labour would damage the national economy. First, it would curtail the country’s full access to the Single Market. Second, it would lower GDP per person since EU immigrants have higher employment rates than the UK-born and therefore help to reduce the budget deficit. And third, there is evidence that lower immigration harms national productivity.

brexit05The new CEP report shows that:

  • Between 1995 and 2015, the number of immigrants from other EU countries living in the UK more than tripled from 0.9 million to 3.3 million. In the year to September 2015, EU net immigration to the UK was 172,000, only just below the figure of 191,000 for non-EU immigrants.
  • The big increase in EU immigration occurred after the ‘A8’ East European countries joined in 2004. In 2015, about a third of EU immigrants lived in London, compared with only 11% of the UK-born. 29% of EU immigrants were Polish.
  • EU immigrants are more educated, younger, more likely to be in work and less likely to claim benefits than the UK-born. About 44% have some form of higher education compared with only 23% of the UK-born.
  • Many people are concerned that immigration reduces the pay and job chances of the UK-born since this means more competition for jobs. But immigrants also consume goods and services and this increased demand helps to create more employment opportunities. So we need empirical evidence to settle the issue of whether the economic impact of immigration is bad or good for people born in the UK.
  • Our new evidence shows that the areas of the UK with large increases in EU immigration did not suffer greater falls in the jobs and pay of UK-born workers. The big falls in wages after 2008 are due to the global financial crisis and a weak economic recovery, not to immigration.
  • There is also little effect of EU immigration on inequality through reducing the pay and jobs of less skilled UK workers. Changes in wages and joblessness for less skilled UK-born workers show little correlation with changes in EU immigration.
  • EU immigrants pay more in taxes than they use public services and therefore they help to reduce the budget deficit. Immigrants do not have a negative effect on local services such as education, health or social housing; nor do they have any effect on social instability as indicated by crime rates.
  • The refugee crisis is unrelated to our EU membership. Refugees admitted to Germany have no right to live in the UK. The UK is not in the Schengen passport-free travel agreement so there are border checks on all migrants.

Jonathan Wadsworth commented: “The bottom line, which may surprise many people, is that EU immigration has not harmed the pay, jobs or public services enjoyed by Britons. In fact, for the most part it has likely made us better off. So far from EU immigration being a ‘necessary evil’ that we pay to get access to the greater trade and foreign investment generated by the EU Single Market, immigration is at worse neutral and at best, another economic benefit.”

John Van Reenen highlighted: “The immigration impact hinges on the post-Brexit trade deal – if we go for a deal like Norway or Switzerland, immigrant numbers won’t change much, as free movement of labour is part of the package. But if we go for a looser trading arrangement we lose out much more from falls in trade and foreign investment”

Swati Dhingra said “Although some people value a diverse society with other Europeans, many other people do not. For this latter group, cutting back EU migration may bring cultural benefits, but Brexit would bring a financial cost.”

CEP BREXIT Analysis
Brexit and the Impact of Immigration on the UK
Swati Dhingra, Gianmarco Ottaviano, John Van Reenen and Jonathan Wadsworth
May 2016
Paper No’ CEPBREXIT05:
Read Abstract | Full Paper (pdf) | Technical Paper (pdf)

Source: http://cep.lse.ac.uk/_new/publications/press1.asp?index=5053

First they came for the vacuum cleaners: will it be kettles next?

13 Friday May 2016

Posted by Kingstone Labour in Barnsley, Europe, European Commission, Referendum

≈ Comments Off on First they came for the vacuum cleaners: will it be kettles next?

Tags

Domestic Appliances, Electrical, Europe, European Union, Full Fact, Kettles, Referendum, Vacuum Cleaners

swan-1.7l-3kw-british-union-jack-jug-fast-boil-kettle-sk24010ngb-[2]-1491-p

“EU is now considering measures to ban most powerful hairdryers, lawn mowers and electric kettles, it was revealed” – Daily Mail , 30 August 2014

“Brussels plans to ban British kettles, toasters and hairdryers after the European Union referendum” – Daily Express , 12 May 2016

A number of retailers reportedly sold out of high-powered vacuum cleaners ahead of an introduction of an EU law preventing hoovers of 1,600 watts or more being manufactured in, or imported to the UK.

The EU is currently in the process of determining which types of product to prioritise for environmental improvements. Hairdryers, lawn mowers, and electric kettles are three categories out of 29 that could face restrictions, and the EU aims to choose about 20 as priorities.

We don’t yet know if the EU will enact any regulations affecting these products, never mind what they’d look like, although its preliminary investigations on some items provide us with clues.

29 product types up for consideration

Today’s vacuum cleaner regulation was part of the European Commissions ‘Ecodesign’ scheme , which is aimed at improving the environmental performance of products sold across the EU. The Commission is currently in the process of developing a new ‘working plan’ for the scheme, which it aims to implement in 2015-17.

As part of the development of this plan, it’s commissioned researchers to narrow the options to about 20 ‘priority product groups’. Once they’ve been identified, each type of product and the potential for regulation will be investigated further.

There are 29 product groups in total. Some of them are common household appliances, such as kettles, others are not, like escalators. Not all of them are particularly recognisable to the average person. They are :

Hair and hand dryers (blowers for personal care); electric kettles; gym and athletics articles; garden houses; humidifiers and dehumidifiers; imaging equipment; in-house networking equipment; lawn and riding mowers; mobile phones (smartphones); swimming pool heaters; anti-legionellae filters; aquarium equipment; base station subsystem; domestic kitchen appliances; elevators, escalators and moving walkways; energy-using equipment in means of transportation; reefers (refrigerated containers); garden houses; greenhouses; handheld power tools; hot food presentation and storage equipment; wireless chargers; inverters and static converters; patio heaters; sound amplifiers; tertiary hot beverage equipment; video projectors; water, steam and sand cleaning appliances.

Regulation isn’t just about limits to wattage

Not all of the potential requirements would involve limits to the power consumed in the home.

For instance, the researchers have said another option in the case of electric kettles would be to require them to be more durable so that they last longer on average, and fewer need to be manufactured.

And for hairdryers , the researchers point to a scheme by a German company which has been able to achieve a certain ratio of power consumption against the rate at which it dries hair. If adopted as a law, that would mean hairdryers would be allowed to have high wattage as long as there was a corresponding improvement in performance.

Neither of these options are actively suggested by researchers, or by the Commission, but they do serve to highlight that regulations on design don’t have to take the form of bans on power consumption.

Source: https://fullfact.org/europe/first-they-came-vacuum-cleaners-will-it-be-kettles-next/

Is exporting death good for the economy?

17 Sunday Apr 2016

Posted by Kingstone Labour in Barnsley, Europe, European Union

≈ Comments Off on Is exporting death good for the economy?

Tags

Chemicals, Europe, European Food Safety Authority, European Union, Paraquat, Regulation, Toxic

By Miles King

paraquat

We are told, repeatedly, that one of the main reasons why the UK should stay in the European Union, is because we have access to the single market. And this argument is being used in particular for agriculture.

But some agricultural products made in the UK are not exported to the EU, because they have been banned there. In fact some products made here are so toxic that they have been banned for use in the UK, as well as the EU. One such product is the herbicide Paraquat.

Paraquat is exceedingly toxic – and easily ingested. It has been blamed for thousands of deaths across the world, including suicides and murders. Sri Lanka banned it as a agrochemical because of the number of people using it to commit suicide. A study last year in Indian tea plantations found paraquat being widely misused and the BBC reported pesticide exposure causing illness and hospitalisation.

Paraquat is manufactured in Huddersfield by Syngenta, the same company who make a range of neonicotinoid insecticides, blamed for killing pollinators like bees. Last year, thanks to what appeared to be a combination of poor maintenance and human error, nearly four tonnes of paraquat was accidentally released from a tanker at the Huddersfield plant. To give you an idea of how much this is, the entire consumption of paraquat in India in 2013/14 was 5000 tonnes. It’s estimated that a lethal dose for a human is 14ml. A quick fag packet calculation would suggest that enough paraquat was released in the accident to kill over one hundred thousand people. Fortunately the wind was blowing in the right direction and the paraquat stayed inside the factory boundary. Syngenta was fined £200,000 yesterday for health and safety breaches – and would like everyone to “move on”, as they have vowed to do.

A couple of things come to mind, from this story.

First off, is that, far from being “red tape” that needs to be removed, regulations such as those on health and safety, are a vital part of society. Regulations are needed to ensure that businesses don’t just focus on the profit and ignore everything else. And as we can see from the story of the Paraquat use in India, where regulations are weak, bypassed or ignored, people and the environment suffer.

Secondly, what on earth are we, as a society, doing allowing businesses like Syngenta to produce agrochemicals in the UK that are so lethal they have been banned across Europe and in many other parts of the world? Is this really the sort of economy we want to support, and are these really the sort of products we want to be exporting? This Government (and previous ones) have done all they can to prevent EU agencies such as the European Food Safety Authority from restricting the use of agrochemicals such as herbicides and insecticides. EFSA recommended that Neonicotinoid use should be phased out, but the UK Government allowed farmers to continue using it.

We need to stay in an EU which will,  strengthen protection for people and nature, through regulation.

Source: https://anewnatureblog.wordpress.com/

David Miliband makes the case for Britain in Europe

16 Saturday Apr 2016

Posted by Kingstone Labour in Barnsley, Europe, European Union, Referendum

≈ Comments Off on David Miliband makes the case for Britain in Europe

Tags

David Miliband, Europe, European Union, Referendum

 david-miliband

Today [12 April 2016] in London David Miliband, the former Foreign Secretary and current CEO of International Rescue Committee, delivered a speech making the case for the UK to remain in Europe, including why the EU matters for international development.

Some of his comments are reproduced below:

At the heart of our British success story in the post-war period – not just as a fringe component or some add-on extra – has been our membership of the European Union. Europe is not an alternative to a global Britain; it is the foundation for our role and reach internationally, which is good for us, and I would argue good for stability and security around the world.

The very same outward-looking attitude that took us into Europe, and has kept us in Europe, is the attitude that makes us credible and influential in the wider world. Rather than limit or diminish us, the European Union multiplies British power, British ideas and British values in very direct ways.

  • The EU multiplies British defence policy. We could never tackle Somali pirates, who were holding the coast of Africa to ransom, on our own. As part of the EU, we despatched a highly successful naval force to do just that – the Atalanta force led by the Royal Navy. In 2011, there were 176 attacks; last year, none.
  • Europe multiplies British diplomacy. We sought, on a cross-party basis, across successive governments, a negotiated resolution to the Iranian nuclear program through the EU, which was ahead of the US on this issue, and which convened and drove forward the process to achieve that hugely important goal. When I went to argue in Beijing for Chinese support for sanctions that would help support a negotiated settlement, progress was achieved in part because of the united European position I was able to put forward.
  • Europe multiplies support for British values. We saw the consequences of break-up in the Balkans in the 1990s before the EU had a common foreign policy. It is thanks to the EU’s diplomatic pressure and economic pull that there is now relative peace and stability in the Balkans, despite the refugee crisis. An independent Kosovo, stable Serbia, growing Croatia exist because of agreed EU foreign policy. This is an area where the EU has thrown its weight around, and to good effect.
  • Europe multiplies our development policy. We know the UK overseas aid budget has gone up – but with a British contribution, the EU’s humanitarian aid budget is the largest in the world, and together we are pioneers in good practice. Britain’s membership of the EU has been good for EU humanitarian aid policy, and in the process good for millions of people helped around the world because of the Union’s clout and commitment in this field.
  • Europe massively multiplies our environmental clout. The UK cares about climate change, but we can hardly tackle it alone. Our EU membership has allowed us to drive and deliver a cross-party UK priority on a European scale, and now a global scale.

Where Europe has been weak, and failed to multiply British interests, for example in its dealings with Russia, it is not because Europe has been too united in its policy, but too divided. The answer to a revanchist Russia seeking to flex its muscles around the world is not a weaker EU, but a stronger one.

So Europe multiplies British power, rather than diminishing or constraining it.

The fact is that Britain needs Europe, and Europe needs Britain. That is the patriotic case for us to not just to remain in the EU, but to develop a positive vision for European cooperation for the 21st century.

Source: https://lcid.org.uk/

Europe needs to change… but I am voting to stay: Corbyn’s full speech on the EU

14 Thursday Apr 2016

Posted by Kingstone Labour in Barnsley, Europe, European Union, Jeremy Corbyn, Referendum

≈ Comments Off on Europe needs to change… but I am voting to stay: Corbyn’s full speech on the EU

Tags

Europe, European Union, Jeremy Corbyn, Labour Party, Referendum

Jeremy Corbyn

The people of this country face a historic choice on 23rd June whether to remain part of the European Union, or to leave. I welcome the fact that that decision is now in the hands of the British people. Indeed, I voted to support a referendum in the last Parliament.

The move to hold this referendum may have been more about managing divisions in the Conservative party. But it is now a crucial democratic opportunity for people to have their say on our country’s future, and the future of our continent as a whole.

The Labour Party is overwhelmingly for staying in because we believe the European Union has brought: investment, jobs and protection for workers, consumers and the environment, and offers the best chance of meeting the challenges we face in the 21st century. Labour is convinced that a vote to remain is in the best interests of the people of this country.

In the coming century, we face huge challenges, as a people, as a continent and as a global community.  How to deal with climate change. How to address the overweening power of global corporations and ensure they pay fair taxes. How to tackle cyber-crime and terrorism. How to ensure we trade fairly and protect jobs and pay in an era of globalisation. How to address the causes of the huge refugee movements across the world, and how we adapt to a world where people everywhere move more frequently to live, work and retire.

All these issues are serious and pressing, and self-evidently require international co-operation. Collective international action through the European Union is clearly going to be vital to meeting these challenges. Britain will be stronger if we co-operate with our neighbours in facing them together.

As Portugal’s new Socialist Prime Minister, Antonio Costa, has said: ‘in the face of all these crises around us. We must not divide Europe – we must strengthen it.’

When the last referendum was held in 1975, Europe was divided by the Cold War, and what later became the EU was a much smaller, purely market-driven arrangement. Over the years I have been critical of many decisions taken by the EU, and I remain critical of its shortcomings; from its lack of democratic accountability to the institutional pressure to deregulate or privatise public services.

So Europe needs to change. But that change can only come from working with our allies in the EU. It’s perfectly possible to be critical and still be convinced we need to remain a member.

I’ve even had a few differences with the direction the Labour Party’s taken over the past few years but I have been sure that it was right to stay a member some might say I’ve even managed to do something about changing that direction.

In contrast to four decades ago, the EU of today brings together most of the countries of Europe and has developed important employment, environmental and consumer protections.

I have listened closely to the views of trade unions, environmental groups, human rights organisations and of course to Labour Party members and supporters, and fellow MPs. They are overwhelmingly convinced that we can best make a positive difference by remaining in Europe.

Britain needs to stay in the EU as the best framework for trade, manufacturing and cooperation in 21st century Europe. Tens of billion pounds-worth of investment and millions of jobs are linked to our relationship with the EU, the biggest market in the world.

EU membership has guaranteed working people vital employment rights, including four weeks’ paid holiday, maternity and paternity leave, protections for agency workers and health and safety in the workplace. Being in the EU has raised Britain’s environmental standards, from beaches to air quality, and protected consumers from rip-off charges.

But we also need to make the case for reform in Europe – the reform David Cameron’s Government has no interest in, but plenty of others across Europe do.

That means democratic reform to make the EU more accountable to its people. Economic reform to end to self-defeating austerity and put jobs and sustainable growth at the centre of European policy, labour market reform to strengthen and extend workers’ rights in a real social Europe. And new rights for governments and elected authorities to support public enterprise and halt the pressure to privatise services.

So the case I’m making is for ‘Remain – and Reform’ in Europe.

Today is the Global Day of Action for Fast Food Rights. In the US workers are demanding $15 an hour, in the UK £10 now. Labour is an internationalist party and socialists have understood from the earliest days of the labour movement that workers need to make common cause across national borders.

Working together in Europe has led to significant gains for workers here in Britain and Labour is determined to deliver further progressive reform in 2020 the democratic Europe of social justice and workers’ rights that people throughout our continent want to see.

But real reform will mean making progressive alliances across the EU – something that the Conservatives will never do.

Take the crisis in the steel industry. It’s a global problem and a challenge to many European governments. So why is it only the British Government that has failed so comprehensively to act to save steel production at home?

The European Commission proposed new tariffs on Chinese steel, but it was the UK Government that blocked these co-ordinated efforts to stop Chinese steel dumping.

Those proposals are still on the table. So today I ask David Cameron and George Osborne to to start sticking up for British steel and work with our willing European partners to secure its future.

There are certainly problems about EU state aid rules, which need reform. But if as the Leave side argues, it is the EU that is the main problem, how is that Germany, Italy, France and Spain have all done so much better at protecting their steel industries?

It is because those countries have acted within EU state aid rules to support their industries; whether through taking a public stake, investing in research and development, providing loan guarantees or compensating for energy costs.

It is not the EU that is the problem, but a Conservative Government here in Britain that doesn’t recognise the strategic importance of steel, for our economy and for the jobs and skills in those communities.

The Conservative Government has blocked action on Chinese steel dumping. It has cut investment in infrastructure that would have created demand for more steel and had no procurement strategy to support British steel.

A Labour government would have worked with our partners across Europe to stand up for steel production in Britain.

The European Union – 28 countries and 520 million people – could have made us stronger, by defending our steel industries together. The actions of the Conservative Government weakened us.

The jobs being created under this Government are too often low skill, low pay and insecure jobs. If we harnessed Europe’s potential we could be doing far more to defend high skill jobs in the steel industry.

And that goes for other employers of high skilled staff too – from Airbus to Nissan – they have made it clear that their choice to invest in Britain is strengthened by our membership of the European Union.

Of course the Conservatives are loyally committed to protecting one British industry in Europe – the tax avoidance industry.

The most telling revelation about our Prime Minister has not been about his own tax affair, but that in 2013 he personally intervened with the European Commission President to undermine an EU drive to reveal the beneficiaries of offshore trusts, and even now, in the wake of the Panama Papers, he still won’t act.

And on six different occasions since the beginning of last year Conservative MEPs have voted down attempts to take action against tax dodging.

Labour has allies across Europe prepared to take on this global network of the corrupt and we will work with them to clamp down on those determined to suck wealth out of our economies and the pockets of our people.

On Tuesday, the EU announced a step forward on country-by-country reporting. We believe we can go further. But even this modest measure was opposed by Conservative MEPs last December.

Left to themselves, it is clear what the main Vote Leave vision is for Britain to be the safe haven of choice for the ill-gotten gains of every dodgy oligarch, dictator or rogue corporation.

They believe this tiny global elite is what matters, not the rest of us, who they dismiss as “low achievers”.

Some argue that we need to leave the EU because the single market’s rules are driving deregulation and privatisation. They certainly need reform. But it was not the EU that privatised our railways. It was the Conservative Government of John Major and many of our rail routes are now run by other European nations’ publicly owned rail companies. They haven’t made the mistake of asset stripping their own countries.

Labour is committed to bringing rail back into public ownership in 2020. And that is why Labour MEPs are opposing any element of the fourth rail package, currently before the European Parliament, that might make that more difficult.

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership is also a huge cause for concern, but we defeated a similar proposal before in Europe, together when it was called the Multilateral Agreement on Investment, back in 1998.

Labour MEPs are rightly opposing the Investor-State Dispute Mechanism opposing any attempt to enforce privatisation on our public services, to reduce consumer rights, workplace protections or environmental standards.

The free market enthusiasts in the Leave campaign would put all those protections at risk. Labour is building alliances to safeguard them.

We must also put human rights at the centre of our trade agreements, not as an optional add-on. We already have allies across Europe to do that. And the EU is vital for promoting human rights at home. As a result of EU directives and regulations, disabled people are protected from discrimination. Lifts, cars and buses need to be accessible, as does sea and air travel.

And it was the Labour Government that signed the Human Rights Act into UK law that transferred power from government – not to Brussels – but to individual citizens.

Climate change is the greatest threat that humanity faces this century. And Britain cannot tackle it alone. We could have the best policies possible but unless we act together internationally, it is worthless. Labour brought in the Climate Change Act, John Prescott played a key role in getting the Kyoto Protocols agreed. Labour has led the debate within Europe.

But despite David Cameron pledging to lead the greenest Government ever, Britain still lags far behind most of Europe in terms of renewable energy production. We have much to learn from what Germany has done in particular.

The Conservative Government has cut subsidies for solar power while increasing subsidies for diesel. It has cut regulatory burdens on fracking yet increased regulations on onshore wind. They say one thing, but do another.

Again, it has been regulations agreed in Europe that have improved Britain’s beaches and waterways and that are forcing us to tackle the scandal of air pollution which will kill 500,000 people in Britain by 2025, unless we act.

Working together in the European Union is vital for tackling climate change and vital in protecting the environment we share.

No doubt debate about EU membership in the next couple of months will focus strongly on jobs and migration. We live in an increasingly globalised world. Many of us will study, work or even retire abroad at some point in our lives.

Free movement has created opportunities for British people. There are nearly three-quarters of a million British people living in Spain and over two million living in the EU as a whole.

Learning abroad and working abroad, increases the opportunities and skills of British people and migration brings benefits as well as challenges at home.

But it’s only if there is government action to train enough skilled workers to stop the exploitation of migrant labour to undercut wages and invest in local services and housing in areas of rapid population growth that they will be felt across the country.

And this Government has done nothing of the sort. Instead, its failure to train enough skilled workers means we have become reliant on migration to keep our economy functioning.

This is especially true of our NHS which depends on migrant nurses and doctors to fill vacancies. This Government has failed to invest in training, and its abolition of nurses’ bursaries, and its decision to pick a fight with junior doctors is likely to make those shortages worse.

As a former representative of NHS workers, I value our NHS and admire the dedication of all its staff. It is Labour’s proudest creation. But right now, it would be in even greater crisis if many on the Leave side had their way. Some of whom have argued against the NHS and free healthcare on demand in principle.

And of course it is EU regulations that that underpin many rights at work, like holiday entitlement, maternity leave, rights to take breaks and limits to how many hours we can work, and that have helped to improve protection for agency workers.

The Tories and UKIP are on record as saying they would like to cut back EU-guaranteed workplace rights if they could.

A Labour government would instead strengthen rights at work making common cause with our allies to raise employment standards throughout Europe, to stop the undercutting of wages and conditions by unscrupulous employers, to strengthen the protection of every worker in Europe.

Just imagine what the Tories would do to workers’ rights here in Britain if we voted to leave the EU in June. They’d dump rights on equal pay, working time, annual leave, for agency workers, and on maternity pay as fast as they could get away with it. It would be a bonfire of rights that Labour governments secured within the EU.

Not only that, it wouldn’t be a Labour government negotiating a better settlement for working people with the EU. It would be a Tory government, quite possibly led by Boris Johnson and backed by Nigel Farage, that would negotiate the worst of all worlds: a free market free-for-all shorn of rights and protections.

It is sometimes easier to blame the EU, or worse to blame foreigners, than to face up to our own problems. At the head of which right now is a Conservative Government that is failing the people of Britain.

There is nothing remotely patriotic about selling off our country and our national assets to the highest bidder. Or in handing control of our economy to City hedge-funds and tax-dodging corporations based in offshore tax havens.

There is a strong socialist case for staying in the European Union. Just as there is also a powerful socialist case for reform and progressive change in Europe

That is why we need a Labour government, to stand up – at the European level – for industries and communities in Britain, to back public ownership and public services, to protect and extend workers’ rights and to work with our allies to make both Britain and Europe work better for working people.

Many people are still weighing up how they will vote in this referendum. And I appeal to everyone, especially young people – who will live longest with the consequences  – to make sure you are registered to vote. And vote to keep Britain in Europe this June. This is about your future.

By working together across our continent, we can develop our economies protect social and human rights, tackle climate change and clamp down on tax dodgers.

You cannot build a better world unless you engage with the world, build allies and deliver change. The EU, warts and all, has proved itself to be a crucial international framework to do that.

That is why I will be am backing Britain to remain in Europe and I hope you will too.

Source: http://labourlist.org/2016/04/europe-needs-to-change-but-i-am-voting-to-stay-corbyns-full-speech-on-the-eu/

← Older posts

Categories

Birdwell Roundabout Update

Barnsley Council Jobs

Landlord licensing consultation ends 24th September

Labour Campaign for Human Rights

Labour Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament

TRADES UNION CONGRESS

A Great Big List of FOI Ideas

Contact Details for Barnsley Council

Larry the Cat: Twitter account of The Chief Mouser to the Cabinet Office.

Recent Posts

  • Kingstone By-election
  • Ministry of Justice sneaks privatisation past parliament
  • This is bad news if you were born in the North of England
  • Council steps in to save substance misuse service
  • This map shows what white Europeans associate with race – and it makes for uncomfortable reading
  • Tory austerity means the memories of Jarrow March are all too clear today
  • Two scams a day reported to councils fighting fraudsters
  • Why the Conservatives struggle with empathy
  • First case of UK employment tribunal recognising foster care workers as employees
  • Jeremy Hunt’s misleading mental health claims
  • JSA Maximum Sanction Increases To Three Years From October 22nd
  • 52 sentences that will help you through Yorkshire Day!

Archives

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 203 other followers

Advertisements

This site is developed and maintained for free by local volunteers for the benefit of Labour Party Supporters in Kingstone and is powered by WordPress.

Our Disclaimer

Powered by WordPress.com.

Cancel
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies from WordPress.com and selected partners.
To find out more, as well as how to remove or block these, see here: Our Cookie Policy