WEEKLY NEWS

Weekly News 6 January 2012

Health and Safety Red Tape. Prime Minister David Cameron has announced a series of measures to tackle the compensation culture and free small and medium enterprises (SMEs) from the stranglehold of health and safety red tape.

Speaking to an audience of small businesses and entrepreneurs at Intuit UK in Maidenhead, David Cameron announced that:

to tackle the compensation culture and address the fear from businesses of being sued for trivial or excessive claims - we will extend the current scheme that caps the amount that lawyers can earn from small value personal injury claims, and reduce overall costs in cases funded by 'no win no fee' deals. This will help bring down the cost of many cases and deter the speculative health and safety claims made against good businesses that would appear not to have done anything wrong.

the health and safety law on strict liability for civil claims will be changed so that businesses are no longer automatically at fault if something goes wrong.

we will investigate the demands made by insurance companies on businesses to ensure that levels of compliance do not force businesses to go far beyond what is actually required by the the law to secure their insurance cover.

we will write to the Chief Executives of all major insurance companies, asking them to set out what they will do to deal with this problem - and they will be invited to a meeting at Downing Street next month to set out their plans.

Additional funding for business. The Prime Minister has also announced that next month we will ask organisations to bid to manage the £1bn of Government funding available through the Business Finance Partnership. This fund will help businesses access the finance they need to grow.

David Cameron said:

"I am determined that we do everything possible to take the brakes off business: cutting taxes; slashing red tape; putting billions into big infrastructure projects; making it much easier for British firms to get out there and trade with the world.

"And there is something else we are doing: waging war against the excessive health and safety culture that has become an albatross around the neck of British businesses.

"Talk of 'health and safety' can too often sound farcical or marginal. But for British businesses - especially the smaller ones that are so vital to the future of our economy - this is a massively important issue. Every day they battle against a tide of risk assessment forms and face the fear of being sued for massive sums. The financial cost of this culture runs into the billions each year.

"So this coalition has a clear New Year's resolution: to kill off the health and safety culture for good. I want 2012 to go down in history not just as Olympics year or Diamond Jubilee year, but the year we get a lot of this pointless time-wasting out of the British economy and British life once and for all."

Success of Academies Michael Gove, the Secretary of State for Education, has outlined the enormous success of the Government's academies programme, announcing another milestone as the number of academies in England reaches 1,500.

Academies are a key element of building a school system in which teachers have more power and in which they are more accountable to parents - not politicians.

Yet, these reforms have been opposed by Labour and the unions.

Michael Gove said: "The same ideologues who are happy with failure - the enemies of promise - also say you can't get the same results in the inner cities as the leafy suburbs so it's wrong to stigmatise these schools.

"Let's be clear what these people mean. Let's hold their prejudices up to the light. What are they saying?

"If you're poor, if you're Turkish, if you're Somali, then we don't expect you to succeed. You will always be second class and it's no surprise your schools are second class.

"I utterly reject that attitude. It's the bigoted backward bankrupt ideology of a left wing establishment that perpetuates division and denies opportunity. And it's an ideology that's been proven wrong time and time again."

Youth Services. Children's Minister, Tim Loughton, has announced that young people across the country should be able to inspect their local youth services and advise on how to improve them.

The Government has published a new vision for young people and youth services, Positive for Youth, in which Mr Loughton calls on every local authority to get young people involved in local decision-making.

The Government also wants local authorities to build stronger partnerships with voluntary organisations and local businesses to develop opportunities for young people in their local communities. Many businesses, such as Starbucks, 02 and the Co-operative are leading the way with innovative projects that are inspiring young people. Positive for Youth brings together everything the Government is doing to support young people. It has been produced with youth professionals and young people themselves.

To build a society that is more Positive for Youth, the Government is:

Providing £320,000 to Business in the Community to build links between businesses and young people in their local areas.

Giving young people the chance to 'youth proof' government policy. A new national scrutiny group and youth select committee will monitor and advise on government policy.

Calling on all local authorities to give young people a voice in local decision-making. Local authorities should introduce programmes like youth mayors or youth inspectors to give youngsters a say. This could include: auditing local services such as youth clubs and leisure services to make them more youth-friendly.

Establishing four new Youth Innovation Zones to develop new, creative approaches to youth services across the country. The first four areas, Devon, Hammersmith and Fulham, Haringey, and Knowsley will each get £40,000 to set up the zones.

Publishing revised statutory guidance for consultation in the New Year on local authorities' duty to secure activities and services for young people.

Providing capital investment to complete 63 myplace centres by April 2013, and developing a national approach to exploit their potential to be led by communities and businesses.

Expanding National Citizen Service to offer 30,000 places to young people in 2012, 60,000 in 2013, and 90,000 in 2014.

Tim Loughton said: "For too long young people in this country have had a raw deal. The vast majority are law-abiding, want to do well at school and are making a positive contribution to their communities. More youngsters volunteer than any other group in society. We must recognise their achievements.

"I want Positive for Youth to be a turning point in how we view and treat young people, and in how we think about youth services. In a tough economic climate, bringing in charities and businesses to help develop and provide youth services is the way forward. There are some superb projects run by organisations like British Youth Council, O2, Starbucks and the Co-operative, building links between young people and their local communities.

"Councils should also think about how to get young people involved in decisions that affect them. I want them to open their doors to young people and get them involved - auditing and inspecting local services and listening to their ideas on how to improve things."

Raising young people's aspirations and educational attainment is crucial to their success in life. The Government has already announced in the Schools White Paper: The Importance of Teaching, significant reforms and investment to radically improve educational standards. The Government has also set out a new strategy to increase young people's participation in learning and work, Building Engagement, Building Futures.

The Government will be measuring progress by local authorities, and central government, in delivering better, more targeted opportunities for young people. Without creating new burdens on local authorities, the Government will publish annual data on positive and aspirational measures for young people. The Government will also publish at the end of 2012 a 'one year on' progress update towards creating a society which is more positive for youth.

Kris Engskov, Managing Director of Starbucks UK & Ireland, said: "There are growing pressures facing youth today, but there are still many reasons to be optimistic about the large number of incredible young people with the ambition and enthusiasm to make a difference in their communities.

"They deserve our support and they deserve to be heard. That's why we're backing the Positive for Youth initiative and why we are giving funding and training to young people across the country through our Starbucks Youth Action Programme."

Ronan Dunne, Chief Executive Officer, Telefonica UK Ltd said: "We believe in young people. That is why we run O2 Think Big - a social action programme that provides funding, training and support for young people who are running projects across the UK to improve their local communities."

"I am constantly struck by the desire of young people to contribute to society, to make a positive difference to the world around them. Thousands of our staff gets involved in their local Think Big projects and many of the young people we support spend time inside the company to learn more about our business and the world of work. Giving young people the support and opportunities they need to fulfil their potential is one of the biggest challenges facing the country. We welcome the Government's Positive for Youth initiative."

Weekly News 18 December 2011

The Congleton Constituency Conservative Association wishes all its readers a very Happy Christmas and New Year

Europe

The Government believes that Britain should play a leading role in an enlarged European Union, but that no further areas of power should be transferred to Brussels without a referendum. This approach strikes the right balance between constructive engagement with the EU to deal with the issues that affect us all, and protecting our national sovereignty.

We will continue to be an active and activist participant in the European Union, with the goal of ensuring that Europe is equipped to face the challenges of the 21st century: global competitiveness, global warming and global poverty.

We will ensure that there is no further transfer of sovereignty or areas of power over the course of the Parliament.

We have introduced a Bill in order to amend the 1972 European Communities Act so that any proposed future treaty that transferred areas of power, or competences, would be subject to a referendum on that treaty - a 'referendum lock'.

We have introduced a United Kingdom Sovereignty clause to make it clear that ultimate authority remains with Parliament.

We will ensure that Britain does not join or prepare to join the Euro in this Parliament.

We are strongly defending the UK's national interests in the EU budget negotiations and agree that the EU budget should only focus on those areas where the EU can add value.

We are pressing for the European Parliament to have only one seat, in Brussels.

We support the further enlargement of the EU subject to all candidates meeting the strict accession criteria.

Economy

Labour left the economy in a mess. The Government believes that it is the most vulnerable who are most at risk from the debt crisis and that it is deeply unfair to leave it to our children to pay off. We are currently spending £120 million every day on debt interest alone.

We understand that the longer we leave the nation’s credit card bill, the worse it will get. So we have taken immediate action to tackle the deficit and debt in a fair way to get the public finances back on track. We are embarking on a hard road. But it is a hard road to a better Britain.

Dealing with Labour’s decade of debt while prioritising the NHS and schools

We have set out a credible plan to tackle the deficit and debt. Our plan will eliminate the structural deficit – the part that does not go away as the economy grows – over the next five years, with the main burden borne by reduced spending rather than increased taxes. The National Debt as a share of our economy will be falling by the end of the parliament.

The Spending Review has set out our choices. We have chosen to prioritise the NHS, schools, security and the infrastructure that will help our economy grow. To do so we have reformed welfare and cut waste.

Tough but fair – ensuring the richest shoulder the greatest burden

We will make the benefit system fairer by withdrawing Child Benefit from households with one or more higher-rate taxpayers – about 15 per cent of families.

We have ensured that the banks make a fair contribution by introducing a permanent Bank Levy which will raise £2.5 billion every year over the current Parliament.

We have ensured that this year there will be no cash bonuses over £2,000 at taxpayer-owned banks.

We will protect those on low incomes from the effect of public sector pay constraint and other spending constraints.

We will work in partnership with local authorities in England to freeze council tax in 2011-12.

Boosting growth

We have delivered on our election promise by stopping the most damaging part of Labour’s planned increase in employer’s National Insurance Contributions – a tax on jobs.

To help small firms get the finance they need, we have got the banks to lend £190 billion of new credit to business this year, up from £179 billion in 2010. £76 billion of this lending will be to small businesses – 10 billion more than in 2010.

We will cut Corporation Tax from 28 per cent to 24 per cent over four years which is the lowest rate in the G7. We have also cut the small companies’ rate to 20 per cent.

We are conducting a fundamental review of employment law to ensure we provide the competitive environment small businesses need to thrive.

We are carrying out a cross-government Growth Review to remove government barriers to growth. Priority will be given to improving the planning system; supporting inward investors and exporters; and reforming the competition regime.

We will boost growth outside the South East through a Regional Growth Fund and abolishing the tax on jobs for new businesses in the regions.

Troubled families

Families suffering problems such as drug and alcohol abuse, mental illness, poverty and anti-social behaviour, cost an estimated £9 billion a year in spending on the NHS, the police and social services. This Government believes it is time for leadership at the top, action in councils and results on the ground.

The Prime Minister announced plans to radically transform the lives of the country’s most troubled families, making almost £450 million available in a new, determined, cross-Government drive to turn around 120,000 of these families by the end of this Parliament.

Crime and Policing

We have a clear plan to cut crime and anti-social behaviour, by reforming the police to make them more responsive and by reforming the criminal justice system to cut re-offending. We are working with police forces to drive out wasteful spending, and increase efficiency in the backroom roles.

We have scrapped all targets and set the police one objective: to cut crime.

We are cutting costs and scrapping bureaucracy, saving millions of police hours – so officers can spend less time on paperwork and more time on the beat.

We are introducing measures to make the police accountable to local communities through directly-elected Police and Crime Commissioners.

We will create a new National Crime Agency to fight serious and organised crime including the exploitation of children, and cyber crime.

We have launched police.uk, a street by street level crime map that shows detailed local crime data so the public can get proper information about crime in their neighbourhoods and hold the police to account for their performance.

We will require police forces to hold regular 'beat meetings' so that residents can hold them to account.

We have banned the sale of alcohol at below the price of duty plus vat to address binge drinking.

We are tackling binge drinking without unfairly penalising responsible drinkers, pubs and important local industries.

We are doubling the fines on premises selling alcohol to the under-aged and to allow councils and the police to shut down permanently any shop or bar that persistently sells alcohol to children.

We have introduced powers to quickly ban ‘legal highs’ to better protect vulnerable young people.

This is the Statement made to the House of Commons by the Prime Minister on 12 December 2011 (taken from Hansard and copied with their permission)

“I went to Brussels with one objective: to protect Britain’s national interest, and that is what I did. Let me refer to what I said to the House last Wednesday. I made it clear that if the eurozone countries wanted a treaty involving all 27 members of the European Union, we would insist on some safeguards for Britain to protect our own national interests. Some thought that the safeguards I was asking for were relatively modest. Nevertheless, satisfactory safeguards were not forthcoming, so I did not agree to the treaty. Let me be clear about exactly what happened, what it means for Britain and what I see happening next.

Let me take the House through the events of last week. At this Council, the eurozone economies agreed that there should be much tighter fiscal discipline in the eurozone as part of restoring market confidence. That is something that Britain recognises as necessary in a single currency. We want the eurozone to sort out its problems. That is in Britain’s national interest because the crisis in the eurozone is having a chilling effect on Britain’s economy too, so the question at the Council was not whether there should be greater fiscal discipline in the eurozone, but how it should be achieved.

There were two possible outcomes: either a treaty of all 27 countries, with proper safeguards for Britain; or a separate treaty in which eurozone countries and others would pool their sovereignty on an intergovernmental basis, with Britain maintaining its position in the single market and in the European Union of 27 members. We went seeking a deal at 27 and I responded to the German and French proposal for treaty change in good faith, genuinely looking to reach an agreement at the level of the whole of the European Union, with the necessary safeguards for Britain. Those safeguards—on the single market and on financial services—were modest, reasonable and relevant. We were not trying to create an unfair advantage for Britain. London is the leading centre for financial services in the world, and this sector

employs 100,000 people in Birmingham and a further 150,000 people in Scotland. It supports the rest of the economy in Britain and more widely in Europe.

We were not asking for a UK opt-out, special exemption or a generalised emergency brake on financial services legislation. They were safeguards sought for the EU as a whole. We were simply asking for a level playing field for open competition for financial services companies in all EU countries, with arrangements that would enable every EU member state to regulate its financial sector properly. To those who say that we were trying to go soft on the banks, nothing could be further from the truth. We have said that we are going to respond positively to the tough measures set out in the Vickers report. There are issues about whether this can be done under current European regulations, so one of the things we wanted was to make sure we could go further than European rules on regulating the banks. The Financial Services Authority report on RBS today demonstrates just how necessary that is and perhaps instead of talking Opposition Members will remember their responsibility for the mess that they created.

Those who say that this proposed treaty change was all about safeguarding the eurozone, and so Britain should not have tried to interfere or to insist on safeguards, are fundamentally wrong as well. The EU treaty is the treaty of those outside the euro as much as it is for those inside the euro, so creating a new eurozone treaty within the existing EU treaty without proper safeguards would have changed the EU for us, too. It would not just have meant a whole new bureaucracy, with rules and competences for the eurozone countries being incorporated directly into the EU treaty; it would have changed the nature of the EU—strengthening the eurozone without balancing measures to strengthen the single market.

Of course, an intergovernmental arrangement is not without risks, but we did not want to see that imbalance hard-wired into the treaty without proper safeguards. To those who believe that that was not a real risk, I tell them that France and Germany said in their letter last week that the eurozone should work on single market issues such as financial regulation and competitiveness. That is why we required safeguards, and I make no apology for it.

Of course, I wish those safeguards had been accepted, but frankly I have to tell the House that the choice was a treaty without proper safeguards or no treaty—and the right answer was no treaty. It was not an easy thing to do, but it was the right thing to do. As a result, eurozone countries and others are now making separate arrangements for the fiscal integration that they need to solve the problems in the eurozone. They recognise that this approach will be less attractive, more complex and more difficult to enforce, and they would prefer to incorporate the new treaty into the EU treaties in future. Our position remains the same.

Let me turn to what this means for Britain. Britain remains a full member of the European Union, and the events of the last week do nothing to change that. Our membership of the EU is vital to our national interest. We are a trading nation, and we need the single market for trade, investment and jobs. The EU makes Britain a gateway to the largest single market in the world for investors; it secures half of our exports and millions of British jobs; and membership of the EU strengthens our ability to progress our foreign policy objectives, too, giving us a strong voice on the global stage on issues such as trade and, as we have seen in Durban this week, climate change and the environment.

So we are in the European Union and we want to be. This week there will be meetings of the Councils on Transport, Telecommunications and Energy, and Agriculture and Fisheries. Britain will be there as a full member of each one, but I believe in an EU with the flexibility of a network, not the rigidity of a bloc. We are not in the Schengen no-borders agreement, and neither should we be, because it is right that we use our natural advantage as an island to protect ourselves against illegal immigration, guns and drugs; we are not in the single currency, and while I am Prime Minister we will never join; we are not in the new euro area bail-out funds, even though we had to negotiate our way out of them; and we are not in this year’s euro-plus pact.

When the euro was created, the previous Government agreed that there would need to be separate meetings of eurozone Ministers, and it is hardly surprising that those countries required by treaty to join the euro chose to join the existing eurozone members in developing future arrangements for the eurozone. Those countries are going to be negotiating a treaty that passes unprecedented powers from their nation states to Brussels. Some will have budgets effectively checked and re-written by the European Commission. None of this will happen in Britain. But, just as we wanted safeguards for Britain’s interests if we changed the EU treaty, we will continue to be vigilant in protecting our national interests.

An intergovernmental treaty, while it does not carry with it the same dangers for Britain, is none the less not without risks. The decision of the new eurozone-led arrangement is a discussion that is just beginning. We want the new treaty to work in stabilising the euro and putting it on a firm foundation. I understand why they would want to use EU institutions—but this is new territory and does raise important issues that we will want to explore with the euro-plus countries. So in the months to come we will be vigorously engaged in the debate about how institutions built for 27 should continue to operate fairly for all member states, Britain included. The UK is supportive of the role of the institutions, not least because of the role they play in safeguarding the single market, so we will look constructively at any proposals with an open mind. But let us be clear about one thing: if Britain had agreed treaty change without safeguards, there would be no discussion. Britain would not have proper protection.

Finally, let me turn to the next steps. The most pressing step of all is to fix the problems of the euro. As I have said, that involves far more than simply medium-term fiscal integration, important though that is. Above all, the eurozone needs to focus, at the very least, on implementing its October agreement. The markets want to be assured that the eurozone firewall is big enough, that Europe’s banks are being adequately recapitalised, and that problems in countries like Greece have been properly dealt with. There was some progress at the Council, but far more needs to be done. The eurozone countries noted the possibility of additional IMF assistance. Our position on IMF resources remains the one I set out at the Cannes G20 summit. Alongside non-European G20 countries, we are ready to look positively at strengthening the IMF’s capacity to help countries in difficulty across the world. But IMF resources are for countries, not currencies, and cannot be used specifically to support the euro—and we would not support that.

There also needs to be greater competitiveness between the countries of the eurozone. To be frank, the whole of Europe needs to become more competitive. That is the way to more jobs and growth. Many eurozone countries have substantial trade deficits as well as budget deficits. If they are not to be reliant on massive transfers of capital, they need to become more competitive and trade out of those deficits. The British agenda has always been about improving Europe’s competitiveness, and at recent Councils we have achieved substantial progress on completing the single market in services, opening up our energy markets, and exempting micro-businesses from future regulations. This has been done by working in partnership with a combination of countries that are in the eurozone and outside it. Similarly, on this year’s EU budget, it was Britain, in partnership with France, Germany and Holland, that successfully insisted on no real increases in resources—for the first time in many, many years in the EU.

On defence, Britain is an absolutely key European player, whether leading the NATO rapid reaction force or tackling piracy in the Indian ocean. Our partnership with France was crucial in taking successful action in Libya. Britain will continue to form alliances on the things we want to get done. We have always had a leading role in advocating the policy of enlargement and, at this Council, we all celebrated the signing of Croatia’s accession treaty. That was one European treaty I was happy to sign.

Let me conclude with this point. I do not believe there is a binary choice for Britain: that we can either sacrifice the national interest on issue after issue or lose our influence at the heart of Europe’s decision-making processes. I am absolutely clear that it is possible to be a full, committed and influential member of the European Union but to stay out of arrangements where they do not protect our interests. That is what I have done at this Council. That is what I will continue to do as long as I am Prime Minister. It is the right course for this country. I commend this statement to the House.”

Congleton

WEEKLY NEWS

Europe

Economy

Crime and Policing

Congleton Conservatives