My Initial Thoughts: General Election 2019

It's been an absolute age since I've written a blog post but the events of recent days have reminded me of just how important it is to feel empowered to write down my thoughts about society, politics and the like. In short I've been quiet for too long (blog wise) and it's time to begin my re-exploration of key issues that I am interested in and which I feel need to be addressed by politicians in order to improve the lives of people living in neighbourhoods such as my own in Birchwood ward. Just in case you needed a reminder, in the General Election of 2017 former nurse, Carholme ward City of Lincoln Councillor and Mayor, Labour's Karen Lee took the Lincoln seat from the Conservative Brexiteer Karl McCartney in what was considered a surprising result despite the fact that Lincoln had voted 56.9% to Leave in the 2016 EU referendum (although I must remind everyone this was the lowest Leave percentage recorded in Lincolnshire). Both Karen Lee and Mr McCartney will be candidates in the 2019 General Election, alongside Caroline Kenyon for the Lib Dems, Charles Shaw for The Liberal Party, Sally Horscroft for the Green Party, lawyer Reece Wilkes for the Brexit Party and independent Robert Bradley. Nobody can say we're not spoilt for choice in this election that's for sure.

So Brexit:

As an ardent Remain in the EU and Reform supporter, the decision I face making at this election, living in a traditional Lab-Con marginal seat would seem crystal clear. Karl McCartney and the local Conservative Association wholeheartedly support Bojo's position on Brexit (“Get Brexit Done” blah blah blah) and will no doubt attract support from voters who voted for the Brexit Party at the European Elections back in May. The Brexit Party may attract Conservative (and Labour) leave voters who are frustrated at both parties' Brexit policies and want to achieve a World Trade Organisation (WTO) terms type Brexit aka “Clean Break Brexit”. Both parties do not appeal to me based on their Brexit policy because my feelings towards Brexit have hardened quite significantly since the June 2016 vote. I understand that Labour's official position going into this election is to offer voters a Final Say referendum 6 months from December 13^th which is framed as “a choice between a sensible deal and remain” according to Corbyn's own words (https://labour.org.uk/press/jeremy-corbyns-first-major-speech-of-the-general-election-campaign/ ). The problem I have with this is that I'm not entirely sure what a “sensible” Brexit deal looks like from a Labour perspective (apart from remaining in the Single Market and being part of a Customs Union) and naturally it would require the securing of another extension (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-delay-extension-labour-corbyn-boris-johnson-article-50-latest-a9179371.html). I'm far from convinced that EU negotiators would be willing to re-open negotiations for a 3^rd time- after all, why would they choose to go through the same old arguments just for the sake of negotiating something that will pretty much look like we are still better off being members of the EU anyways? I have felt at times that the Labour leadership has let down voters like me who wanted the party to come out boldly and unequivocally for retaining membership of the EU. Then again I do understand that just deciding to Revoke Article 50 and denying voters the opportunity to have their say on a deal would be perceived by some as anti-democratic, particularly in constituencies that voted heavily to Leave in 2016. So yes I am very skeptical of Labour's Final Say referendum position (how it'll happen within 6 months is beyond me) but given the alternative (leaving the EU without having my Final Say), I am favourable to giving Labour the benefit of the doubt at least on Brexit and will wait to see further outlining of the Brexit policy in the manifesto. That being said, I can't say the policy of the Liberal Democrats to Stop Brexit by Revoking Article 50 isn't attractive...it would end the uncertainty even if it did anger the Brexiteers.

It's certainly not all Brexit:

Brexit isn't the only policy area that will be scrutinised by voters during the 2019 GE campaign. In fact, when I speak to neighbours here in Birchwood, discussions centre around a number of issues but include boosting the local economy to provide long-term job opportunities for young people living in the ward, tackling instances of Anti-Social Behaviour in the ward and Lincoln city centre, tackling levels of poverty and social inequality and addressing the level of traffic congestion faced by daily commuters into the city centre. I outline some of these issues below.

Poverty:

In the latest Indices of Multiple Deprivation (2019), Birchwood ward was identified as having 2 of the top 10% most deprived neighbourhoods in England and 1 (which I happen to live very close to) was ranked the 394^th most deprived neighborhood in England . Overall 18% of neighbourhoods in Lincoln were ranked amongst the top 10% most deprived (https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/local-news/ten-most-deprived-neighbourhoods-lincolnshire-3369859). When people think of Lincoln (and Lincolnshire more widely), they often picture middle class suburban voters or older Brexit voting retirees but the county demographic is far more diverse than that. The City of Lincoln Council has done a lot at a local level to try and reduce levels of poverty through the Anti-Poverty Strategy, the second version of which was approved in July 2016. The Strategy focuses on a number of areas and objectives include empowering people to maximise their income, breaking the link between poor health and poverty and improving the condition of people's homes. The Strategy document can be viewed here: http://79.170.40.231/lincolnagainstpoverty.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Lincoln-Anti-Poverty-Strategy-2014-2020.pdf .

Comparison of the Indices of Multiple Deprivation figures for Lincoln from 2015 and 2019 shows that 42 out of the 56 neighborhoods measured in Lincoln have gone down in terms of rank, demonstrating there has been an improvement in poverty levels in the City. For example, my own neighborhood in Birchwood has gone from being the 2,397^th most deprived neighbourhood in 2015 to to the 2,742^nd in England in 2019.

However, I personally feel that policy decisions taken at a national level can help to compliment local policy such as the Anti-Poverty Strategy and reduce poverty levels more significantly. This should include more investment in our local authority support services as well as a re-examination of the effectiveness of the Universal Credit system. It's just not right that more families in Lincoln find themselves reliant on food banks because they have no income left by the end of the month to afford essentials and families with a parent or parents in low-paid work are particularly struggling. Earlier this year, the Welfare Team reported that they had “issued 505 food vouchers for local community larders and food banks in 2018-19”, up 306 from 2017-18 (https://thelincolnite.co.uk/2019/05/food-vouchers-surge-65-as-universal-credit-is-rolled-out/). Nationally the Trussell Trust issued 823,145 food parcels between April and September 2019, including 301,653 to families with children and their research found that 94% of food bank users are classed as destitute (https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/social-affairs/welfare/news/107943/universal-credit-slammed-figures-show-sharpest-rise-food). If we are truly a society that cares for all citizens, we need to ensure that nobody is left in a state of destitution. Politicians must work further with charities, voluntary organisations, social enterprises and campaign groups such as The Joseph Rowntree Foundation and End Child Poverty campaign and listen to their policy ideas because they know what works and what doesn't work when it comes to addressing poverty.

Children and young people:

Since July I've been keeping a written record in my notebook of statistics relating to children and young people and the impact that growing up in poverty has on their life chances, whether they are living in Lincoln or England more generally. Did you know for example that nearly one in three reception children and almost half of children eligible for Free School Meals (FSM) were found to be not ready for engaging fully in lessons at primary school? (https://schoolsweek.co.uk/one-in-three-reception-children-arent-school-ready-warns-teach-first/).

Were you aware that disadvantaged young people are on average 19 months behind their peers by the time they come to do their GCSEs and that only 35% of students on FSM get 5 GCSE passes? In non-mainstream settings (Alternative Provision), only 1.5% of students achieve grade 5 GCSE passes in Maths and English (https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/oct/17/pupils-with-behavioural-issues-failing-to-meet-exam-benchmark). Very concerning indeed. It still rings true that your start in life can have a significant bearing on your chances of academic achievement but there are policies that can be enacted which improve those chances. According to Impetus' comprehensive Youth Jobs Gap research (https://impetus.org.uk/policy/youth-unemployment), young people who are classified as “doubly disadvantaged”, described as being from disadvantaged backgrounds and having achieved less than 5 GCSE passes are being “left behind” in the jobs market. Even when young people from disadvantaged backgrounds have those 5 GCSE passes, they are still 50% more likely to not be in education or employment or training in early adulthood (NEET) (https://impetus.org.uk/policy/youth-unemployment).What's even more concerning is that 75% of NEET young people are NEET for a long-term period ( https://impetus.org.uk/policy/youth-unemployment).

It's natural to understand why younger voters and their parents are concerned about being able to access the long-term job opportunities which allow young people to have the financial stability needed to be able to lead an independent life. The latest employment statistics I have accessed (July 2018-June 2019) show that 6.1% of economically active people in Lincoln (i.e. people between the ages of 16-64) are unemployed which is higher than the overall East Midlands percentage of 4.6% (http://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/lmp/la/1946157150/printable.aspx). The statistics also show that the percentage of people in Lincoln with a qualification above NVQ Level 4 is lower than the East Midlands figure (24.2% compared with 33.2%). What's also interesting to note is that the majority of businesses based in Lincoln are micro businesses (85.0%) employing between 0 and 9 people. Most micro business employers are looking to employ young people who have advanced IT skills, are good communicators and who are willing to learn and can provide opportunities for stable, long-term employment. Yet one-third of English 16-19 year olds have low basic skills, there has been a dramatic decline in the number of Level 2 and 3 apprenticeships being offered and more worryingly, research uncovered by 2017-19 Education Select Committee Chair Robert Halfon suggests that 28% of jobs being done by 16-24 year olds could be at risk of automation by the 2030s and yet only 5% of young people work in the STEM sector (https://www.makeuk.org/insights/blogs/2018/03/06/robert-halfon-for-naw). Couple this with research by the IFS which has looked at the decline of adult learning programmes over the last 15 years which found that “overall spending on classroom-based courses has fallen by two-thirds, as have the number of adult learners” (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-50378666?ns_source=twitter&ocid=socialflow_twitter&ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbcnews) and it's clear that we need much more decisive action to change this situation. Upskilling is vital for those who want to thrive in a competitive, increasingly tech driven economy, particularly in an area such as Lincoln which already has a lower percentage of full-time jobs and higher number of part-time jobs than the East Midlands and Great Britain average (http://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/lmp/la/1946157150/printable.aspx). So for me and for other voters my age and younger living in Birchwood, policies which focus on investment in FE colleges and community outreach education, which focus on providing more access to Level 2, 3 and degree apprenticeships, especially for young people with disabilities and funding for projects which improve the social and technical skills of young people who come from disadvantaged backgrounds which are grassroots led, appeal greatly.

There is an increasing awareness in politics of the need to invest long-term in public services and community projects in order to address the impact of Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) on young people's chances of improving their quality of life. ACEs include experiencing bereavement of close family members or close friends, surviving a traumatic life event, being a young carer, experiencing repeated discrimination based on a protected characteristic (e.g. race), being involved in a gang and being a survivor of domestic abuse and/or violence (https://youngminds.org.uk/media/2852/aa-slides.pdf).

Investment in schools, children and youth services, youth centres, mental health services and local amenities has been identified as important in helping to improve the life chances of young people who have experienced or are still experiencing ACEs. However, youth services across England for example have faced cuts as a result of the austerity measures imposed on local authorities by the Tories. £880m has been cut from spending on youth services in England since 2010 (70% of total spending) with 87% of councils slashing spending on youth services by 50% and 50% of councils slashing spending by over 75% (https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tories-500m-youth-services-380m-20338813). In Lincoln we are fortunate to have third sector organisations such as YMCA Lincolnshire and The Lincolnshire Youth Association which are providing a diverse range of affordable activities for disadvantaged and vulnerable young people as well as the Lincolnshire Council for Voluntary Youth Services (LCVYS) commissioned by Lincolnshire County Council to provide small grants to grassroots youth clubs who are registered with them. However, I believe the next Government must do more than restore funding for youth services lost due to austerity cuts: it needs to work with third sector organisations to establish a long-term strategy for funding youth work. The National Youth Agency provides a number of excellent recommendations in their High 5 manifesto, with ideas including the establishment of a Government Youth Covenant and funding for the core provision of at least 2 qualified youth workers per school catchment area (https://nya.org.uk/2019/11/high-5-manifesto-investing-in-youth-work/ ).

Funding for schools has been high on the political policy agenda since the 2017 election. The School Cuts website reveals that 83% of schools across England will lose out on funding next year and recent research released by the National Education Union found that just 18 out of 533 constituencies analysed (3%) would receive real terms funding increases next April compared with 2015 and even when the £2.6bn of funding announced by Boris Johnson before the election is factored in. Lincoln is ranked 298^th in the table, with a £227 per pupil funding loss between 2015/16 and 2020/21. You can check out the funding table via the Schools Week website here: https://schoolsweek.co.uk/union-publishes-constituencies-league-table-for-school-funding-to-sway-voters/.

Further investigation of the Schools Cuts website demonstrates that levels of per pupil funding can vary from school to school: for example, the figure which signifies the difference between funding provided between 2015 and 2020 and the amount which is needed to protect per pupil funding in real terms for Birchwood Junior School is £462,637 and the loss per pupil is calculated at £252 (https://schoolcuts.org.uk/schools/?chosenSchool=9252245) whereas funding increases for Woodfield Infant and Nursery School mean that per pupil funding has increased by £138 (https://schoolcuts.org.uk/schools/?chosenSchool=9252135 ). This is interesting to say the least. 

SEND funding has been a central area of concern, with some families struggling to access support by securing a Education Health and Care Plan (ECHP). Layla Moran cites Freedom of Information reports which found that 40% of ECHPs were not being issued within the 20 week deadline required by law (https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/education/house/house-magazine/107201/layla-moran-mp-children-special-educational-needs-or ). 

A report by the Royal National Institute for the Blind found that 44% of councils had cut or frozen funding for educational support for visually impaired children and 43% had seen a reduction in specialist staff even though there has been a 7% increase in the number of children needing support (https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/oct/22/funding-cuts-visually-impaired-pupils-rnib). 

Children with SEND are also more likely to be excluded from mainstream schools: a new report by the charity JUSTICE highlights statistics which found that although only 15% of pupils in England are pupils with SEND, 45% of permanent exclusions and 43% of fixed exclusions of pupils in 2017/18 were of pupils with SEND (https://justice.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Challenging-Report.pdf ). 

Being permanently excluded can have a detrimental effect on mental health and emotional wellbeing, academic performance and future job prospects. 

The 2019/20 Lincolnshire County Council Budget did not see an increase in the SEND grant award amount from 2018/19 (£259m) and the testimonials from families who are struggling to secure an ECHP or to keep their child in mainstream education demonstrate that support must be readily available.

The next Government must ensure that funding provided for schools in Birchwood ward and across Lincoln is fair and sufficient to allow for the provision of a comprehensive, inclusive education for ALL students.

Mental health service access for children and young people who have experienced ACEs is mixed at best across England. The latest NHS statistics available finds that at the end of July 2019, there were 234,458 people in contact with children and young people's mental health services (https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/mental-health-services-monthly-statistics/final-july-provisional-august-2019). We are very fortunate in Lincolnshire to have a pioneering, inclusive mental health services trust (Lincolnshire Partnership Foundation Trust) and it was recently announced that they would receive £6m over 2 years to “test new models of care for young, working age and older adults who have moderate to severe, long term mental health problems” through a community service approach (https://www.lpft.nhs.uk/news-and-events/news/significant-funding-lincolnshire). Yet many children and young people do not access CAMHS yet experience anxiety and stress which impacts their everyday lives. The Children's Society Good Childhood Report found that almost a quarter of a million 10-15 year olds are unhappy with their lives and that any experience of financial strain or poverty in childhood is linked to lower well-being by the age of 14 (https://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/good-childhood-report).

Overall, 1 in 8 children and young people experience mental health problems: in fact there has been a 48% increase in levels of anxiety and depression among British children since 2004. Such statistics are incredibly concerning to read about and it highlights the urgent need for more early intervention strategies to support children and young people to cope with challenges which go beyond reliance on community mental health services. This includes delivering self-care strategies and mental wellbeing lessons through a wide-ranging Relationships and Sex Education programme of study, starting in primary school, ensuring every school has qualified Mental Health First Aiders as well as providing access to youth clubs and counselling services. 

Law and Order:

Law and order is a policy area which I know from conversations I have that Lincolnites take very seriously. We are proud of our police force and our emergency service personnel more generally and our emergency services have led the way on modernisation and diversification of the emergency services. Funding for front-line police officers has increased recently thanks to grassroots campaigning and campaigning by Marc Jones, our Police and Crime Commissioner and this has already led to the announcement of the recruitment target of 50 new police officers by March 2021 (https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/boris-johnson-police-lincolnshire-3409759). However, Lincolnshire police do face a deficit of £6.7m next year despite this announcement and I continue to support the fight for fairer funding.

One of the law and order issues that concerns Lincoln residents in particular is Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB). ASB consists of a variety of different behaviours but the ones that are most noticed and reported in Lincoln happen to be harassment of customers in shops and restaurants, loud noise levels mostly as a result of night parties and public urination. According to statistics recorded by local news site The Lincolnite, 3,181 requests for assistance with ASB were made to the City of Lincoln Council between April 2018 and March 2019 and 595 fines were handed out (https://thelincolnite.co.uk/2019/09/harassment-and-public-urination-lincolns-anti-social-behaviour-hotspots/ ). 36 ASB incidents were recorded in Birchwood but despite this low number, there is regular talk about the perception of the level of noise coming from houses in areas of Birchwood. Over the past few months I've been looking at research focusing on how community social action projects can reduce instances of ASB amongst young people whilst also challenging perceptions of what constitutes ASB to avoid stereotyping...for example, I have heard one or two residents in Birchwood label gatherings of young adults at local shops as ASB but usually such gatherings of young adults happen because they feel they have nowhere else to go to socialise and they are courteous whilst in the shopping centre anyways. Yes we need the next Government to continue to commit to tackling ASB at a local and national level but we need more provision and promotion of social action projects and localised services for young adults.

Whilst mentioning law and order I can't forget to mention the prison service. A report released earlier this year found that whilst prison officers and support staff were doing their best to help look after the welfare of prisoners, there was a 49% rise in incidents of prisoner self-harm between 2017 and 2019 and issues were identified with the infrastructure of the prison (https://thelincolnite.co.uk/2019/07/lincoln-prison-falling-apart-as-staff-do-top-job/). In addition, the number of prison staff who took sick days increased by 28% between 2017/18 and 2018/19 (https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/number-sick-days-taken-prison-3351794). I hope the next Government will ensure that prisons do receive the funding and support needed to address these issues to ensure that prisons are truly fit for purpose for the 21^st century and I hope that the mental and physical health of prison staff improves as a result.

Community Services and Amenities:

There's much discussion around the perceived and actual reduction of community services and amenities in Lincoln. It's true to say that some services have been reduced or lost altogether. Birchwood library is now open for only 2 days a week and the nearby Skellingthorpe Library has been closed down. Over the past year there has been discussions as the future of Lincolnshire's heritage attractions after Lincolnshire County Council voted to cut £750,000 a year from its heritage budget (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-49569564).

The Usher Gallery had been earmarked for closure, with plans to turn it into a wedding venue and for artworks from the likes of L S Lowry and Henry Moore removed, something which I am personally opposed to but recent news looks promising (https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/lincoln-news/row-over-lincolns-usher-gallery-3279735).

Amenities wise in Birchwood we do have a recently renovated Leisure Centre, a number of pubs including my family's local Green Barrel and a thriving Shopping Centre with a diverse range of shops, including a chippy, a Co-op and a Greggs (yes there is a Greggs out here in the suburbs). The next Government must ensure they enact policies which create the economic environment which will protect these vital amenities from closure as well as looking at ways of restoring some of the library and information services lost.

Transport:

There is so much discussion about traffic congestion into Lincoln City Centre. My parents for example have regularly sat through traffic delays of up to 45 minutes in the mornings travelling in and they complain about the number of times the barriers go down for the trains. Even the bypass from the Skellingthorpe roundabout down to the Riseholme roundabout can be gridlocked for 30 minutes when congestion is made worse by accidents or bad weather. It's alright for Mr McCartney to talk about transport infrastructure improvements that have been made since 2010 but the volume of traffic on the roads continues to increase and the perception of transport infrastructure remains mixed at best. It's all fine and dandy having a shiny new public transport hub to travel to and from but if more people are not being convinced to use the buses to get into Lincoln, what's the point? Dawn Hinsley, a Lincoln resident, recently wrote a column for Lincolnshire Live discussing the haphazard nature of the bus services in the city, not least the phenomenon of waiting ages for the bus to come but two follow in quick succession (https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/lincoln-news/bus-services-lincoln-farce-deserve-3442835). I must say I also agree with Dawn when she states that Stagecoach needs to improve its service provision and perhaps the next Government needs to do far more to ensure local councils have the funding they need to commission bus services which run efficiently and when they are needed. It's just ridiculous that buses services to Bracebridge Heath stop at 6:15pm.

Notwithstanding this, Bojo is apparently interested in funding the completion of the Lincoln bypass after being asked about it by Dr Caroline Johnson at the last PMQs before the General Election (https://www.lincolnshirelive.co.uk/news/lincoln-news/lincoln-eastern-bypass-set-108-3488665). It remains to be seen whether the investment is forthcoming post the General Election.

Social Care:

One final General Election issue in this very long blog post that I want to outline is that of Social Care. My Mum (who happens to be a Norwegian citizen) worked in the care sector for 20 years and she saw the difficulties that people needing care and their families experienced particularly in relation to affording care services. In 2019, there are around 1.4m older people who are not getting the care and support they need to thrive. There are around 122,000 vacancies in the care sector in England (https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/articles/brexit-implications-health-social-care) and more than 50% of home care workers employed on zero-hours contracts. Staff feel undervalued and do not always receive the training they deserve. Even when staff do gain experience, they do not necessarily see an improvement in pay and conditions: care workers with 5 or more years' work experience are only paid on average £0.15 an hour more than new entrants (https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/whats-your-problem-social-care#meanstesting?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_term=thekingsfund). 

The Social Care system needs an overhaul to become more sustainable and retain experienced and dedicated staff. The next Government must do far more than promise to release a Green Paper and then not release it: they must look at implementing policies that can cope with future increased demand. Population estimates provided by the ONS state that the number of 85 year olds is set to double to 3m by 2043 and Age UK warns that care services will become overstretched as demand for carers experienced in supporting older people with dementia care increases (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/21/number-85s-uk-double-25-years-amid-fears-social-care-crisis/). 

The challenge posed by Brexit to an already stretched care sector cannot be underestimated either: whilst there are more non EEA nationals working in the care sector than EEA nationals, the proportion of non-EEA workers fell by 3% between 2012/13 and 2018/19 whereas the proportion of EEA workers rose by 3% over the same period (https://www.skillsforcare.org.uk/adult-social-care-workforce-data/Workforce-intelligence/publications/Topics/Workforce-nationality.aspx) and this comes before the implementation of a points system that is more likely to favour applicants with higher qualifications. 

This blog is just the start of my examination of core issues over the General Election period and only gives an overview of some of the key issues that I will be thinking about. I look forward to finding out more about the policies which parties propose to try and address social inequality and funding concerns. If you'd ask me to make a prediction about what will happen come December 13^th, I would say that we should all “expect the unexpected” but we have to prepare ourselves unfortunately for a dysfunctional Hung Parliament that is even more divided on Brexit than before. Some traditional Labour voters do feel alienated from supporting the party because of factional infighting, confusion over previous official Brexit positions and what some perceive as radical far-left policies. If Labour wants to have a chance of broad appeal amongst voters and win them back, the party needs to focus on talking about the “bread and butter” issues that so many care about, from improving community service provision and encouraging small businesses to strong law and order policies and improving public transport infrastructure. 2019 will not be like 1997 but it can still be fruitful. However, if Labour is unable to make gains against a Conservative party that has lurched further to the right and in fact loses Lincoln to them, then serious questions will need to be asked about Labour's place as a major player in UK politics and as the party of choice for centre left progressives going forwards.

A Labour Remain Voter's Conundrum

Hello folks! It's been a wee while since I last blogged but I've spent the last month buried deep in thought on a whole host of topics and can't wait to start discussing them further!

What's happened since the start of the year is that there have been a number of reports brought out that make for despairing reading: figures in report after report released by third sector organisations, charities and think-tanks have shown the appalling effect that austerity measures, imposed by a Government far too occupied with sucking up to Donnie Drumpf and his “merry” band of “I want to go back to the 50's when we didn't know about pop music and Oreos” Trumpians and placating our own nostalgia loving elements of the electorate (who will never be satisfied until the gates are firmly shut to anyone who doesn't have “Dr” as a prefix or a few bob in their pockets).

Our NHS has been struggling to cope with this year's flu season, given the addition of the Aussie flu strain into the mix. More than 50,000 non-urgent operations have been postponed on the advice of NHS England this winter (https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/health/2018/01/towards-eternal-winter-can-nhs-survive) yet PM Theresa May boasted that the NHS had been prepared for winter, stating “there were 3,000 more beds in use and 2.9m more people using A&E since 2010” at PMQs last Wednesday. As Corbyn pointed out when he retorted her point, “14,000 beds in wards have been lost since 2010 and 100,000 patients have waited longer than 30 minutes for an emergency ambulance”. Let's not forget that 17,000 were left waiting in the back of ambulance to get admitted to A&E in the last week of December (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/10/pmqs-verdict-may-holds-up-better-against-corbyns-nhs-attack). More nurses are now leaving the NHS than joining it (more than 33,000 nurses walked away in 2017, a rise of 20% since 2012-13), perhaps because the working conditions are stressful, the pay is not enough given the amount of work nurses are being asked to do, EU nurses face xenophobic language being thrown at that and nursing bursaries, which trainees relied on, have been unfairly scrapped. According to Shadow Health Secretary, Jon Ashworth, “there are 100,000 vacancies in the NHS as of this month” (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jonathan-ashworth-jeremey-corbyn-end-to-carillion-style-outsourcing-in-nhs-and-emergency-5bn-budget-plan-trickett_uk_5a6631c4e4b00228300577d6). Some hospitals are facing an equipment shortage, including a lack of ventilators and oxygen cylinders (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/25/nhs-hospitals-serious-shortages-vital-equipment).

At a more local level, Lincoln's highly rated Walk-In Centre will be shutting its doors at the end of February due to short-sighted decision making by Lincs West Clinical Commissioning Group, leaving Lincolnshire residents and voters feeling concerned about where they can go to be seen for low-level medical conditions without having to wait for hours at an already busy Lincoln County Hospital A&E. 94% of people who responded to the consultation made it clear they did not want the facility to close (I was one of them) and yet Lincs West CCG chose to ignore us but perhaps if the CCG wasn't dealing with the consequences of chronic underfunding from central Government, they wouldn't have had to close it. Our NHS is facing its greatest crisis since the 1990's and it's time the Tories living it up in Westminster faced up to it.

Labour have announced a number of measures that may reduce pressures on the NHS and improve the situation for staff and patients; for example Labour Peer Baroness Chakrabarti stated that Labour would bring “life and death services” like hospital cleaning back into public ownership. Labour would halt the introduction of Sustainability and Transformation Plans “which devolve the national service into local ‘footprints’ with reduced accountability and the potential for marked reductions in healthcare provision, commercial control of both the public estate and the commissioning function” (https://www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/stewart-player/taking-politics-out-of-nhs-or-constructing-elitist-consensus). Labour have also announced they will provide free car parking for patients, staff and visitors, funded by increasing the private medical premium tax. Labour would also scrap the public sector pay cap on nurses pay, reinstate nursing bursaries and guarantee the rights of EU workers to stay in the UK and continue doing their amazing work. All of which I believe would be broadly welcomed by voters like me.

Another issue that has been discussed in some depth this month has been the increasing number of children living in poverty in English cities. Figures released by the End Child Poverty campaign just this past week state that 4 million children in the UK are now classed as living in poverty, a truly embarrassing and unacceptable statistic when you are reminded of the fact that the UK is the 6^th largest economy globally. There are 4 constituencies in the UK where children are now “more likely than not to grow up poor” with over 50% of children living in poverty: Bethnal Green and Bow, Poplar and Limehouse (where the 1950s and 60's themed Call the Midwife is set), Birmingham Ladywood and Birmingham Hodge Hill.

The situation for children in Lincolnshire makes for less glum reading but still there should be pause for thought: 5,907 children are classed as living in poverty in Lincoln (which is defined in the report as a household having an annual income below 60% of the average); this means that 26.7% of children living within the constituency boundary are living in poverty. Louth and Horncastle has the highest percentage of children living in poverty for a Lincolnshire constituency (29%), followed by Boston and Skegness (28.6%). Data from Lincoln electoral wards (Jul-Sept 2017) shows that the percentage of children defined as living in poverty when housing costs are taken into account is highest in Glebe (34.13%) followed by Birchwood (34.12%). Birchwood happens to be the ward I live in (my parents have had a lovely house here since the Eurodance days of 1992) so to hear that 788 children in my ward are living in households where getting adequate food and clothing is disappointing to say the least.

Benefit freezes imposed by the Tory Government since 2016 (and expected to last another 2 years) have done everything to exacerbate the situation. The Child Action Poverty Group have stated recently that universal credit changes will push 1 million more children into poverty and I fear what will happen to Lincoln residents when the changes are brought in from March. The “Poverty Premium”, which is where low-income families pay as much as £1,700 more per year than wealthy families to buy essential goods and services needs to be tackled but there is very little desire from the Tory party to address the gap; instead they reiterate the tired party line that “employment is the best route out of poverty, and they have cited unemployment statistics which show that there are now 600,000 less children in workless households than in 2010. The problem with their assumption is that having a part-time minimum wage is not going to significantly improve a person's living standards, especially considering the cost of renting flats in the private sector in cities across England (how can someone earning £7.50 an hour for 20 hours a week afford a flat costing £400-£500 a month for themselves and their child??) and the potential price rises which may come as a result of the UK leaving the EU (clothing tariffs on items made in Turkey may increase by 12% from zero for example: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/26/warnings-of-post-brexit-price-rises-unless-uk-can-copy-eu-trade-deals). Doing well at school/university is also no longer a guarantee of future economic stability. Even when a graduate has manged to secure a position or a young person who has left school secures their first job, they may still find themselves living in poverty.

The End Child Poverty figures just add to what we already know about the effect child poverty is having in Lincoln. The number of emergency food parcels (which are designed to last 3 days) delivered by The Trussell Trust funded Lincoln foodback between April 1^st 2016 and March 31^st 2017 was 2,447, up from 2,233 the year before (an increase of 9.58%). The number of food parcels received by children increased by 17% from 813 to 952 (http://thelincolnite.co.uk/2017/04/foodbank-charity-reveals-staggering-rise-in-foodbank-referrals-in-lincoln/). Kate Taylor, in her excellent piece for The Lincolnite back in November 2017 highlighted the Institute for Fiscal Studies projections which predicted that “relative child poverty will increase from 30% to 37% by 2021” (http://thelincolnite.co.uk/2017/11/kate-taylor-poverty-in-lincoln-and-beyond-why-are-so-many-in-financial-insecurity/). I agree with Ms Taylor that there needs to be less time spent on “crucifying people for not being in work and more time helping them out of abject poverty” and that means focusing on more than just funding employability schemes.

I appreciate the situation in Lincoln could have been much worse, were it not for the Labour-led City of Lincoln Council's Anti-Poverty Strategy, which has been in place since 2014. The Strategy has a number of objectives, including “increasing money management skills and confidence, supporting families to feed and clothe their children and helping those facing poverty due to illness” (https://democratic.lincoln.gov.uk/documents/s26370/Lincoln%20Anti-Poverty%20Strategy%20-%20Appendix%201.pdf). Campaigns that have been run by Lincoln Against Poverty, the organisation overseeing the implementation of the strategy include The Living Wage Campaign (encouraging employers in Lincoln to pay their employees and workers at least the Living Wage, with employers being recognised and recommended by the City Council for doing this) and the Helping Hand Campaign, which is designed to get debt and budgeting information and advice to residents who need it (http://www.lincolnagainstpoverty.co.uk/us/). Projects delivered by the City Council included running 5 “Survive the School Holiday” sessions which provided adults in wards such as Birchwood and St Giles with information about debt, welfare and jobs and a pilot voucher scheme in Bracebridge Heath helping 119 children from low-income families get access to groceries over the summer holidays (6 weeks) during Summer 2016. Details of 2017/18 projects will be discussed at the next Lincoln Against Poverty Conference, which I'd love to attend later in the year.

Labour are very well placed to devise policies that appeal to swing voters on the issue of reducing Child Poverty. In the last election general manifesto, for example, Labour proposed spending £250m a year on the creation and implementation of a Child Health fund, with funding being made available to support the running of Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS) in schools, boosting the number of school nurses so there are more than 1 visit to a school (as seems to be the norm currently) and creating an Index of Child Health, measuring progress on tackling obesity, poor dental health, poor healthcare for under-5s and poor mental health (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-junk-food-adverts-ads-ban-x-factor-hollyoaks-primetime-corbyn-election-manifesto-a7722926.html). For those asking where the money would have come from, Labour would have sought to half NHS Management consultancy fees by half (estimated to cost £538 a year): I don't think many voters outside of the private sector management consultancy sector would have disapproved of that.

On policies and strategies for the NHS, on policies to reduce homelessness, Labour have the upper hand. Corbyn's most recent announcement of buying 8,000 homes for homeless families as soon as his party wins the next General Election paints him as a compassionate figure in tune with the needs of the most vulnerable members of our society. With the rate of homelessness having increased by a shameful 169% since 2010, the number of rough sleepers up by 15% during 2017 (4,751 people bedded outside) and the number of people in sheltered temporary accommodation rising by 60% between 2011 and 2017, I don't think that the Tories can deny the seriousness of the problem any longer, particularly with regards to street homelessness in our inner cities. The heralded Homelessness Reduction Bill should help to alleviate the situation but if the Government had really wanted to address the issue, they could have provided ring-fenced funding for Local Authorities to prevent families becoming homeless in the first place (by paying outstanding rent arrears). As Zoe Williams so succinctly puts it:“Local government officials are now in a situation so impossible-statutory duty on one side, insufficient resources to meet it on the other-that they have to conceive the homelessness problem as a set of practical tasks to execute, rather than a series of human interactions” (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/24/why-are-councils-so-creative-in-making-life-unbearable-for-homeless-people). We have people who are forced to endure night after night sleeping on cold doorsteps, getting little to no treatment for their mental health issues and we have amazing people, who work for organisations such as LEAP and the Nomad Trust who want to do far more but feel their hands are tied by a lack of funding (again a failure of the Tory Government to provide adequate investment for our Outreach services).

With such a bleak picture painted of a Britain struggling under the grip of Austerity loving Tories, it should make sense to a centre-left equal opportunities voter like me to turn to Labour once again and give them a chance to improve the lives of the most vulnerable people. But one aspect of the Labour leadership's view (and I am guessing the ongoing policy platform) is troubling me: that is the approach towards Brexit. When I voted for Labour back in June 2017, I did so with my eyes wide open; I knew that the likelihood of the Brexit vote being quashed entirely was next to zero and I knew at that time that support for a 2^nd referendum, or even a referendum on the terms of the Brexit deal was insufficient to encourage the leadership to consider altering their mindset towards Brexit. I had read the manifesto section which stated quite clearly that “Freedom of movement will end when we leave the EU” but I questioned in my mind whether we'd get to the point where we actually left the EU (naïve maybe?) What I did think may happen was in any clarification of Labour's position, Mr Corbyn would decide that membership of the Single Market, along EFTA(European Free Trade Association) lines, would be the best possible deal for the UK given the limited amount of options on the table. I'm glad that Labour has, along with the Lib Dems, the Greens, Plaid Cymru and the Scottish National Party seemingly managed to convince PM May to change tact and agree that a transition deal was needed and had to be one where the UK retained membership of both the Single Market and the Customs Union. But I can't say that I'm not worried about the future of the UK outside the Single Market. I'm disappointed in Corbyn's claim that the EU cannot be reformed (ask the Nordic Greens and ALDE whether EU reforms are impossible and they'd rebuff Corbyn straight out of hand) and I am equally frowning at his blanket dismissal of the possibility of a 2^nd referendum or even a referendum on the terms of the deal. That being said, Corbyn favours “some kind of Customs Union” but not the current version. Corbyn also doesn't want to be a member of EFTA either but wants to work with EFTA countries such as Norway (http://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/jeremy-corbyn-second-referendum-1-5372112). There's been some references made as to what immigration policy will be like after Brexit but Sir Keir Starmer was the latest to comment, back in December, when he said “the end of free movement doesn't mean no movement. Of course we would want people to come from the EU to work here, we would want people who are here to go to work in the EU” (https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/what-is-labour-policy-on-brexit). Confusing policy remains the order of the day, you betcha!

I guess I should be grateful for any kind of clarity being offered by Corbyn on the party's official position but I do feel that crucial votes may end up being lost as a result of a lukewarm approach towards the EU. Take the most recent poll on Brexit support. The YouGov poll conducted back in December 2017 for The Guardian and Best For Britain campaign found that voters intending to vote Labour at the next election still are unsure as to what Labour's overall Brexit position happens to be: 23% believe Labour is “completely against Brexit” and 10% “didn't know”. The most recent Guardian/ICM poll, with over 5,000 respondents, shows that 39% of Labour leavers are now in favour of a second referendum with 65% of Labour backers overall wanting voters to have the final say on a Brexit deal (only 19% now oppose it). That being said, in the Midlands region (including Lincolnshire), 52% of voters polled would still vote to Leave the EU and that is despite 45% of voters thinking the decision will have a negative effect on the economy (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/26/labour-brexit-rethink-second-referendum-guardian-icm-poll). Students are also increasingly likely to vote for Remain (74%..up 16% since 2016...although the rise comes from those who could not vote in 2016) and women are more likely to vote to Remain in another referendum (53% to 47%). What may give any future Remain campaign a win is the fact that 51% of voters aged 38-64 would now vote to Remain.

Other results from the poll make for interesting reading. For example, when asked what impact Brexit will have on their personal finances, 36% of respondents said negative and that includes 50% of Labour voters. This stands in stark contrast to Tory voters, with only 18% stating that Brexit will have a negative impact on their finances. When it comes to asking about the impact of Brexit on culture, 42% of DE voters (unskilled and unemployed) said that it would be positive, compared to only 34% of AB (managerial and professional) voters. 57% of Labour voters stated that Brexit will have a negative impact on British culture, compared with 20% of Tory voters. There is clearly a sharp divide socially and politically here, although it would also come as no surprise to learn that 54% of voters aged over 75 believe leaving the EU will have a positive impact on the UK whereas only 24% of 18-24 year olds and 29% of 25-34 year olds agreed with them. What these figures reveal is the difficulty every political party has in adopting a unifying approach policy wise; there will be a significant section of the population worried about the social and cultural as well as economic effects of Brexit and they may feel politically homeless if the Labour party decides to align themselves with a harder form of Brexit. Nonetheless, the ruling out of a referendum on the terms of the final deal seems to be a foolish decision by Corbyn, given that 77% of potential Labour voters and 58% of overall respondents want to have that chance. Hmm.

Corbyn is set on gambling on the idea that Brexit voters in the North, in constituencies where Labour lost their seat, such as Mansfield (which went from having a 5,315 majority for Labour to just a 1,057 majority for the Tories) and Stoke-on-Trent South (which went from having a 2,539 majority to Labour to a 663 majority for the Tories) will be so convinced by Corbyn's commitment to Brexit that they will back him and vote Labour at the next election and that their votes would offset any votes lost with liberal pro-EU voters like myself choosing another party to vote for (e.g. Liberal Democrats) in marginal seats. It's certainly an interesting assumption. If you look at the figures from the poll for Northern voters especially, 54% would now vote Remain, 60% want a say on the final deal and 52% of voters think Brexit will have a negative effect on the economy. Who would have predicted that back in June? Anyways time will tell whether Corbyn is right to gamble Brexit policy wise and we shall see the effects at the next election.

Perhaps what is giving Labour the edge in polling at the moment is a desire to enact social change to help improve the lives of the most vulnerable. After years of policies favouring individualism and consumerism, there's a sense that voters are now realising the need to look after our public services after years of lack of proper investment in them. The lowering of taxes may have helped boost the economy but wage growth has stagnated and voters are increasingly fearful of the prospect of being homeless; most of us have next to no savings, which means we are often only one or two paydays away from finding ourselves on the street. That realisation should make us more compassionate towards those who have found themselves in dire straits. We should not be living in a country where more families have to make a choice between heating their home for a week or buying healthy meals for a few days. We should not be asking parents to fork out for expensive bits of clothing just because they have to have the right style of school logo on them. We should not expect single parents and parents who have found themselves with a reduced income as a result of illness or long-term disability to have to routinely deny their children access to leisure activities because they can't afford the bus fare or the petrol to take them. How can the Government continue to justify their approach and squeeze funding for Local Authorities to the point where they cannot afford to fund schemes that could reduce child poverty and empower young people from disadvantaged backgrounds to aspire to be in their dream jobs?

The question now is whether Labour leaning Remain voters put aside their concerns over Corbyn's muddled policy platform and trust in Labour's overall vision or whether they look for a party that showcases the referendum on the final deal as a central policy?