We will NOT nationalise Grangemouth oil refinery, admits Labour 

Union accuses Sir Keir Starmer of ‘industrial vandalism’

Prime Minister finally admits government rescue deal ‘not on the table’

By Georgia Edkins, 

Scottish Political Editor

THE DAILY MAIL
12 October 2024

Sir Keir Starmer has been accused of ‘industrial vandalism’ as Labour confirmed it would not strike a rescue deal to nationalise the Grangemouth oil refinery.

Ahead of the Prime Minister’s major UK investment summit on Monday, his energy department finally admitted that pleas for the UK government to buyout Scotland’s only refinery - even if only on a temporary basis - were not being considered.

Desperate union chiefs, workers and campaigners have for weeks implored UK ministers to take a stake in the oil refinery to keep it running amid fears closing it would threaten the country’s energy security, and de-industrialise the local area.

However, in a devastating hammer blow to thousands of Scots workers, an energy department insider said: ‘The company [Petroineos] were very clear that there was no viable commercial future for the refinery operation.

'It would not be right for the Government to underwrite a business that does not have a viable commercial future.’

Grangemouth’s owner Petroineos announced it was shutting the facility in the second financial quarter of 2025

And an official spokesman for the Department of Energy and Net Zero said: ‘We have never received any proposals about nationalising Grangemouth and there are no discussions under way about doing so.

‘We are focused on finding a viable clean energy future for Grangemouth and have provided £100 million funding, alongside the Scottish Government, to help the workforce find good, alternative jobs and invest in the community.’

Grangemouth’s current owner Petroineos announced it was shutting the facility in the second financial quarter of 2025 with the loss of 400 jobs last month - to the fury of the local community.

Thousands more ancillary workers will also be affected by the closure according to a report by PriceWaterhouseCooper carried out on behalf of Scottish Enterprise.

Despite pressure from unions and campaigners for the UK government to take a stake in the plant the Mail on Sunday has been told this is ‘not something the government is looking at’ and it is ‘not on the table’.

Last night local Labour MP Brian Leishman said the newly-revealed position had filled him with ‘despair’ and called on Sir Keir to ‘learn from what happened to the miners of the 1980s,’ referring to Margaret Thatcher's closure of the mines.


Sir Keir Starmer will not step in to save the refinery at Grangemouth despite the pleas of local Labour MP Brian Leishman

Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: ‘What is happening in Grangemouth is an act of industrial vandalism. Unite will not allow Scotland’s only refinery to be mothballed with the loss of hundreds of jobs.

'It doesn’t matter the colour of a party’s rosette, Unite will always ferociously hold the government to account when they are wrong and putting jobs at risk,’ adding: ‘We need public investment to come with public stakes that guarantee jobs and a long-term commitment.’

In September, the site’s current owners Petroineos, a joint venture between Asia’s largest oil and gas producer PetroChina and Ineos - the chemicals firm founded by Manchester United’s billionaire co-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe - blamed global competition and falling demand for fossil fuels as they announced its impending closure next year.

It sparked serious concern over a raft of job losses at the site, which produces vast quantities of petrol, diesel, heating oil and aviation fuel for the UK.

In response Labour and SNP Ministers hastily added £20 million to an existing £80 million growth fund for the local Falkirk area.

They also talked up Project Willow, a joint government investment scheme that would examine ways of creating a new long-term industry at the site, focused mainly around storing green renewables.

Yet unions hit back, and insisted the oil refinery must be saved.

Addressing the Unite Union conference in Dundee, general secretary Sharon Graham said Energy and Net Zero secretary Ed Miliband and Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer were ‘on notice’.

She said: ‘The government must make the necessary investments to safeguard its future. Labour must be forced to act.’

The Keep Grangemouth Working campaign group has also blasted the decision by PetroIneos to close the site and called on the UK and Scottish Governments to act to save jobs.

Last week, local MP Brian Leishman submitted a House of Commons Early Day Motion calling on the UK Government to buy a so-called ‘transitional stake’ in Grangemouth.

That would see the UK Government takeover the plant from as early as next year until a ‘viable’ green energy alternative is found for the plant.

It has been signed by a dozen MPs, including fellow Labour MPs Euan Stainbank and Diane Abbott, and has been supported by campaigners.

In an article for this newspaper published today, Mr Leishman suggested that he had held ‘early discussions’ with UK ministers over his plans.

Labour MP Brian Leishman called on the UK Government to buy a so-called ‘transitional stake’ in Grangemouth

However, a UK government source said that no such proposals were being considered.

They said that nationalisation - either temporarily or in full - was not being discussed by ministers or policy officials.

As well as threatening a Labour civil war, the newly-revealed government position may cast a long shadow over Sir Keir Starmer’s big UK Investment Summit tomorrow, during which his Scotland Office will tout the government’s newly-launched industrial strategy.

It is another bombshell ahead of the major event on Monday, intended to showcase the attractions of Britain to international business, after a £1billion deal was seemingly pulled after Sir Keir’s ministers criticised P&O Ferries.

Ports and logistics giant DP World, the parent company of P&O Ferries, reportedly dropped a major announcement about its London Gateway container port after a press release from Angela Rayner and Transport Secretary Louise Haigh described action by P&O Ferries towards seafarers as ‘outrageous’ and a ‘national scandal’.

Discussions about the future of Grangemouth have also involved claims there is a serious prospective buyer that could step in to keep the refinery going.

North American petroleum giant Hudson Reid Holdings Inc., headed by Canadian businessman Garth Reid, is reported to be interested in the site.

Stacey Oil Services - an equipment company based at Portlethen, near Aberdeen - is also understood to have been working on a possible deal, however Petroineos says it has not received any ‘credible’ bids for the facility.

Starmer sucks up to bosses and angers unions on Labour’s 100th day in office

The Labour government says it's had ‘warm engagement’ with DP World bosses who sacked 800 P&O Ferry workers two years ago

Workers march against P&O bosses in Dover in April 2022 

(Picture: Guy Smallman)

By Tomáš Tengely-Evans
Saturday 12 October 2024 

SOCIALIST WORKER Issue

Keir Starmer marked Labour’s first 100 days in office on Saturday by siding with bosses who’d sacked hundreds of workers on the spot.

Transport secretary Louise Haigh had described P&O Ferries—which sacked 800 workers in a brutal fire and rehire in 2022—as a “rogue operator”. “I’ve been boycotting P&O Ferries for two-and-a-half years and I would encourage consumers to do the same,” she said on Wednesday.

Her comments came the day before Labour unveiled its Employment Rights Bill, which is a step forward but falls short on the party’s pledges. It promised to “end unscrupulous fire and rehire practices”, but wouldn’t ban bosses from using the vicious tactic.

That still outraged DP World—P&O’s owner—which threatened to pull a £1 billion investment into the Thames Gateway port project on Friday.

Starmer slapped down Haigh in a BBC interview, saying, “Well, look, that’s not the view of the government.”

Whitehall sources told BBC News that there was “warm engagement” between senior figures in the firm and the government since Starmer’s criticism.

DP World bosses will now go to the International Investment Summit on Monday. Starmer, chancellor Rachel Reeves and business secretary Jonathan Reynolds are preparing to court big business at the conference.

Reeves and Reynolds supported “intense lobbying” from bosses to water down protections in the Employment Rights Bill.

Starmer is desperate to regain control after almost a month of scandals surrounding luxury gifts. Morgan McSweeney—a ruthless Labour right winger—was appointed as his chief of staff last week after Sue Grey was pushed out.

But the sense of panic remains for Labour and is opening up potential divisions. One ally of Haigh described the briefings as “disgraceful” and suggested the circle around the prime minister “are running out of friends.”

Labour’s support for big business is driving more tension with the unions, which had been more than willing to “give Labour a chance”.

Matt Wrack, FBU firefighters’ union general secretary, slammed Starmer’s criticism of Haigh as “unacceptable”. “Louise Haigh has the full support and solidarity of the FBU in setting out clear opposition to P&O and other rogue employers,” he said.

“Any backlash or briefing against Labour politicians and trade unionists who challenge or clamp down on firms that have been exploiting and abusing workers in that way is completely unacceptable, wherever it comes from.”

He added, “It’s outrageous that DP World is seeking to derail the extension of employment rights that Labour was voted into government to deliver.

“Rogue employers and corporate bullies cannot be allowed to hold a democratically elected government to ransom.”

A new YouGov poll this week showed that half of Labour voters are disappointed in Starmer’s government.

Starmer unpopularity goes deeper than the gifts scandal because Labour is committed to austerity mark 2 ahead of the budget on 30 October.

Labour MPs, including “soft left” figures such as Haigh, voted to keep children in poverty and snatch winter fuel payments from pensioners.

Earlier this week Wrack addressed an FBU rally of over 1,000 firefighters, who demanded Labour breaks with austerity.

He described the Labour government as an “opportunity” after 14 years of Tory rule. “The question is whether we seize that opportunity to fight for better conditions,” he said.

He warned “those who think it’s going to be easy under a Labour government”, pointing to the Tony Blair government’s attacks.

The Labour government is dashing hopes for what little change it promised, as it sucks up to bosses and prepares for a new round of austerity.

But struggle outside parliament—on the picket lines and streets—can win the transformative change working class people need. Let’s seize that opportunity by fighting back.

P&O Ferries owner's £1bn investment in UK will go ahead despite transport secretary calling for boycott of shipping firm

Sky News
 Sat 12 October 2024




A £1bn investment in Britain by port operator DP World will go ahead as planned, after a frantic effort by ministers and diplomats to repair relations following a row with the Dubai-owned multinational that threatened to overshadow a crucial investment summit.

On Friday, Sky News revealed that the planned investment was under review and that DP World's chairman, Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, had cancelled plans to attend the summit, following criticism by ministers of P&O Ferries, a subsidiary company.

On Wednesday, Transport Secretary Louise Haigh described P&O Ferries, which summarily sacked 800 seafarers in March 2022, as a "rogue operator" and called for a consumer boycott.


Her comments caused considerable offence to DP World's leadership as it prepared to sign-off of the £1bn investment in London Gateway container port, timed to coincide with the summit.

In an attempt to salvage the situation Sir Keir Starmer slapped down Ms Haigh, saying the government did not share her views, and officials from Downing Street and the Foreign Office are understood to have been involved in efforts to repair relations.

DP World has told Sky News that Mr bin Sulayem will attend the event in London and it is understood the investment will be confirmed as planned, before a row with ministers threw the flagship announcement into doubt.

A DP World spokesperson told Sky News: "Following constructive and positive discussions with the government, we have been given the clarity we need. We look forward to participating in Monday's International Investment Summit."

Mr bin Sulayem is expected to meet the UK's prime minister, perhaps as soon as Sunday, when delegates will gather for a reception in central London.

The investment in London Gateway will see the addition of two new berths taking the total to six, and a second rail terminal. Capacity, currently at almost two million containers a year, will double and the port is expected to become Britain's largest by volume within five years.

The investment is expected to create 400 full-time jobs in addition to the 1,200 people already employed at London Gateway, and will take the total spent at the facility on the Thames Estuary in Essex, near the village of Corringham, to more than £3bn.

A logistics park employing 1,500 people has also been developed adjacent to the port, formerly the site of a Shell oil refinery.

DP World owns ports and logistics operations in more than 60 countries and generated global revenues of almost £14bn last year.

A government spokeswoman said: "DP World's investment in Britain is a vote of confidence in the stability and seriousness of the government. We welcome the jobs and opportunities it will create.

"By working in partnership with businesses and investors from all over the world, this government is unlocking the UK's potential and ambition. As our international investment summit will show, Britain is once again open for business."

P&O will attend investment summit after Starmer’s rebuke to minister over ‘cowboy’ comment
Amy-Clare Martin
Sat 12 October 2024 

Scroll back up to restore default view.


The owner of P&O ferries will attend a key investment summit after Sir Keir Starmer distanced himself from comments by a minister who called the firm a “cowboy operator”.

After efforts by Downing Street to smooth relations, it is understood that DP World will now attend Monday’s gathering, despite the row over Louise Haigh’s comments about the firm.

The ferry operator’s Dubai-based parent company was expected to announce £1bn of investment in the UK at the government’s International Investment Summit, which is thought to be key to government plans to attract investment to the country.

But DP World was reported to have pulled out of the event and placed its investment plans under review, according to Sky News, after deputy prime minister Angela Rayner and transport secretary Ms Haigh’s repeated criticism of P&O Ferries.

The operator faced scrutiny by politicians from both main parties in March 2022 when it suddenly sacked 800 British seafarers and replaced them with cheaper, mainly overseas, staff, saying it was necessary to stave off bankruptcy.

P&O Ferries was sharply criticised by MPs from all parties after suddenly sacking 800 seafarers in March 2022 (PA Archive)

On Wednesday, Ms Rayner and Ms Haigh introduced legislation to prevent similar actions, with the transport secretary describing P&O Ferries as “cowboy operators” and Ms Rayner saying the incident had been “an outrageous example of manipulation by an employer”.

In an ITV interview Ms Haigh went further, saying: “I’ve been boycotting P&O Ferries for two-and-a-half years, and I encourage consumers to do the same”.

However Sir Keir distanced himself from the remarks during an interview on the BBC News Newscast podcast. Asked whether Ms Haigh was right to call for a boycott of the firm, which she called a “rogue operator”, Sir Keir said: “Well, that’s not the view of the government.”

He added: “And that was an issue that well, you know, the issue that cropped up a number of years ago now that I think across parliament was a cause for real concern. And I think one of things we’ve done is to change that. So they can’t forget that that matters.

“But what matters to me is keeping our focus on that inward investment because it’s... the jobs of the future that matter and jobs that are well-paid, that are secure, that are skilled and in different parts of the country.”

In his interview, Sir Keir claimed he had achieved all he had hoped in his first 100 days as prime minister but admitted that “along the way, there were bumps and side winds, which I’d prefer we hadn’t bumped into and been pushed by”

.

Sir Keir Starmer on BBC’s ‘Newscast’ (PA Media)

The department of business and trade confirmed on Saturday that DP World will attend the summit.

Meanwhile Labour MP Liam Byrne, chairman of the House of Commons’ business and trade committee, sought to play down the row, saying Ms Haigh was “absolutely right” to criticise P&O’s past behaviour, but that new legislation would regulate how the firm can treat its staff.

Mr Byrne told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the ferry firm’s past treatment of its workers is “the kind of behaviour that we can’t have in this country”.

But he added that the government’s Employment Rights bill would provide a “very clear framework” on how companies can treat workers, which would “bite on” firms like P&O.

“I think there’s a bit of a split here between the past and the future. So look, Lou Haigh was absolutely right to say that the behaviour of P&O, owned by DP World, in the past has been completely unacceptable.”

Monday’s high-profile investment summit will be used by the government as a chance to champion firms who have already committed billions of pounds to the UK and attempt to woo others who are considering new deals.

“The message, I think, that is going to go from the summit is really clear that if you want to come and do business here, you can’t behave in the way that P&O has in the past,” Mr Byrne said.

“And I think the prime minister was expressing that confidence in the way in which DP World is going to run their shop.”

Labour seeks to balance P&O criticism after Starmer slaps down call for boycott

City AM reporter
Sat 12 October 2024

Starmer said Louise Haigh’s call for a boycott of P&O was “not the view of the Government”.


A Labour MP has sought to balance criticism of P&O Ferries after reports the Transport Secretary’s call for a boycott of the company could have jeopardised a £1bn investment in the UK.

Keir Starmer has said Louise Haigh’s call for a boycott of the ferry firm was “not the view of the Government”.

Liam Byrne said Louise Haigh was “absolutely right” to say that the behaviour of P&O, owned by DP World, has been “completely unacceptable.”

Byrne, the MP for Birmingham Hodge Hill and Solihull North, said the ferry firm’s past treatment of its workers is “the kind of behaviour that we can’t have in this country”.

But he added that the Government’s Employment Rights Bill would provide a “very clear framework” on how companies can treat workers, which would “bite on” firms like P&O.

Dubai-based DP World, P&O’s parent firm, is reported to have been planning to announce a major investment in the UK at the Government’s International Investment Summit next Monday.

But, according to Sky News, that investment is under review after Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner and Transport Secretary Haigh repeated criticism of P&O Ferries.

The operator was criticised by politicians from both main parties in March 2022 when it suddenly sacked 800 British seafarers and replaced them with cheaper, mainly overseas, staff, saying it was necessary to stave off bankruptcy.

On Wednesday, Rayner and Haigh introduced legislation to prevent similar actions, with the Transport Secretary describing P&O Ferries as “cowboy operators” and Rayner saying the incident had been “an outrageous example of manipulation by an employer”.

In an ITV interview, Haigh went further, saying: “I’ve been boycotting P&O Ferries for two-and-a-half years, and I encourage consumers to do the same”.

Asked whether Haigh was right to call for a boycott of the firm, which she called a “rogue operator”, Starmer said: “Well, that’s not the view of the Government.”

Asked about the DP World situation, Starmer told the BBC’s Newscast: “Well, look, I think we’ll resolve that.

“But… I think if you look at the last three or four weeks, you’ve seen £40-plus billion worth of investment.”

Byrne, chairman of the House of Commons’ Business and Trade Committee, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “I think there’s a bit of a split here between the past and the future. So look, Lou Haigh was absolutely right to say that the behaviour of P&O, owned by DP World, in the past has been completely unacceptable.”

P&O chief executive Peter Hebblethwaite told the committee he could not live on what he paid his workers and that his pay package was around £750,000, Byrne said.

“That is the kind of behaviour that we can’t have in this country,” he said.

Byrne added: “Once the Employment Rights Act goes through Parliament, there’ll be a very clear framework for the way in which we expect companies to behave and that is going to bite on companies like P&O.”

Monday’s high-profile investment summit will be used by the Government as a chance to champion firms who have already committed billions of pounds to the UK and attempt to woo others who are considering new deals.

“The message, I think, that is going to go from the summit is really clear that if you want to come and do business here, you can’t behave in the way that P&O has in the past.

“And I think the Prime Minister was expressing that confidence in the way in which DP World is going to run their shop,” Byrne said.

Helen Corbett, PA Political Correspondent

Starmer steps into cabinet row over P&O to rescue global summit in London

Toby Helm and Jon Ungoed-Thomas

THE GUARDIAN
Sat 12 October 2024

Keir Starmer in Edinburgh on Friday.Photograph: WPA/Getty Images


Keir Starmer expressed his full confidence on Saturday in the transport secretary, Louise Haigh, after an explosive cabinet row cast fresh doubt over his Downing Street operation and threatened to overshadow a key international investment summit in London.

Government sources said the prime minister and Haigh had spoken and made up on Saturday after Starmer appeared to rebuke her on Friday for branding P&O Ferries a “rogue operator” in a statement and then calling for customers to boycott the company in a subsequent media interview.

Related: P&O owner to attend UK investment summit despite minister’s criticism

The comments – and a description by the deputy prime minister, Angela Rayner, of P&O’s behaviour as “outrageous” when it sacked nearly 800 workers without notice in 2022 – led to reports that P&O’s parent company, DP World, had pulled out of Monday’s investment summit and shelved a £1bn infrastructure project at the London Gateway.

The workers sacked in March 2022 were told of their fate by the company in pre-recorded Zoom video. They were told: “I am sorry to inform you that your employment is terminated with immediate effect … your final day of employment is today.”

P&O Ferries boss Peter Hebblethwaite subsequently appeared before the Commons business select committee over the sacking scandal later that month. Darren Jones, then committee chair and now chief secretary to the Treasury, opened the session by asking: “Are you just a shameless criminal?”

Hebblethwaite told MPs the ferry business was not viable without the changes, adding: “I would make this decision again, I’m afraid.”

With DP World’s attendance at the investment summit in doubt, Starmer was asked on Friday if Haigh had been wrong to describe the company as a “cowboy operator” and to encourage a boycott. The prime minister appeared to cut her adrift, saying: “Well, look, that’s not the view of the government.”

Official sources said early on Saturday they were astonished that Haigh had been “hung out to dry” and “thrown under the bus” because she had only been echoing a government press release about new protections for seafarers, which had mentioned “rogue employers” and specifically said the measures were aimed at “preventing another P&O scandal”.

The release had been signed off by the No 10 communications team. “No 10 comms gave it the tick,” said a well-placed source.

Both Haigh and Rayner were said by insiders to be “hopping mad” that No 10 had not protected them, given that it had sanctioned the same kind of highly critical language towards P&O.

Downing Street sources later said that while the row had been smoothed over, it had been Haigh’s comments about a boycott that had gone too far and caused most annoyance to P&O’s owners.

On Saturday night, it appeared that DP World would, after all, attend the conference and that the investment of £1bn was no longer under threat. Senior sources confirmed that Haigh and Starmer had spoken on the phone and that he had expressed his confidence in her.

The Observer also understands that senior ministers, including Haigh, had not been informed in advance that DP World would be attending the investment summit, nor that they had been proposing a £1bn investment that would be announced at it.

They said the fact that they were not informed was “astonishing”, given that the government last week unveiled its key bill to improve workers’ rights and that this was highly relevant in that context.

“It shows the tension between the workers’ rights stuff and the investment stuff. This is going to keep happening unless we sort out the comms and the grid,” said an insider.

The row comes just days after Starmer’s chief of staff, the former senior civil servant Sue Gray, quit after weeks of bitter internal arguments and tensions inside No 10. She was replaced by another of the prime minister’s closest aides, Morgan McSweeney.

The investment summit has been talked up as a showpiece of the new government, aimed at attracting foreign money to the UK. Both Starmer and the chancellor, Rachel Reeves, will attend, as well as many of the world’s leading business figures.

The Labour MP Liam Byrne, chair of Westminster’s business and trade committee, said on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Saturday: “I think there’s a bit of a split here between the past and the future. Lou Haigh was absolutely right to say the behaviour of P&O, owned by DP World, in the past has been completely unacceptable.

“The calls for the boycott, let’s not forget, were originally made by Grant Shapps [the former Tory transport secretary] … but now we have got the employment rights bill coming through, I think we are all expecting businesses to play by the rules.”

The Dubai-based company owns the port of Southampton as well as London Gateway and was involved in the creation of some of the first of Rishi Sunak’s controversial freeports.

The latest Downing Street row comes as the government rolls out a series of announcements designed to underline its pro-business credentials before the summit.

It includes the appointment of a new industrial strategy advisory council, which will be chaired by the chief executive of Microsoft UK, Clare Barclay, as ministers unveil the first industrial strategy in seven years.

Jonathan Reynolds, the business secretary, said the new strategy would “hardwire stability for investors and give them the confidence to plan not just for the next year but for the next 10 years and beyond”.

He said: “This is the next step in our pro-worker, pro-business plan, which will see investors and workers alike get the security and stability they need to succeed.”

Reeves said:“I have never been more optimistic about our country’s potential. We have some of the brightest minds and greatest businesses in the world, from the creative industries and life sciences to advanced manufacturing and financial services.

“This government is determined to deliver on Britain’s potential so we can rebuild Britain and make every part of the country better off.”
A chorus of disapproval: P&O explainer

“Are you a shameless criminal?”: how DP World’s subsidiary P&O Ferries was attacked by everyone from Boris Johnson to Keir Starmer

17 March 2022
P&O Ferries tells nearly 800 staff in a pre-recorded Zoom video: “I am sorry to inform you that your employment is terminated with immediate effect.” They included those on the Dover to Calais and Liverpool to Dublin routes.

23 March 2022
Prime minister Boris Johnson condemns the “callous behaviour” of P&O Ferries. He said it appeared the company had broken the law and could “face fines running into millions of pounds”. Employment lawyers tell the BBC it was unlikely employment law had been broken.

24 March 2022
Peter Hebblethwaite, boss of P&O Ferries, is quizzed by the Commons’ business select committee. Darren Jones, now chief secretary to the Treasury, asks: “Are you just a shameless criminal?” Hebblethwaite tells MPs: “I’d make this decision again.” Cheaper staff would make the business viable, he said, at £5.50 an hour, plus pension contribution, food and accommodation.

30 March 2022
Transport secretary Grant Shapps tells MPs the “shameful” sackings exploited a loophole, flagging vessels in Cyprus to avoid UK laws.

30 May 2022
Ministers are said to have cancelled a Home Office contract with P&O Ferries to provide transport for UK Border Force staff.

27 March 2023
The Trades Union Congress attacks an “appalling decision” to allow DP World to co-run the Thames Freeport in Essex, as part of the Tory government’s freeports plan. It is reported the project will see more than £4.6bn in investment, with the creation of 21,000 jobs.

9 October 2024
Transport secretary Louise Haigh promotes a new employment rights bill on TV, urging viewers to join her in boycotting P&O Ferries. Deputy PM Angela Rayner is quoted in a press release the next day saying the sackings were “an outrageous example of manipulation by an employer”.

11 October 2024
DP World pulls out of a £1bn investment at London Gateway, part of the Thames Freeport, due to be announced at the government’s investment summit tomorrow, according to reports.

12 October 2024
It is reported that DP World would attend the investment summit. The prime minister Keir Starmer says calls for a P&O Ferries boycott did not have government support.

Blow to No 10's investment summit as port giant pulls £1bn announcement over P&O row

Sky News
 Fri 11 October 2024 



The government's Investment Summit has suffered a major blow after ports and logistics giant DP World pulled a scheduled announcement of a £1bn investment in its London Gateway container port, following criticism by members of Sir Keir Starmer's cabinet.

Sky News understands the Dubai-based company's investment was due to be a centrepiece of Monday's event, which is intended to showcase Britain's appeal to investors and will be attended by the prime minister and Chancellor Rachel Reeves.

DP World's investment in the port is now under review however, following criticism by Transport Secretary Louise Haigh and Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner of its subsidiary P&O Ferries.

In March 2022, P&O caused huge controversy by sacking 800 British seafarers and replacing them with cheaper, largely foreign workers, a move it said was required to prevent the company from collapsing.

Announcing new legislation to protect seafarers on Wednesday, Ms Haigh described P&O as a "rogue operator" and said consumers should boycott the company.

In a press release issued with Ms Rayner, Ms Haigh said P&O's actions were "a national scandal" and Ms Rayner described it as "an outrageous example of manipulation by an employer".

While Ms Haigh has previously criticised P&O's actions, the strength and timing of the ministers' language undermined efforts by the Department for Business and Trade to make the Investment Summit a turning point for the government and the economy.

Hundreds of business leaders and investors, including representatives of US private capital and sovereign wealth funds, will attend the event in the City of London, as the government tries to drum up billions of pounds in foreign investment to fund its plans.

The event is seen by Downing Street as an attempt to reset Sir Keir's premiership after a faltering first 100 days mired in rows about his advisers and acceptance of freebies.

As well as losing for now a £1bn investment in the UK's key strategic infrastructure, the apparent lack of coordination between ministers will again focus attention on the competence of government operations.

It is understood the decision to pull the announcement and review an investment that has been in negotiations for months was made personally by DP World's chairman Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem.

He had been due to attend the Investment Summit on Monday, but will now not travel to London.

Mr Sulayem has previously refused to apologise for P&O's actions, saying the summary sackings were a decision made by local management and ultimately ensured the survival of the company and thousands of jobs that were retained.

The £1bn investment was intended to expand the London Gateway facility, adding two new berths to the four that already exist and a second rail terminal. The expansion would have seen it become the UK's largest port by volume.

DP World generated global revenues of almost £14bn in 2023 and operates in more than 60 countries. It has already invested £2bn in London Gateway, and also owns and operates Southampton's container port.

A DP World spokesman told Sky News: "The investment is under review."

Responding to Sky's story, shadow science secretary Andrew Griffith said: "This is further evidence that Angela Rayner may have two jobs but she's costing other people theirs.

"It is not surprising that when you take union laws back to the strike-hit 70s, that the UK becomes less investable. It's not canapés at summits that sway investors, it's having a sensible environment to do business."

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer hailed next week's summit when he was quizzed about Sky's story on Friday.

When asked if his cabinet members had cost the country investment, he replied: "In the last I think four weeks we've had at least five or six huge investments in the UK, including £24bn today.

"We've got a massive investment budget, summit coming up on Monday where leading investors from across the globe are all coming, to the UK.

"This is very, very good for the country, very, very good for the future of jobs. It's just the sort of change that we need to see."

Steve Rotheram, the Labour mayor of the Liverpool City Region, defended the criticism of P&O, saying that while the UK needed as "much investment in this country as possible", he had "very little sympathy with a company that sacks its workforce".

"You can't just fire and rehire," he told Sky News. "You can't just sack workers - there are protections in this country for everybody."

A government spokesperson said: "We welcome P&O Ferries' commitment to comply with our new seafarer's legislation.

"We continue to work closely with DP World which has already delivered significant investment in the London Gateway and Southampton ports, to help deliver for the UK economy.

"Next week's International Investment Summit will bring together hundreds of global firms to show Britain is open for business."

KAPITAL STRIKE

DP World cancels £1billion London Gateway port announcement in row with Labour

Jitendra Joshi
Fri 11 October 2024 


Sir Keir Starmer’s Government faced fresh embarrassment after it emerged that Dubai-based DP World plans to boycott an investment summit next week at which it was due to announce a £1billion expansion of the London Gateway container port.

Monday’s summit is meant to mark a fresh start for the PM after a rocky first 100 days since Labour won the election in July, showcasing ministers rubbing shoulders with global business leaders to drum up investment in the UK.

But it risks being overshadowed by a row over strong criticism aired this week by Labour ministers Angela Rayner and Louise Haigh against DP World’s subsidiary P&O Ferries.

They have long expressed anger about the company’s firing of 800 British seafarers in 2022. But it is understood that given the timing of their latest comments, just before the summit, DP World chairman Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem will not now attend Monday’s event in the City of London.

And the company has shelved the announcement of hefty new investment to build two more docking berths at London Gateway in Thurrock, Essex, which would eventually give the port bigger capacity than Felixstowe or Southampton.

DP World declined to comment after the boycott was first revealed by Sky News. There was no immediate response from the Department for Business.

It comes after Deputy Prime Minister Rayner and Transport Secretary Haigh announced new legislation to protect seafarers on Wednesday as the Government presented a bill to enhance workers’ rights more generally.

Ms Haigh described P&O as a "rogue operator" and said consumers should boycott the ferry company. Ms Rayner described the 2022 sackings as "an outrageous example of manipulation by an employer".

Asked about DP World, Sir Keir evaded the question and insisted that Monday’s “massive” summit represented a turning point for the economy.

“This is very, very good for the country, very, very good for the future of jobs,” he told reporters.

“It is just the sort of change that we need to see.”

Responding to the news, Shadow Business and Trade Secretary Kevin Hollinrake said: “On the eve of this much vaunted inward investment event, this is a body blow for the Government and shows that Labour Cabinet Ministers have never been in business, don’t understand business and don’t know how to talk to business. They just haven’t got a clue.

“Just 100 days in, new investment should be rolling in, not being scared off because of anti-business statements or worries about the impact of Labour's employment and tax policies.”

Ports company pulls £1bn investment over ministers’ criticism – reports

Christopher McKeon, PA Political Correspondent
Fri 11 October 2024 at 9:37 am GMT-6·3-min read

The Prime Minister has declined to comment on reports a £1 billion investment in the UK has been jeopardised by ministers’ criticism of the company behind it.

Dubai-based DP World is reported to have been planning to announce a major investment in the UK at the Government’s International Investment Summit next Monday.

But, according to Sky News, that investment is now under review after Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner and Transport Secretary Louise Haigh repeated criticism of P&O Ferries, which is owned by DP World.

P&O Ferries was criticised by politicians from both main parties in March 2022 when it suddenly sacked 800 British seafarers and replaced them with cheaper, mainly overseas, staff, saying it was necessary to stave off bankruptcy.

On Wednesday, Ms Rayner and Ms Haigh introduced legislation to prevent similar actions, with the Transport Secretary describing P&O Ferries as “cowboy operators” and Ms Rayner saying the incident had been “an outrageous example of manipulation by an employer”.

P&O Ferries was sharply criticised by MPs from all parties after suddenly sacking 800 seafarers in March 2022. (Gareth Fuller/PA)

On Friday, Sky News reported DP World chairman, Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem, ordered Monday’s announcement to be cancelled and the planned investment in the company’s London Gateway port to be reviewed.

Asked about the row on Friday, the Prime Minister declined to answer directly, saying there had been “five or six huge investments in the UK” announced in the past four weeks.

He said: “We’ve got a massive investment summit coming up on Monday where leading investors from across the globe are all coming to the UK.

“This is very, very good for the country, very, very good for the future of jobs, it’s just the sort of change that we need to see.”

Monday’s investment summit was a major part of the Government’s plan for its first 100 days in office and its mission of securing economic growth.

Liverpool City Region mayor Steve Rotheram said he had “very little sympathy” with DP World “moaning about a Government because of the actions that they’ve previously taken against workers in this country”.

“We as a Government would have wanted to work with these, but they would have had to have done things differently because you can’t have fire and rehire, you can’t just sack workers, there are protections in this country for everybody,” he said.

Conservative shadow business secretary Kevin Hollinrake said DP World’s decision was “a body blow for the Government” that shows ministers “don’t understand business and don’t know how to talk to business”.

He said: “Just 100 days in, new investment should be rolling in, not being scared off because of anti-business statements or worries about the impact of Labour’s employment and tax policies.”

At the time of the P&O Ferries incident, senior Conservatives themselves criticised the company, with then-prime minister Boris Johnson telling MPs it appeared to have broken the law.

Then-transport secretary Grant Shapps also called for P&O Ferries chief executive Peter Hebblethwaite to resign or be dismissed following the incident.

DP World and the Department for Business and Trade have been contacted for comment.

The Tories have made the UK more corrupt, unequal and authoritarian

Civil rights and the rule of law have been eroded

Prem Sikka ,7 June, 2024 ,  Left Foot Forward

Prem Sikka is an Emeritus Professor of Accounting at the University of Essex and the University of Sheffield, a Labour member of the House of Lords, and Contributing Editor at Left Foot Forward.

The last 14 years of neoliberal assaults have changed the UK. Under the Conservative government, the UK has become more corrupt, unequal and authoritarian; less open, and civil rights and the rule of law have been significantly eroded.

Openness and transparency are essential for public information and holding governments to account. In 2010, Prime Minister David Cameron promised to make “our government one of the most open and transparent in the world”. It hasn’t turned out that way as ministers make misleading statements, and government departments and regulators resist requests for information. In 2014 the UK was placed third in the 2014 OECD Open, Useful and Re-usable data (OURdata) Index. By 2023, the UK fell to 25th place, and the UK is less open and transparent than Colombia, Denmark, Estonia, France, Ireland, Korea, Lithuania, Poland, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden.

Lack of transparency and public accountability always facilitates political corruption, and is made worse when parliament is emasculated. The government has used its parliamentary majority to curtail debates. Many bills have received perfunctory scrutiny. The Financial Times reported that the working day for MPs in the House of Commons has been shorter on average this parliamentary session than in any other in the past quarter century.

Public contracts continue to be handed to friends of the ruling party. Honours, peerages and knighthoods are showered on party donors. Against this backdrop the UK has sunk to 20th position, its lowest ranking, in the Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index. The UK is seen as more corrupt than Uruguay, Estonia, Seychelles and Hong Kong.

Corruption provides cover for illicit practices. Ministers and regulators protect banks engaged in sanctions busting and illicit financial flows. In 2012, the UK-regulated HSBC was fined $1.9bn by US regulators for facilitating money laundering and faced prospect of criminal sanctions. The then Chancellor George Osborne and the financial regulators secretly intervened to urge the US authorities to go easy on HSBC. It was apparently too big to jail. Despite requests in parliament, no information or explanation has been provided. That pattern of indulgence has continued and unsurprisingly 40% of the world’s dirty money goes through the City of London and UK Crown Dependencies.

A kind of lawlessness has been normalised in other arenas too. Leading newspapers have engaged in phone hacking and police bribery in the pursuit of stories and profits. But corporations and their directors are rarely prosecuted.

Water companies have excelled by hiking customer bills and extracting dividends. They have failed to invest adequately in infrastructure and dump raw sewage in rivers, seas and lakes. The government allowed them to continue to do so until 2050.

The state-corporation nexus has corrosive effects elsewhere too. In March 2022, P&O Ferries sacked 800 workers without the required consultation. The sacked workers were replaced by agency staff on a fraction of their pay, and the P&O CEO said that he couldn’t live on wage of £4.87 an hour. P&O chief executive told a parliamentary committee that the company knowingly broke the law. The then Prime Minister Boris Johnson told parliament that the company has “broken the law” and the government would “take them to court”. Nothing happened. The lack of government action encouraged Body Shop and other employers to emulate P&O practices.

Workers have been impoverished by austerity, low wages, zero-hour contracts, fire and rehire, and unchecked profiteering. Wealth is concentrated in fewer hands as 1% has more wealth than 70% of the population combined. Work doesn’t pay enough. Median UK pre-tax annual wage in April 2024 was £28,572, and lower in real terms than in 2008. 38% of the people on Universal Credit are in employment and millions rely upon food banks and charity. The Bottom decile of British households have a standard of living that is 20% per weaker than their counterparts in Slovenia. Industrial action is about the only avenue left for workers.

The UK already has some of most stringent balloting requirements for withdrawal of labour, but the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023 sought to make strikes almost impossible. It empowered minister to specify minimum service levels during strike action in six broad sectors. Employers could select workers who must cross the picket line to provide the minimum level of service. Those refusing would be sacked without compensation or any right of appeal, and trade unions could be sued by employers for losses. There are no sanctions for withdrawal of capital and closure of work places.

In 2019 the Supreme Court stated that the government illegally prorogued parliament. Ever since then the government has sought to enhance its dictatorial powers. The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 empowers the Home Secretary to remove people’s citizenship without necessarily telling them. There is a right of appeal against citizenship deprivation but sensitive evidence can be withheld from the appellant and their lawyer. Many of those deprived of their citizenship on ‘public good’ grounds are British Muslims. British citizens can also be refused a passport or have their passport withdrawn by the government. There is no right of appeal against having a passport withdrawn, but the person can ask for an internal review by the Government or apply for judicial review by a judge.

In November 2023, the Supreme Court judged that Rwanda was not a safe place for people seeking asylum in the UK. This went against the government’s policy of forced trafficking of refugees to Rwanda. The Safety of Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) Act 2024 states that Rwanda is safe because the Ministers say so, and no domestic court can consider any contrary evidence. The Act is in conflict with the UN Refugee Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights. UN Commissioner for Refugees said that “By shifting responsibility for refugees, reducing the UK’s courts’ ability to scrutinise removal decisions, restricting access to legal remedies in the UK and limiting the scope of domestic and international human rights protections for a specific group of people, this new legislation seriously hinders the rule of law in the UK and sets a perilous precedent globally”.

Courts were also ousted by the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill. Under this the government sought 24/7 powers to snoop on the bank accounts of anyone receiving social security benefits, including the state pension. There was no limit on the amount of information and how it might be used. No court order is needed and the parties affected had no right of appeal. The Bill was passed by the House of Commons but failed to clear the House of Lords and fell with the calling of the general election.

Dissent and protests are the foundation stones of democratic renewal. Through protests and related disruption people draw attention to grievances and make a case for change. That has now been changed by the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. The Act empowers police to ban protests because they could amount to undefined “serious disruption”. Protests can also be banned for being “noisy”. Even one-person protests face ban and prosecution. Ministers, not courts, can unilaterally change the meaning of “noisy” and “serious disruption”.

The Public Order Act 2023 authorised police to stop and search people without any suspicion and on the grounds that they might commit a crime. People can be sent to prison for protests relating to locking-on, interference with key national infrastructure, obstructing transport work and tunnelling. The House of Commons and House of Lords Joint Committee on Human Rights said that the legislation would have a ‘chilling effect’ on the right to peaceful protest, putting fundamental democratic rights at risk, but the government ignored the objections. In May 2023, during King Charles’s coronation 64 people were arrested for anti-monarchy demonstrations on suspicion of conspiracy to cause a ‘public nuisance‘, to prevent a ‘breach of the peace‘, and for ‘being equipped for locking on‘.

The state is distinguished from other centres of power in that it has the authority to inflict violence and death on its citizens. The Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Act 2021 has taken it a stage further. It enables government departments and selected regulators to grant “criminal conduct authorisation” to selected state and non-state actors i.e. power to commit murder, torture, rape and phone-tapping with complete immunity from prosecution. The chilling Section 1(5)(5) of the Act says that this is justified on grounds of national security, preventing or detecting crime or of preventing disorder, and because it is “in the interests of the economic well-being of the United Kingdom”.

The above has provided a brief glimpse of the massive social and political changes inflicted on the people. There has been a sustained attack on civil liberties and workers’ rights. The forthcoming general election presents an opportunity to halt the slide towards authoritarianism and rebuild society. This can’t be done without ending corporate sponsorship of political parties and a voting system that allows parties securing less than 50% of the popular vote to have a huge majority in the Commons.

Image credit: Simon Walker / Number 10 – Creative Commons

UK
Corporate profiteering is the main source of inflation and people’s never-ending cost-of-living crisis. Here’s why

Corporate profits soar to 30% higher than pre-pandemic levels

Prem Sikka 17 May, 2024 
Columnists
Left Foot Forward 

Prem Sikka is an Emeritus Professor of Accounting at the University of Essex and the University of Sheffield, a Labour member of the House of Lords, and Contributing Editor at Left Foot Forward.

Corporations make obscene profits by squeezing household budgets and workers’ pay to enrich a few executive and shareholders who have no loyalty to any place, product or people. Money is their only God and they have no qualms about sacrificing lives, the environment and social cohesion.

This week, Unite published its report into profiteering by UK corporations. The report looked at the profit margins of 17,000 companies and found that their average profit margins have soared by 30% compared to the pre-pandemic period. Electricity and Gas supply companies were the worst culprits as they increased their profit margin by 363%. With nearly 7.74m unfilled NHS appointments patients have turned to private hospitals for treatment and companies have excelled at fleecing people. Profit margins in health and social work increased by 118%. Altogether, companies made £156bn additional profit over 2021 and 2022, compared to if margins had stayed at 2018 levels. That’s equivalent to £5,500 extra spent by every UK household. Their profit is the main source of inflation and people’s never-ending cost-of-living crisis.

Companies exploit people because they enjoy monopolistic and oligopolistic power in almost all sectors, and are indulged by the state. Oil/Gas and energy company profit margins increased from 8.5% to 16.5% enabling them to rake in an extra £64bn in profit. In 2023, BP, Shell, Chevron, ExxonMobil and TotalEnergies and have handed $100bn (£79bn) to shareholders in dividends and share buybacks. Meanwhile, UK households are struggling to pay energy bills and 6m people are trapped in fuel poverty.

The patronage of the state helps the finance industry to make excessive profits in other sectors too. Big four banks Barclays, HSBC, Lloyds and NatWest control 85% of UK business accounts and 75% of current accounts between them. They have the best of all worlds. They are rescued from their financial follies by the state, which also boosts their profits. For example, the government’s anti-inflation policy requires people to hand over their savings and wealth to banks in the forms of higher interest rate charges. Inevitably, they make record profits. Bank profit margins have increased by nearly 50% compared to their pre-pandemic average. They reported £45bn profits in 2023 compared to average of £25bn in 2018/19, an increase of 75%. Some £27bn has been paid to investors in 2023. Meanwhile, since 2015 more than 6,000 bank branches have been axed resulting in inferior services for many. Banks are quick to hike interest rates and also to pass on the benefit of higher rates to savers. Buying a home is an impossible dream for millions.

A plethora of anti money laundering laws has not dulled the finance industry’s appetite for illicit financial flows. This week, the Deputy Foreign Secretary said that 40% of the global dirty money resulting from bribery, corruption, theft, narcotics, human trafficking, smuggling, sanctions busting and tax dodges is laundered through London and UK Crown Dependencies. UK regulators have long been adept at turning a Nelsonian eye to crime in the finance industry. Accountants, lawyers, banks and financial services experts are central players in the global tax avoidance industry, but rarely face any prosecutions. To appease public concern about corporate tax dodges the government rushed out the Criminal Finance Act 2017 to tackle tax evasion but to date not even one company has been charged.

Big supermarkets have increased their profit margins by 19% and made an extra £17.4bn in profits. Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Asda, Morrisons and Waitrose hold a combined market share of around 70% of the grocery market. This week Tesco announced that its pre-tax profits rocketed from £882m to £2.3bn, a 159% increase. It hiked dividends by 11% and handed £1bn to shareholders in share buybacks. CEO’s remuneration rocketed from £4.5m to £9.9m whilst most of Tesco workers toiled at between £12.02 and £13.15 an hour. CEO collected more than the combined total of 421 workers wages. Thousands of supermarket workers rely upon food banks and social security benefits to make ends meet.

England’s water and sewage companies have a long history of exploiting people. Since privatisation in 1989 they have boosted profits by dumping raw sewage in rivers and seas and failing to plug water leaks. Customer bills have been hiked by over 360%, which is more than 60% in real terms. Companies have paid out over £85bn in dividends but have not built any new reservoirs. Despite the public disquiet, they have increased their profits margins by 43% since the pandemic. They are holding the people to ransom by withholding investment until the regulator approves a 56% price increase and the government hands them a bailout.

The PR spin on profiteering is that this somehow increases investment in productive assets and facilitates higher wages. Such claims rarely withstand scrutiny. The Unite research shows that since the pandemic net investment by FTSE350 companies fell from £37bn per half year in 2018 and 2019, to £9bn between 2022 and 2023. The UK private sector has long been a laggard in making investment in productive assets. In the OECD league table of investment by the private sector, the UK is ranked 27th out of 30 countries. Companies succumb to pressures from shareholders to prioritise dividends over investment. Over the course of 2022 and 2023, the total value of shareholder payouts was £275bn compared to £227bn in the pre-pandemic period of 2018/19, an increase of nearly 21%.

Profits are generated by the brawn, brains, sweat, blood and tears of workers, but companies continue to squeeze labour. With anti-trade union laws and erosion of worker rights, employee share of the gross domestic product in the form of wages and salaries has shrunk from 65.1% in 1976 to less than 50% by March 2024. Zero-hour contracts, fire and rehire on inferior working conditions are rife. Companies like P&O Ferries have openly flouted employment law to fire workers to boost profits.

Workers have not benefitted from the economic growth since the financial crash of 2007-08. The average real wage of workers in March 2024 was less than in 2008. The median pre-tax wage of £28,104 a year is utterly inadequate for an acceptable standard of living. A typical FTSE100 CEO collects more than that in less than 3 days. To prevent workers from taking strike action to secure equitable share of income and wealth, the Strikes (Minimum Service Levels) Act 2023 bans millions of workers from taking strike action even though they meet all the requirements for a legal ballot.

The social consequences of corporate profiteering are all too visible. Over 12m people, including 4.3m children, live in poverty. Work does not pay enough for essentials and people rely upon charity and benefits for survival. 38% of the people on Universal Credit are in employment. This week the Trussell Trust announced that last year it handed out 3,12m emergency food parcels, the highest ever, to desperate people including 1.14m children and 179,000 pensioners.

Social housing has been sold off by the government and not replaced. UK builds fewer homes than the vast majority of other developed countries. A house purchase is beyond the means of many workers and private sector rents have spiralled. Tenants typically asked to pay rent of £2,633 a month in London and £1,291 outside. Bailiff evictions of tenants evictions are at a six-year high. The UK alone accounts for more than 80% of the homeless people in OECD countries. The number of English households living in temporary accommodation has increased from 48,000 in 2010 to 112,000 in 2023.

Corporate profiteering has reduced people’s access to good food, housing, education, healthcare and pensions. Due to poverty, healthy life expectancy in England is 62.4 years for males and 62.7 years for females; 61.1 years for males and 60.3 years for females in Wales. Some 28% of over-55s have no other pension saved apart from the state pension. Nearly 32% of Britons are unable to save for a pension due to low incomes Around 93,000 Britons die each year in poverty. Hardship, insecurity and premature death are the human costs of corporate profiteering.

Yet political intuitions are cowered by the power of corporations and no party wants to tackle their excesses. The social costs of poverty, misery and premature death are considered to be just another externality of corporate operations. Just this week, parliament voted to oppose a law which would have criminalised water companies that fail to tackle sewage dumping. Instead of protecting people from corporate abuses, governments protect corporations from the outrage of the people by enacting laws to ban strikes and protests.

No major party wants to democratise corporations by putting worker-elected directors on the boards of large companies; customer elected directors on the boards of utilities, banks and insurance companies, or empowering customers and employees to vote on executive pay and secure equitable distribution of income and better services, or holding corporations responsible for the social cost of their excesses. Inevitably, disenchantment with the political system and possibilities of social instability will grow.

UK

Opinion

Mick Lynch: We need binding laws to prevent vicious race to the bottom for seafarers’ jobs

Mick Lynch 

Today
Left Foot Forward

'P&O have been preventing seafarers from ‘interacting with the British economy’ for years'

Mick Lynch is General Secretary of the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers

Disgraced P&O boss Peter Hebblethwaite admitted he could not live on £4.87 an hour during his grilling by MPs at the Business Select Committee hearing last week.

It was probably the most truthful thing he said throughout his testimony.

Committee Chair Liam Byrne MP was asking that question because that is the pittance many of Hebblethwaite’s staff have to subsist on while working for P&O Ferries.

Worse still, the seafarers currently working on P&O Ferries’ Cypriot and Bahamas registered ships are employed via a crewing agent registered offshore, further undermining their terms and conditions.

During his testimony, Hebblethwaite informed MPs that his crews are employed by an agency and are not employed by P&O Ferries directly.

At the same time, Hebblethwaite repeated his dubious claim P&O’s seafarer welfare standards were “second to none.”

This perverse situation has arisen following the decision two years ago by P&O to sack 786 seafarers, violating domestic British law and ripping up collective bargaining agreements.

Heavy duty security guards entered ships on March 17th to remove the crew, on the orders of P&O bosses.

P&O were eventually given the green light from their Dubai owners to fork out a redundancy payment that circumvented the Employment Tribunal process and slapped gagging agreements on those who took ex-gratia, time limited redundancy payment which cynically exploited the cost-of-living crisis and the aftermath of the pandemic.

This decision to drastically alter the P&O crewing model from a union recognised workforce with decent terms and conditions, to super exploited agency crews paid less than the UK national minimum wage, is part of the company’s drive to maximise profits and minimise costs.

Replacing our members with agency Ratings on £4.87 per hour and other poverty rates of pay cannot be tolerated at P&O or any other operator in the UK.

Hebblethwaite’s reference during his testimony to International Transport Federation (ITF) agreements demeans the maritime industry, as these are agreements in the deep sea where an ordinary seafarer can be paid a basic rate under $500 per month.

The ITF supports a mandatory seafarers charter which would set seafarer pay and conditions on international ferry routes from the UK and allow negotiations between trade unions including with all operators of passenger and freight ferries from UK ports. This would include P&O.

However, comparing the rates of pay that are established through ITF agreements on vessels transiting the world should have no place in the short sea ferry sector.

We are clear that the crewing model for seafarers working on ferry services that call at a UK port up to five times a day should reflect local employment conditions, regardless of where the ship is flagged.

Hebblethwaite also claimed that their agency seafarers on the Channel have 7 days leave per month and 9 days leave per month on Hull-Rotterdam during 17-week contracts.

We can categorically state that P&O’s seafarers on these routes do not work 28 on and 36 days off respectively during their 17-week contracts and it is noticeable that Hebblethwaite could not say whether crews are working longer than 17 weeks or not in the North Sea.

From what we know, agency crew on the Dover – Calais route continue to work 17-week rotations, working a minimum of 12 hours per day 7 days per week over that period.

They are essential ferry services for the economy and the employment conditions and rights of all Ratings employed on board in roles such as cook, steward, abled bodied seamen or engine rating, should reflect this through collective bargaining agreements with the RMT, like those agreed with Stena Line and DFDS ferries.

P&O crews are also effectively held captive, as they are prevented from taking shore leave in the UK, to visit shops, exercise or benefit their mental wellbeing during their 17-week contracts on the Dover route.

P&O have been preventing seafarers from ‘interacting with the British economy’ for years and the replacement of our members with agency crew on voyage only contracts, ingrains this approach.

Given the riding roughshod over British laws, sacking hundreds of seafarers and continuing to mislead parliamentarians, P&O needs to be bought to heel through strong domestic legislation.

That’s why we need binding laws, setting mandatory standards above international minimums which is creating a vicious race to the bottom for seafarers’ jobs, working conditions and livelihoods in the ferries sector.

There is a tremendous opportunity to legislate for high employment in the shipping sector and wider maritime economy particularly in growth areas like offshore renewable, decommissioning and waste transport.

But that can only happen by reviving jobs for UK Ratings across the shipping industry, ending exploitation of seafarers and providing opportunities for seafaring communities to get back on their feet.

NOT EVEN A 'RED' TORY

Defected ex-Tory MP Natalie Elphicke’s worrying voting record

Labour MP’s left angered by the former hard-right MP's admission to the party over concerning track record

Natalie Elphicke the MP for Dover defected from the Conservative Party to Labour on Wednesday just before Prime Minister’s Questions blaming Rishi Sunak for the Tories becoming “a byword for incompetence and division”.

However it was many in the Labour Party who were left angered by Keir Starmer’s decision to admit the former Tory into the party, with Labour MPs questioning why a rightwinger with her voting record was admitted and she will share the party’s values.

Following Elphicke’s defection, Starmer said he was “delighted” to welcome her, however the Guardian reported that one shadow cabinet minister said his decision had left people “upset and angry right across the party”.

Another shadow cabinet member told Politico that Starmer’s team had made a very poor decision while others have questioned why Elphicke was allowed to join Labour while MPs like Diane Abbott still have the Labour whip suspended.

Her hard-right views have worried cabinet members, with another telling the Guardian, “are we welcoming Nigel Farage next week?”

Labour MP for Birkenhead, Mick Whitley wrote on X: “Natalie Elphicke’s values are not the values of the labour movement.

“It’s outrageous that she should be allowed to join the Labour benches while principled socialists like @HackneyAbbott and @jeremycorbyn still haven’t had the whip restored.”

A snapshot of her voting record on the website They Work For You says Elphicke consistently voted against laws to promote equality and human rights, voted against measures to prevent climate change, voted against higher taxes on banks and was found to generally have voted against fewer obstacles for access to abortion.

Her record on trade unions also left much to be desired, having voted consistently for more restrictive regulations on trade union activity with critics online sharing a video of her at a debate on P&O Ferries sacking nearly 800 workers, during which she attacked trade unions as she talked of “odious hard left militants”.

Also highlighted online was the time in 2021, when she suggested Marcus Rashford missed a penalty because he spent too much time “playing politics”. The footballer was campaigning for free school meals which subsequently forced former Prime Minister Boris Johnson to U-turn on the issue.

Others have re-surfaced the story that she defended her ex-husband after he had been convicted of sexual assault, casting doubt on his victims’ testimonies. She took over his seat as Dover’s MP in 2019 after he was jailed for two years.

Articles she wrote have also been re-circulated, including one for the Daily Mail titled ‘When will The Left admit this is no refugee crisis… but simply illegal immigration’ and another for the Express, ‘Don’t trust Labour on immigration they really want open borders’.

Elphicke endorsed Liz Truss and Boris Johnson and previously called Keir Starmer ” Sir softie” over Labour’s border control plans. She has repeatedly criticised Labour for being soft on migration and untrustworthy on Brexit, which she supported.

In her defection statement Elphicke said the Labour Party “has changed out of all recognition” and now occupies the “centre ground of British politics”, as she now felt Labour was the party “building a Britain of hope, optimism, opportunity and fairness”.

(Image credit: David Woolfall / UK Parliament)

Hannah Davenport is news reporter at Left Foot Forward

 

Folkestone & Hythe CLP “appalled” that Tory MP Elphicke welcomed by Labour

10th May 2024Leave a Commenton Folkestone & Hythe CLP “appalled” that Tory MP Elphicke welcomed by Labour

“We believe that she is a toxic and divisive figure who has no place in the Labour Party”

Folkestone and Hythe Constituency Labour Party have released the following statement in response to hard-right Tory MP Natalie Elphicke being admitted into the Labour Party.

The Folkestone and Hythe CLP executive was shocked and appalled to hear that Natalie Elphicke had been accepted as an MP within the Labour Party yesterday.

We stand for values of kindness, decency, empathy, and humanity; values that have not been displayed by Elphicke in the time that she has been an MP. We believe that she is a toxic and divisive figure who has no place in the Labour Party and that – while it might have been temporarily headline grabbing to accept her – tremendous damage has been done to the party’s reputation in doing so.

We know that many members of the CLP in Dover and Deal will feel bewildered by this move. We send our solidarity to them, and we hope that they will apply to the NEC to have Elphicke’s application to join the Labour Party rejected as they are entitled to do under the rule book.

---

• You can read more on the response to Natalie Elphicke’s acceptance into the Labour Party here: Elphicke out, Abbott in, say Labour Left. 

Elphicke defection: 76% of our readers say Labour wrong to accept Tory MP

Katie Neame 9th May, 2024    

https://labourlist.org/

Photo: @Keir_Starmer

Labour’s decision to welcome former Tory MP Natalie Elphicke into its parliamentary ranks has drawn considerable criticism from within the party – with multiple national executive committee members calling for the party whip to be suspended from her.

LabourList asked readers of our daily briefing email this morning whether they think the party is “right” to accept Elphicke’s defection from the Tories.

More than 700 readers had responded by 3:30pm this afternoon, with more than three-quarters (76.4%) saying the party was not right to admit the former Tory MP. Just over a fifth of respondents (20.3%) said the party was right to accept her, while 3.3% said they did not know. You can still vote here.

As the leading dedicated Labour news site with readers across the party, LabourList hopes the poll may give some clues about member sentiment on the move – but it should still be handled with some caution.

LabourList is not suggesting this is a scientific poll that provides an exact representation of the views of all party members at large. While many members read our daily email, anyone can subscribe to it, and anyone can fill in the poll, member or not.

We also asked readers which Tory MP they would most want to join Labour if any, to which more than 400 responded “none”. The Tory MP named in the most responses was Alicia Kearns on 13, followed by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak on nine.

Elphicke, the MP for Dover, announced she was quitting the Conservative Party and joining Labour in a statement issued through Labour officials just before Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday.

The former Tory MP argued that the Conservatives have become a “byword for incompetence and division” under Sunak’s leadership, particularly highlighting the party’s record on housing and border security.

“Britain needs a government that will build a future of hope, optimism, opportunity and fairness. A Britain everyone can be part of, that will make the most of the opportunities that lie ahead. That’s why it’s time for change. Time for a Labour government led by Keir Starmer,” she said.

The Labour leader said on Wednesday he was “delighted” to welcome Elphicke to Labour, telling Sky News: “She’s got a strong track record on issues such as housing. She’s on the frontline when it comes to the crisis of small boats.

“And the reason that she’s given for joining the Labour Party is very, very important because I think she speaks for very many Tory voters in saying that the Tory Party has changed, it’s left the centre ground.

“But equally, the Labour Party has changed, and we are very clearly the party of the national interest, of country first, party second. And I look forward to working with her on the mission to deliver the real change that this country desperately needs.”

NEC members Jess Barnard and Mish Rahman – who are both standing for reelection to the party’s governing body with the backing of the Centre-Left Grassroots Alliance and Momentum – have called for the Labour whip to be suspended from Elphicke.

Barnard argued that accepting the former Tory MP was a “colossal error of judgement” from Starmer which “undermines the fight against sexual harassment and is totally inconsistent with Labour values”.

Elphicke has faced scrutiny in part over comments she made supporting her ex-husband, the former Tory MP Charlie Elphicke, after he was convicted of sexual assault. She released a statement today apologising for the comments.

“I have previously, and do, condemn his behaviour towards other women and towards me. It was right that he was prosecuted and I’m sorry for the comments that I made about his victims,” she said.

Others within Labour and on the left have also questioned the decision to accept Elphicke, with The Mirror’s Kevin Maguire asking if it is a “defection too far” and Labour staffer and chair of the GMB branch for members’ staff Jenny Symmons describing the defection as “really, really poor and disappointing”.

Elphicke out, Abbott in, say Labour Left

9th May 2024

1 Commenton Elphicke out, Abbott in, say Labour Left

“It’s outrageous that she should be allowed to join the Labour benches while principled socialists like Diane Abbott and Jeremy Corbyn still haven’t had the whip restored”

Mick Whitley MP

By Labour Outlook

The Labour Left has hit back after yesterday’s shock announcement that Tory MP, Natalie Elphicke, has defected from the government benches and been welcomed by Keir Starmer into the Parliamentary Labour Party – all while Diane Abbott remains under suspension for comments made last year.

Jess Barnard, a prominent member of Labour’s NEC on the left of the party, said “it’s clear this was a colossal error of judgement from Starmer. His welcoming of Natalie Elphicke undermines the fight against sexual harassment and is totally inconsistent with Labour values. I call on him to suspend the whip from Elphicke and apologise for the hurt caused.”

After Elphicke’s husband was convicted of sex offences, she claimed his victims were part of a “dirty politics” and that he had been punished for being “attractive and attracted” to women. She was also found to have attempted to improperly lobby the judge over the outcome of the court case.

Another Labour NEC member, Mish Rahman, commented similarly: “Elphicke should have the whip withdrawn for comments about victims of sexual harassment.”

“Labour’s Shadow Women and Equalities Minister has to do better than to defend someone who has never been held to account about those awful comments”

Pointing to the hard-rightwinger’s record, a spokesperson for Momentum said “Natalie Elphicke has consistently demonised refugees and aid groups. She voted against Labour proposals to outlaw fire and rehire, while supporting a wide array of destructive and damaging Tory legislation. She should have no place in a Labour Party committed to progressive values and working-class people. Sadly, Keir Starmer is taking Labour away from its core values, aping a failed Tory Party instead of offering a real alternative to it. More than ever, Britain wants change – but is being offered a two-party consensus instead.”

They added: “This hard-right Tory should have no place in a Labour Party worthy of the name.”

“It speaks volumes about Keir Starmer that he is welcoming her with open arms, while leaving Diane Abbott out in the cold.”

MPs also expressed their concern. Mick Whitley said “Natalie Elphicke’s values are not the values of the labour movement.”

“It’s outrageous that she should be allowed to join the Labour benches while principled socialists like Diane Abbott and Jeremy Corbyn still haven’t had the whip restored.”

Nadia Whittome MP, said “I don’t agree with the decision to admit Natalie Elphicke. Labour is a broad church, but there should be limits. I am deeply concerned by Natalie’s past comments and I’m unconvinced that her politics have changed sufficiently for her to represent our party.”

Similarly, John McDonnell told LBC “I’m a great believer in the power of conversion, but even this one would strain the generosity of spirit of John the Baptist.”

Watch and read Starmer’s speech on his small boats plan in Elphicke’s seat

Katie Neame    

10th May, 2024,     https://labourlist.org/

Keir Starmer via Shutterstock

Lab

Keir Starmer has today unveiled Labour’s latest proposals to reduce small boat crossings, pledging to end the Tories’ “talk tough, do nothing culture” on the issue with proposals including a new ‘Border Security Command’ – using cash currently allocated to the Rwanda scheme.

The Labour leader delivered a speech this morning on the Kent coast, in the Dover and Deal constituency of his party’s newest MP, the former Tory Natalie Elphicke, who defected to Labour earlier this week.

Starmer accused the Tories of “rank incompetence” and argued that rebuilding the UK’s asylum system has become “a question [of] can you prioritise, at all times, the politics of practical solutions and can you reject the politics of performative symbols, the gimmicks and gestures”.

He announced proposals including the creation of a new Border Security Command, which would bring together the key agencies of the National Crime Agency, Immigration Enforcement, CPS and MI5 and work cross-border with international agencies to tackle people-smuggling gangs.

Discussing Elphicke’s defection in a question-and-answer session with journalists following the speech, Starmer said: “This changed Labour Party ought to be a place where reasonably-minded people, whichever way they voted in the past, feel that they can join with our project to change the country for the better.

“And so it is an invitation to be less tribal in the pursuit of a better country and invite people to our party who want to join in our project of national renewal.”

You can watch back Starmer’s speech here, and a full transcript is below.

Here is the full text of the Labour leader’s speech:

Thank you, Mike, – what a fantastic campaign you are running. And thank you Natalie – it’s fantastic to be here in your constituency. Welcome to the Labour Party, it’s really great to have you on board. And thank you Yvette for everything you do on this brief and on this important challenge.

It’s great to be here in sunny Kent, the Garden of England. I used to play football around here for years, the uncompromising, no-nonsense, hard knocks, training school of the Kent Boys League. So, it’s a part of the world I’m very familiar with this part of the world.

But after elections last week, I have to say, it’s a part of the world the Tories are increasingly unfamiliar with. A county not just green and pleasant, but now also turning red. And on a day like this, I do have to apologise for keeping you all indoors. But we’ll be out there before too long.

But look – we’re here today on serious business. Because this is a community on the frontline of one of the gravest challenges we face as a nation. Illegal migration is a test of seriousness for all governments and would-be governments, and not just here – right across the world. A symbol, as I said in my conference speech last year, of a more volatile world, an age of insecurity.

It’s a hard nut to crack – I’m not going to pretend otherwise. Tackling organised crime is always hard, especially across borders. I know that from my work at the Crown Prosecution Service, on drug smuggling or counter-terrorism operations.

And let’s be clear at the start – this is a criminal enterprise we are dealing with. A business that pits nation against nation, that thrives in the grey areas of our rules – the cracks between our institutions, where, they believe, they can exploit some of the most vulnerable people in the world with impunity. A vile trade – that preys on the desperation and the hope it finds in its victims. The common humanity that ultimately it seeks to extinguish.

Not so long ago, back in 2016, I went for myself to the outskirts of Calais. It was winter, it was freezing. The ground was mud sodden with rain and human waste. I saw the children there – the same age as my own. Back then, that was aged five and aged seven. Huddling together in a tent that offered almost nothing in the way of warmth. A desperate situation. That night, I went home and said goodnight to my children, each in their own bedroom, with central heating on.

I came away from that day profoundly depressed, and I would defy anybody to go into those camps and come away with any other reaction. That camp represented a monumental failure, across nations. People had been brutally let down, by governments of course. Not just in terms of the truly awful conditions but also because the failure of our asylum system had encouraged a false hope. A hope that had unequivocally made those people more vulnerable to exploitation. Gangs were hovering round the camp, that day, using it as a job centre for modern slavery.

Now – that camp has long gone, but the smuggling business remains. The exploitation remains. The peril. As Yvette said, the children dying in our waters. Just three weeks ago – a seven-year-old girl. The same age as one of the children I saw in that camp. That all remains.

So, no matter how good anyone thinks their intentions are, turning a blind-eye to this business, not understanding how important a rules-based asylum system is for tackling that exploitation, for removing the criminal business-model if you like – that is not a progressive and compassionate position, it is the complete opposite of a progressive and compassionate position. This problem must be tackled. These gangs must be stopped, our asylum system must be rebuilt, our borders must be secured.

But to do that. To finally grip this problem. We need to turn the page and move on from an unhealthy interest in gesture politics that has long defined this policy area. And which has dragged the Tories as a serious party of government onto rocks of their own delusion.

Let me give you a few examples of what I mean by gesture politics. September 2020: The Sun newspaper reports that the government was exploring the procurement of Yamaha jet-skis. The plan, allegedly, to patrol the English Channel and tow boats containing asylum seekers back to France.

October 2020: The Financial Times reports that the government is undertaking a “secret consultation with the maritime industry”. The plan now? Constructing “floating walls” or “marine fencing”, in order to block small boats. And presumably, in the busiest shipping lane in the world, all other boats.

December 2020: Yvette will remember this – Chris Philp, then the immigration minister, at the Home Affairs select Ccmmittee in front of Yvette, refusing to rule out the use of wave machines to blow back the boats. A policy that by then had – somehow – also managed to find its way into newspapers.

I could go on. After all, there is plenty more material: sound cannons, sonic weapons, various deployments of the Royal Navy – against advice and with little success – the list is endless.

And yet here we are. Over 8,000 people have made the perilous journey across the Channel in small boats this year. On track to surpass the record set in 2022.

Now, I want to be clear – there is no implied critique of the reporting here. If a government source tells you it’s going to build a wall in the English Channel, you better believe – that is a story.

But the question this record must raise is whether the latest gimmick, the Prime Minister’s Rwanda scheme, can really be taken as a serious solution to this important challenge? I don’t think so.

They will get flights off the ground – I don’t doubt that. But I also don’t doubt – that this will not work. A policy that will see just a few hundred people a year removed to Rwanda, less than 1% of the people who cross the sea in small boats every year, less than one per cent – for £600m, that is neither an effective deterrent or a good use of your money.

And then you look at the rest of our border system. And honestly, it’s like a sieve. Just the other day, the Home Office admitted it’s lost track of thousands of people they think have no right to be here. And yet still the government refuses to do anything than focus all its time and energy propping up Rwanda. Throwing good money after bad, hoping it will get a few flights – with what, a couple of hundred migrants off the ground, because it’s symbolic.

For party management. For the election. It’s gesture politics. £600m for a few hundred removed – that is gesture politics, and Britain can do better.

Labour will do better. We will end this farce. We will restore serious government to our borders, tackle this problem, at source, and replace the Rwanda policy – permanently.

Today we launch our plan to do that. A new approach to small boat crossings that will secure Britain’s borders, prevent the exploitation by tackling it upstream and smash the criminal smuggling gangs.

And as the first step in this plan – a new manifesto commitment. We will set up a new command with new powers, new resources, and a new way of doing things – Border Security Command.

This is about leveraging the power and potential of dynamic government, based on a counter-terrorism approach which we know works. An end to the fragmentation between policing, the border force and our intelligence agencies, a collective raising of standards, so that border protection becomes an elite force, not a Cinderella service, an essential frontline defence that communities like this can depend upon.

To do all that, Border Security Command will bring together hundreds of specialist investigators. The best of the best. From the National Crime Agency, the Border Force, Immigration Enforcement, the Crown Prosecution Service and yes – MI5, all working to a single mission, all freed from the cloying bureaucracy that so often prevents collaboration between different institutions.

I’ve seen this first-hand at the Crown Prosecution Service. Good ambition is never enough on its own. But I’ve seen how with determination, with leadership, with a single-minded focus, agencies can work together and deliver results. And not just within one country either. We can co-operate across borders, that’s not some kind of weakness, it’s absolutely essential. These criminals do not respect national borders.

When I was at the Crown Prosecution Service, we had prosecutors posted in Pakistan working on counter-terrorism operations. In the Caribbean, on smuggling. In West Africa, disrupting the flow of drugs coming from South America on their way to Europe and ultimately to Britain.

These operations are not easy. Just think about conducting a raid, I’ve been through this so many times, seen it in real time. If you’ve pooled all the intelligence in one place, if you’ve spent weeks, months, years, mapping out the patterns of criminal activity, bringing in prosecutors to help assess the vital evidence. You cannot have your raid in London going off a single minute earlier or later than the coordinating raids in Paris.

So yes – we need more co-operation on illegal migration. We need a new partnership with Europol. We need access to the real-time intelligence-sharing networks that are so crucial to our security and which the government so casually threw away as part of its botched Brexit deal.

That’s why I’ve already been to the Hague with Yvette, to start pushing for a new security pact with our European partners. But look – it is also my firm belief, based on years of experience in this area, that we also need new and stronger powers to bring these vile criminals to justice.

In some areas of criminal activity, counter-terrorism is the most obvious, we have made the decision that the crime justifies tougher measures.

Make no mistake, we have reached that moment with illegal migration. These vile people smugglers are no better than terrorists. They are a threat to our national security and a threat to life, and it is time we treated them as such.

That means new powers that, as with would-be terrorists, can be used pre-conviction with High Court approval, that can limit the ability of the gangs to conduct their vile business – before arrest.

Powers that will allow us to shut off internet access, close their bank accounts, trace their movements – using information provided by the intelligence services. Or powers like stop and search at the border. Or raiding and seizing evidence – before an offence has taken place.

Let me explain why. We use the term ‘small boats’. But these boats are not, for the most part, that small. The gangs now use dinghies that are on a scale way beyond anything you would see for legitimate recreational activity.

We should be working with our European partners to seize those boats, seize material here in the UK to collect further evidence, turn over every stone, use every reasonable power – and that is my message to the smugglers. These shores will become hostile territory for you. We will find you, we will stop you, we will protect your victims, with the Border Security Command, we will secure Britain’s borders.

And we will also rebuild Britain’s broken asylum system. As I said at the beginning – I believe in a rules-based asylum system. I believe that a system that processes claims quickly and humanely, and that finds ways, without squeamishness or cruelty, to detain and remove people who have no right to be here, is essential for security, fairness, and justice.

It is a form of deterrence in itself. Until we are seen around the world as a country that has a firm grip of the process at our border. Until we are busting the Home Office backlog arriving at decisions quickly, without a fuss, so that we can return people who have no right to be here, then yes, Britain will be seen as a soft touch.

It goes without saying, we do not have that effective deterrence at our borders at the moment. Our rules-based asylum system isn’t working. Ask anyone in this part of the world, that much is obvious.

So it’s not hard to see why the Prime Minister might want a path to deterrence, without the hard graft – the boring graft perhaps – of fixing the wider system. But I’m afraid, like so much of what he says these days, it’s magical thinking, a symbol of the unquenchable Tory desire for the shortcut. The easy-fix, the sticking plaster, gimmicks not serious government.

Let me spell it out again. A scheme that will remove less than 1% of arrivals from small boat crossings a year cannot and never will be an effective deterrent. It’s an insult to anyone’s intelligence and the gangs that run this sick trade are not easily fooled.

In fact, by allowing vast numbers of people into the country via this route, running up a perma-backlog of nearly 100,000 people, refusing to process the claims – so that even if they have absolutely no right to be here – they cannot be removed – billing the taxpayer for expensive hotel accommodation – because like Hotel California, there is no prospect of ever leaving. No prospect of a decision for or against – then let me be clear.

The government has achieved the complete opposite of what they claim. A Travelodge amnesty handed out by the Tory Party, that is warmer and safer than spending winter under canvas near a beach in Northern France. If you don’t think that’s what the gangs are telling the people they exploit – you’ve never met one of these gangs.

So, no – we have to restore integrity and rules to our asylum system. We have to clear the backlog so we can return people swiftly. That is the path, the only path, to real deterrence.

That’s why we will hire hundreds of new caseworkers for the Home Office, and we’ll do it straight away. We will create a new fast-track returns and enforcement unit that will make sure the courts can process claims quickly and we will save the taxpayer billions. The £8m we spend every day on hotels, an £8m a day message that Tory chaos has a cost.

Labour will stop the chaos. Labour will bust the backlogs. Labour will rebuild our broken asylum system. Now – these plans will be fiercely resisted, of course they will. That is par for the course on this issue. I have no doubt that the British people fully support a rules-based asylum system. No doubt that the fair-minded majority want a system that can secure Britain’s borders and uphold this country’s fine tradition of providing sanctuary for people fleeing persecution.

But this is a debate that has been captured by polarising voices. And so, every solution must run a gauntlet of bad faith objections just to get a hearing. On one side of the debate, it comes from people who claim they want to reform the asylum system, but in fact want to get rid of it.

People who believe, based on their principles, that people should be able to move across the globe, wherever, whenever, and however they want. No matter that this, in this age of insecurity especially, would lead to a chaos that, quite apart from other objections, does nothing to advance global justice.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the debate, some people pretend they want to reform asylum. When what they really want, is for the British state to act with impunity, to tear-up rules on a whim. Because ultimately, they do not want us to take in any asylum seekers whatsoever. I do not think there are many Tories who truly believe that. But what I do think is that they are too weak to admit that plainly. Too weak to say that this is not and never should be a world we live in.

Because Britain should show leadership on the global issues that drive insecurity and migration. Britain should step up to tackle climate change, famine and conflict. We do have a duty to work with other nations. And the state should not have untrammelled power against minorities or anyone. Our rules-based system should align with global rules that protect individual human rights. That is in our interest and the right thing do.

And so, rebuilding our asylum system has become a test of political strength. A trial of leadership to resist the voices who fundamentally do not want to build a functioning asylum system. A question: can you prioritise, at all times, the politics of practical solutions and can you reject the politics of performative symbols, the gimmicks and gestures.

This is the story of what has happened to the government, the explanation of how a party that cares about illegal migration – there’s no doubt about that – finds itself with a record of failure as total and stark as this.

It isn’t just rank incompetence – though it is that, it’s also about who the Tories are now, and I’m afraid also about our politics as a whole, a culture that is part of the water in Westminster that rewards the grand gesture. The big talk, while disregarding the detailed practical action that over time, moves a nation forward, step by step.

Take Northern Ireland. Because in my lifetime, there is no more powerful example than that, and I was there in the room, helping create a police service that could work for all communities. Trying to move a nation slowly but surely towards the hard work, the long work, the patient work of real change.

Now – I don’t want to stretch the analogy too much. But that is what the hard graft of change means to me, and it is that kind of approach that tackling small boats requires now.

So I say to the British people: if I am elected to serve this country, if I earn that privilege, I will turn the page on Westminster’s ‘talk tough, do nothing’ culture. Not just on small boats. Not just on migration. On everything.

I don’t know if that’s a new politics or whether it’s a return to the bare minimum you should expect. But if you vote Labour – that is what you will get. And if you don’t believe me – after 14 years of broken promises from the Tories, that’s understandable.

But as the country’s chief prosecutor, I smashed the terrorist gangs. And I know we can now smash the people-smuggling gangs. I’ve dragged my party away from the allure of gesture politics, and I will do exactly the same to Westminster.

No more gimmicks. The character of politics will change and through that, we will deliver higher growth, safer streets, an NHS back on its feet, more opportunity in your community, cheaper bills in your home, and secure borders for our nation.b

An asylum system – rebuilt. The criminal gangs – smashed. The exploitation of some of the most vulnerable people in the world – prevented.

An end to the chaos. A turning of the page. A politics returned to service and a careful, patient, determined renewal of our country with Labour. That is the future you can choose. That is what serious government can deliver. Thank you.