Brexit won't help to resolve key social issues faced by working class communities. So is it any wonder why I'm wholeheartedly backing a People's Vote?

Hey folks - I'm back!

It's that time of year again when many of us have been busily settling back into our work routines, figuring out how we're going to improve productivity, coupled with the odd “let's try not to break but ends up getting broken at some point or another New Year's Resolution” thought or two. This year seems more important than ever due to the impending date of our departure from the EU, ever etched in the minds of political folks as the 29^th March although this does now seem subject to change. Things have been heating up at Parliament, with MPs declaring support for the various positions that the UK should proceed in. My own preference is that the electorate be given an opportunity to make the final decision as to whether we accept whatever Brexit deal finally emerges out of Parliamentary discussions (although I have no idea what that deal could actually look like....it's probably not going to be Chequers Improved that's for sure) or reject the deal and decide to Remain in the EU and look to reform its structures (the option for a No Deal Brexit on World Trade Organisation terms needs to be on the table in the interests of fairness of course). The People's Vote campaign has been gradually gaining steam and attracting interest in Leave voting areas, including Lincoln, Mansfield and Sunderland and it's been pleasing to see the photographs of Brexitometers appearing on a weekly basis on Twitter and the accompanying comments about conversations campaigners have had, particularly with voters who declare they are Remainer Now. I'd encourage anyone interested in finding more about some of the personal stories of Remainer Now voters in Lincolnshire to follow the Lincoln for a People's Vote Twitter handle (@LincolnVote) as well as hashtag #LincolnRemainerNow.

What's clear from reading social media messages over the past month is that the People's Vote campaign face a huge challenge of getting working class people in leave-leaning surburban and rural areas proactively engaged in campaigning and buying into the reasons why a People's Vote is an important step in helping politicians to find an effective way forward out of the political stalemate they have found themselves in. Very few of my neighbours living in Birchwood, Lincoln have mentioned Brexit in public and those that have, tend to do so with a mutter of angst, disgust or frustration, depending on how invested they find themselves in the process. Even the Brexiteers of Birchwood, once emboldened by the promises of “taking back control” of Britain's sovereignty and seeing “real” constitutional change are more muted and contemplative. I'm reminded of one articulate gentleman who had told me back in early 2017 that I had nothing to fear from Brexit because leaving the EU would lead to Tory MPs realising they needed to end the austerity measures they had placed on local authorities, has now retreated to a position that only by getting the Tories out will mean Brexit can be fashioned in a socialist way and lead to an end to austerity. It's a subtle shift but it highlights where the real concerns are concentrated. The issues that the working class are facing are not actually due to mismanagement and harsh treatment by the EU towards us, its mismanagement and harsh policies imposed by the Government of the day. Well shit's got real y'all and there is little that seems certain politically.

When I talk to neighbours who voted Leave and Remain and neighbours who didn't vote in the 2016 EU referendum or couldn't vote in the referendum about what changes they want to see happen to improve the quality of their lives, similar comments emerge time and time again. They talk about wages and earning enough to keep a roof over their heads, homes heated and food on the table. If you're on a zero hours contract or only manage to secure less than 16 hours a week at minimum wage, you feel more on edge and uncertain about the future. The Universal Credit reforms introduced thus far have been botched and the effects on people struggling are well documented. I remember reading a Lincolnshire Reporter article in October which reports findings from a survey conducted with Lincolnshire residents dealing with Universal Credit: “Of those who had moved over to the welfare system, 46% of people said they had received help from a food bank. Some 29% had sought assistance from Citizens Advice” (https://lincolnshirereporter.co.uk/2018/10/universal-credit-leaves-many-hungry-in-lincolnshire/). A trainee midwife said that she was being “penalised” for studying and that had left her going into rent arrears. At a time when there are midwifery and nursing vacancies across the NHS (41,000) and more than 7,000 nurses and midwives from the European Economic Area (EEA) have already left the UK since June 2016 (https://www.ft.com/content/8f2d6e22-e7f9-11e8-8a85-04b8afea6ea3) this is just simply not acceptable and it's one reason why I think training bursaries for nurses and midwives need to be made available, so that trainees are not forced to endure financial hardship whilst studying and training for long hours.

Tory Austerity measures are making life harder for working class families and families who have fallen on hard times, whether that be due to being made redundant or a family member not being able to work because of the severity of illness or having to stay at home to care for a sick or disabled relative. Child poverty is becoming ever increasingly visible. I saw a BBC Breakfast interview with Siobhan Collingwood, a Headteacher from Morecambe who stated that 1 in 10 of her school's pupils came from families that had been forced to access a foodbank (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-46827360). Ms Collingwood isn't alone. Teachers from across England have reported that students in their class are coming into school hungry and worried about the mental and physical health of themselves and their family members. Just last month The Guardian reported findings from the National Education Union which found teachers reported “that a lack of food, poor housing and unsuitable clothes are overwhelming pupils and cash-strapped schools”, with 2 in 3 teachers saying that more families of students attending their school were now unable to afford adequate winter clothing compared with just 3 years ago (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/17/many-pupils-in-england-hungry-and-badly-clothed-say-teachers?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other). Child poverty statistics paint a picture of a Britain that is far from being considered fair and equal. The Child Action Poverty Group has compiled a list of statistics (http://www.cpag.org.uk/content/child-poverty-facts-and-figures) which include the following:

• 9 children in a classroom of 30 will be living in poverty
• Children in large families are at a far greater risk of poverty – 42 per cent of children living in families with 3 or more children live in poverty
• By GCSE, there is a 28 per cent gap between children receiving free school meals and their wealthier peers in terms of the number achieving at least 5 A*-C GCSE grades.

Numerous reports have demonstrated how growing up in poverty can affect a child's chances academically and vocationally. This is particularly the case in the North of England. The 2018 Children's Commissioner report” Growing Up North” found that the most disadvantaged students in England are two years behind non-disadvantaged pupils by the age of 16 and less than a quarter of Northerners possess a Level 4 qualification (https://www.northumberlandgazette.co.uk/news/education/opinion-schools-and-colleges-need-more-investment-1-9533033). Educational inequality has soared on this Government's watch, with 3 out of 10 maintained secondary schools now reporting a financial budget deficit of nearly £500,000 (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/17/many-pupils-in-england-hungry-and-badly-clothed-say-teachers?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other). Recent research conducted by Lucy Powell, MP for Manchester Central found that independent schools are putting their students through IGCSE's for their EBacc subjects which are found to be less academically rigorous than the new GCSEs introduced by the Conservatives and which students in state schools have to take because access to IGCSEs is being phased out in those schools: in fact 91% of all entries for the EBacc core subjects were in independent schools this year (https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/dec/30/labour-demands-inquiry-into-private-schools-evading-gcse-reform). Labour have quite rightly demanded an inquiry into this and hopefully it may lead to decisive action. Every child has the right to access a comprehensive, challenging academic education regardless of their socio-economic status.

Tackling educational inequality and child poverty should be two of the most important things on any Government agenda, yet instead this one seems utterly obsessed on getting Britain out of the EU and trying to convince folks in Birchwood and many other working class neighbourhoods across the UK that it's the most pressing policy agenda item and that social change will not happen without it. Far Right commentators tell us that social inequality is made worse by “the influx” of migrants that come to live and work in the UK. Perhaps one of the most disturbing things that happened during the Christmas and New Year break was the step up in coverage on illegal migration, with the Government deciding in their infinite wisdom to deem the efforts of a few dozen people coming to the UK illegally via the English Channel (and Mablethorpe) a “major incident”. What absolute claptrap. Ask the folks in Birchwood what they may deem to be a “major incident” or a “national crisis” and you would, I guarantee you, very rarely hear “illegal immigration into the UK” given as an answer. There were 201 confirmed migrant Channel rescues since November 2018 on the British side (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/01/05/ignoring-difference-legal-illegal-immigration-penalises-migrants/). 201 compared with the situation in Southern Europe in 2015 when more than 10,000 people landed in 1 day in Greece (https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/dec/30/uk-migrant-crisis-bears-no-comparison-to-eus-2015-influx). Not exactly a national crisis. I get the importance of distinguishing between legal and illegal immigration for right-wing voters but for me, the UK has to take a compassionate and measured approach by ensuring that people who do attempt the English Channel or North Sea crossings are protected from danger and instead direct more anger towards the people smuggling gangs who are perpetuating those dangerous situations. Nobody can blame people who have experienced economic hardship for many years for wanting to search for a job in a country with better prospects.

Let's talk a little bit more about the Brexiteer argument that migrants are harming the employment prospects and wages of working class people. Contrary to what certain commentators may report, I've only spoken to 3 people in the last year who have expressed a clear concern about immigration along these lines. Most of my neighbours are concerned about keeping their own jobs or actually trying to secure a sustainable job, rather than spending time blaming EU and non EU citizens for the circumstances they have found themselves in. Numerous studies that have been conducted have concluded that immigration has little or no impact on average employment or unemployment of existing workers and where an impact was detected, although a 2018 study by the Migrant Advisory Committee found that “immigration from EU countries during the 34-year period from 1983 to 2017 had reduced the employment rate of the UK-born working age population by around 2 percentage points and increased unemployment by 0.6 percentage points” (https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/the-labour-market-effects-of-immigration/). I believe that the emphasis needs to move away from painting a picture of migrants being in constant competition with British nationals to ensuring that all people have access to the education and training they need to develop skills to access the jobs market and to ensure that employers provide true equality of opportunity for all job applicants. I know that from bitter previous experience, being non-binary trans and having moderate dyspraxia. Figures from November 2018 state that 393,000 people who have disabilities were unemployed and the rate between July and September was 9.3%. People with disabilities have an employment rate that is 30.1 percentage points lower than that of people without disabilities (https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CBP-7540). It's interesting that Brexiteers like Jacob Rees-Mogg seem to be perfectly prepared to align themselves who shout slogans like “British Jobs for British People” but never bothers to question why we have such a large employment gap between disabled and non-disabled people, a gap which I believe will not be closed significantly by stricter immigration rules.

I also recommend people share this article written by Aditya Chakrabortty, retelling the employment experiences of Robert, a Romanian who came to the UK to help others but ended up in insecure low-paid work and his experience at Nestlé’s Fawdon plant as an agency worker- an experience which many, British national, EU national or non-EU national would recognise (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/12/myths-migration-stereotypes-insecure-low-paid-work). The far-right are primarily responsible for the perpetuation of stereotypes and fearmongering towards the small number of migrants who try to reach the UK illegally and I feel we need to fight against such fearmongering in a timely and robust manner. Centering the voices of migrants by encouraging and empowering them to craft platforms to speak out such as through blogging or podcasting is one way of doing this.

When I think of “major incidents” and “national crises” I think about what's happening to families and individuals who are being made homeless. The rise in homelessness rates is a national scandal and something the Government should be thoroughly ashamed about allowing the crisis to arise. According to the homelessness charity Crisis, 24,000 people will have slept rough this Christmas, this after an estimated 169% rise in levels of rough sleeping since 2010 (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/20/homeless-deaths-rise-by-a-quarter-in-five-years-official-figures-show). I read a great letter from The Guardian online from Juha Kaakinen, CEO of Y-Foundation, a key organisation which helped devise the Housing First principle in Finland and help young people at risk of becoming homeless finding an affordable place to live. Juha argues that the supply of social housing in the UK has been sufficient and the Government needs to commit to rectifying this now the Homelessness Reduction Act has passed, using the plan created by Crisis. I read the plan last year which I thoroughly recommend: read it in full here: https://www.crisis.org.uk/ending-homelessness/the-plan-to-end-homelessness-full-version/executive-summary/. It includes limiting time spent by individuals and families in temporary accommodation and building 100,500 new social homes a year for the next 15 years to meet the needs of homeless people as well as funding for local authorities to provide a mandatory set of activities to help prevent homelessness, including family mediation and supporting people to keep their tenancies (https://www.crisis.org.uk/ending-homelessness/the-plan-to-end-homelessness-full-version/executive-summary/). Professor Mike Stein, from the University of York (my alma mater) also highlights the fact that there has been 25% increase in deaths of homeless people since 2015, - up to an estimated 600, partly as a result of lack of funding for preventative measures provided by public services (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/20/homeless-deaths-rise-by-a-quarter-in-five-years-official-figures-show). Many of my neighbours, whether they voted to Remain or Leave, are well aware that life is increasingly tough for people in Lincolnshire who find themselves homeless, especially those sleeping rough on our streets or having to navigate the challenges faced as a result of living in temporary accommodation. I believe leaving the EU will not help one jot to alleviate levels of hardship homeless people face. Do not think that money saved from “paying for membership” will trickle down and lead to the building of more homes for the homeless, more services to help improve the mental and physical health of homeless people or the creation of additional jobs. Besides the Conservative Government could have chosen to relieve the burden of austerity measures on our local councils and allowed them to invest in more services. Instead we have to accept for the moment the drips and drabs funding and praise local councils who are trying to do their best under financial strain. One bit of recent good news is that a homelessness hub will open in Lincoln due to funding allocated under the £100m Rough Sleeping Strategy (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-46603795) but much more needs to be done long-term to ensure people do not end up falling through cracks in the system and end up back rough sleeping on the streets. That includes access to skills training, secure long-term council housing tenancies and mental health and emotional wellbeing support.

I couldn't do this blogpost without mentioning the concerns people in my area have about the pressures faced by our local NHS trusts, namely United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust (ULHT), Lincolnshire Community Health Services (LCHS) Trust and Lincolnshire Partnership Foundation Trust (LPFT). I hear far more from my neighbours about waiting times for GP appointments and what they deem to be “unfair” hospital parking charges than I do about whether PM May's deal will lead to us struggling to secure a free trade deal with the US or how the coastline border will be secured. Research conducted by the Nuffield Trust found that people living in the top 10% most deprived areas of England find it harder to secure an appointment with their local GP because “there are markedly fewer GPs per head in poorer areas of England than in richer areas.....There was an average of 1,869 patients on GP lists for each doctor in the most affluent clinical commissioning groups (CCGs), compared with 2,125 in the most deprived” (https://www.ft.com/content/628b25ca-06d1-11e9-9fe8-acdb36967cfc). Emergency admissions are also nearly 30% higher in the 20% most deprived CCGs, compared with the 20% least deprived CCGs (https://www.ft.com/content/628b25ca-06d1-11e9-9fe8-acdb36967cfc). This is partly due to lack of awareness of self-care and prevention strategies for health issues such as smoking and obesity and yet this Government in their infinite wisdom is perfectly happy with presiding over cuts to the Public Health budget by £85m, which “will affect community and prevention services also including ‘stop smoking’ clinics, schemes to tackle obesity, and drug and alcohol misuse services for children and young people.” (https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/government-sneaks-out-ps85m-cut-to-public-health-on-last-day-before-parliamentary-recess_uk_5c1bc9bee4b0407e90785176). Then we need to talk about the current state of our mental health services. A survey of GPs which was commissioned by the youth mental health charity stem4 and undertaken by MedeConnect Healthcare Insight found that 99% of GPs asked said that they feared that patients under the age of 18 would come to some form of harm if they faced lengthy delays in seeing a mental health specialist, with 27% stating that they greatly feared this (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/30/inadequate-nhs-services-put-under-18s-with-mental-health-issues-at-risk). 90% of GPs surveyed also stated that existing health and social care services for under 18s is inadequate, with 37% saying they were extremely inadequate (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/30/inadequate-nhs-services-put-under-18s-with-mental-health-issues-at-risk). This is concerning given numerous studies that have indicated a rise in levels of mental health problems among children and young people. The majority of GPs in this survey reported that they had seen a rise in the numbers of 11-18 year olds diagnosed with anxiety disorders (86%) and yet they say it is “impossible or very difficult for young people to get help with anxiety” (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/dec/30/inadequate-nhs-services-put-under-18s-with-mental-health-issues-at-risk). I wish Parliament was focussing their attentions much more on finding solutions to addressing mental health service provision rather than expending most of their energies on pushing forward with Brexit and having to make provisions to stockpile medicines in the event we leave without any deal with the EU. I mean I'm sure nobody could have foreseen that a form of Brexit that hopefully will never happen has led to the need of the Department for Health to buy 5,000 fridges to store medicines. Not to mention increasing concerns regarding staffing levels in the NHS post-Brexit under the Tories because of the policies outlined in their Immigration white paper. Currently there are numerous hospital staff members who do not earn £30,000 a year: “the starting salary for nurses, midwives and paramedics is £23,000. Junior doctors start at £27,000 while healthcare assistants are at £17,000. Most scientific researchers also earn below the proposed threshold” (https://metro.co.uk/2018/12/19/brexit-migrant-salary-cap-devastating-nhs-schools-experts-warn-8266041/). This on top of the fact that our NHS is short of 107,743 staff overall makes me think how ridiculous it is for those middle and upper class Brexiteer campaigners to crow on about migrants taking jobs British people want to do. I'm all for rises in wage amounts but I very much doubt hospital trusts can afford to raise the salary of a healthcare assistant to £30,000 in one go.

In this blogpost so far I've touched on just a few of the key social issues that we will face as a country in 2019. There are many others I could have mentioned – animal welfare, plastic waste pollution, emergency service strains – ambulances and policing, access to legal aid etc. They are issues that many of us, whether we voted to Remain or Leave in the 2016 EU Referendum care about resolving and issues that will need significant funding and fresh idea generation if we are to address socio-economic inequality. Thus far Brexiteers on the far-right of politics have failed to supply an explanation as to why we must leave the EU in order to tackle systemic socio-economic inequality. Those on the left who define themselves as staunch Brexiteer socialists, aka Lexiteers have tended to put forward arguments that centre around the idea that the EU is somehow deliberately preventing politicians in the UK from putting in place policies that could reduce austerity and lead to greater investment in areas such as Lincolnshire. This is particularly the case when it comes to the question of renationalisation of national infrastructure- i.e. the EU would prevent Labour which favours renationalisation of the railways and the energy production network, from renationalising them, because its rules favour the private sector. The State Aid question has been debated by numerous commentators but I find George Peretz's explanation quite helpful. In particular it was interesting to note that “the UK gives much less state aid per head than most EU countries, under-using the scope that it has within the state aid rules to support (for example) industrial training and regional development.” (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/27/four-reasons-jeremy-corbyn-wrong-eu-state-aid?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other) Yet again another decision taken by the Conservatives not to invest appropriately through having an ambitious Industrial Strategy rather than the fault of the EU. The idea that the EU is some kind of “authoritarian state” and we somehow have to leave it because if we don't we can't then create a truly socially democratic UK sounds a bit far-fetched to me. The rules that have come about as a result of EU membership have, on the whole, been widely accepted without significant critique, other than from the usual quarters. I'm thinking for example, of the recent General Data Protection Regulation which has helped to give individuals more control over how their data is used and retained by organisations- e.g. the right to erasure which “allows individuals to request that personal data be deleted or removed in certain circumstances such as withdrawal of consent or when that data is no longer accurate” (https://blog.centrify.com/consumer-privacy-benefits-gdpr/). Being a member of the EU has meant the Government has had to adopt changes and improve rights and I for one think that's great. So when people complain about EU legislation and regulations being imposed on us, I remember the rules that have been adopted, such as GDPR and The Working Time Directive and how they have and are making a positive difference in our lives. So yeah....EU authoritarian state....what absolute poppycock!

What also gets my goat is how Lexiteers can talk about the EU system being unfair and anti-democratic when we see what our own Parlimentary system is like. How can they honestly say those things with a straight face when we are the ones who still have an unelected House of Lords with hereditary peers and Anglican Bishops being able to have a direct say in our decision making and we have a system which ends up concentrating most of the power in the hands of two parties? I certainly admit that the EU Parliament is far from perfect but maybe we need to consider working on democratising our own Parliamentary system before deciding to mock others for being anti-democratic. On the plus side, if Labour were to be elected in a General Election this year there could be steps taken on long-overdue constitutional reform, not least lowering the voting age to 16 and potentially introducing a referendum on Proportional Representation (I know, “Not Another One”). Such moves would do a lot more to work towards crafting a more modern democratic system than leaving the EU. Mind you, some Lexiteer socialists will just dismiss me as a “neoliberal” or a member of the “metropolitan elite” and consequently dismiss such concerns. It's amazing to think how people on low incomes can be so easily labelled as being members of “The Establishment” these days if they disagree with leaving with the EU and are prepared to do so publicly. Well let me tell you, resurrected eurosceptic Benniteism isn't going to win me or other working class liberal left Labour voters over (yes we do exist!!). 

Instead, I think the focus needs to be on outlining a positive, progressive vision for the UK that aims to address social issues. It's the biggest challenge that a campaign for Remain during a People's Vote referendum needs to overcome. People know that we don't want to Leave the EU but what are we going to offer to improve the lives of voters in Mansfield, Redcar, Lincoln and Preston so that those voters would be sufficiently satisfied to vote for that Remain vision. Commentators and MPs have begun to outline such visions. For example, Zoe Williams in her Guardian article states that “A positive vision for the future needs solid answers to urgent questions: climate change, austerity, the erosion of workplace rights, the rise of fascism. All of these feed into one another to create a sense of precariousness and threat, and all solutions involve cooperation across borders. The new remain movement must articulate a future in which opportunities and freedoms expand rather than retract, citizens’ rights ratchet upwards in a race to the top, revivified unions support one another internationally, a green new deal echoes across multiple governments, racism is answered robustly and migration celebrated, and the dreams of the EU’s founders – peace, reconciliation, solidarity, equality – are rediscovered.” (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/23/labour-remain-jeremy-corbyn-brexit). Such a vision encapsulates much of what I believe and there is a lot of policies within the current Labour manifesto that could be adapted- I'm thinking introducing three year tenancies in private sector as standard, safeguarding homeless shelters, scrapping the draconian bedroom tax for starters. I want to see those policies enacted, but I fear it will be more difficult to enact them outside of the EU.

Brexit is neither necessary nor will benefit working class communities. The core systemic social issues that need addressing will not be addressed by a Conservative Government pushing through Brexit in any form, particularly a No Deal Brexit that could lead to further perpetuation of the Austerity Agenda. Once PM May's deal has been voted down in the House of Commons and the vote of no-confidence has failed, I hope more Labour MPs in particular will join the People's Vote campaign and push for the Final Say on any final deal PM May or other Tory leader manages to cobble together. If not, then I hope MPs realise that working class constituents will need their help more than ever as the country deals with any potential economic turbulence resulting from Brexit.

Thoughts on the Liberal Democrat Spring Conference 2018

The stringency of the austerity measures....Brexit.......The Housing Crisis.....issues that are discussed by people on a daily basis at the moment, whether explicitly or implicitly. Half the time it can feel like the structural problems connected with our society: inequality of opportunity, wage stagnation, low productivity, a growing demand for public services can seem insurmountable. Disengagement with politics remains an issue, particularly for Millennials and Generation Z (16-35). Hope for a brighter, more equal future flickers rather than burns brightly, which is why it's more important than ever to be engaging with voters and non-voters through the dissemination of an inclusive, ambitious and progressive vision for the country that will try to address our structural challenges head-on. I believe the party that can best articulate such a vision at a grassroots local and national level will have a real chance of winning a majority at the next General Election. The question is, whether there is a party out there who can listen to the electorate AND non-electorate, build political engagement and articulate a vision, in the shadow of disruptive Brexit negotiations.

This Mothering Sunday afternoon I decided to tune into Sir Vince Cable's (the leader of the Liberal Democrats) closing speech to Spring Conference delegates in Southport, which was streamed live via Periscope and also simultaneously disseminated via YouTube and Facebook live. I was probably only one of a couple thousand viewers who made such a decision but I didn't feel it was an entirely wasted activity. Cable came across as clearly passionate about campaigning for an #ExitFromBrexit (i.e. a referendum on the terms of the Brexit deal with an option to Remain in the EU) and well-informed about current domestic issues and the need for pragmatic, wide-ranging solutions. Yet I did wonder whether he was already preaching to the converted, although it is important to empower them to go out campaigning in constituencies across the UK in all kinds of places (including care homes, Mr Cable!!) I also thought his comments RE Leave voters were a little hap-hazard: trying to reduce the reasons why older voters backed Brexit down to one reason: nostalgia for a less diverse Britain isn't founded entirely on evidence- a minority of voters may have done so but they are exactly that, a minority. Hmm...Anyways onto the policy announcements...

Education:

The Lib Dems certainly have a number of policies that I believe would appeal to the electorate at large: protecting per pupil funding in real terms for all pupils including in Further Education, protecting the Pupil Premium, increasing the Early Years Pupil Premium by £700 to £1000 a year, requiring teachers in state schools to have QTS (Qualified Teaching Status) or working towards it and providing at least 50 hours of Continuing Professional Development per year for teachers. In addition to these, the Lib Dems are proposing quite radical changes: abolishing Key Stage 1 and 2 SATs with moderated teacher assessments and a standardisation test, abolishing Regional Schools Commissioners, making local authorities responsible for planning, exclusions and admissions and replacing Ofsted with a new inspection system, looking at emotional wellbeing of teachers and students in addition to test scores. I'm also glad to see SEND pupils' needs mentioned, with a desire to reduce the number of SEND pupils being excluded from mainstream school, and to see the proposal for a named person (a pastoral team lead preferably) who is responsible for craft whole school policies and approaches towards mental health.

I agree with the idea behind “Every Child Empowered”, ensuring that children and young people in constituencies across the country, including in deprived wards and rural villages and hamlets get access to the skills they need to prepare them fully for adult life: who can argue against providing First Aid training in schools and colleges if it means it reduces the amount of unnecessary GP appointments, A&E admissions and calls to NHS helplines? Who can argue with introducing comprehensive LGBTQIA+ Relationships and Sex Education if it helps to reduce instances of sexual assault, abuse, under-age pregnancies or misinformation about gender identities? Who can argue against teaching children about budgeting and debt management if it allows them to make informed decisions about borrowing and reduces the number of people resorting to loan sharks? Financial literacy, First Aid and RSE should all be on the National Curriculum, as part of the PSHE and Citizenship programmes of study and there should be funding given by Government directly to schools to allow for external providers to deliver sessions, taking the pressure off teachers who may not have the time to be researching such topics in depth with students. Such a broad curriculum, a “Curriculum for Life” should be required to be taught in academy and free schools and public schools should be encouraged to reform their curriculum offer.

There's also talk of introducing Personal Education Accounts, one for 16-18 year olds and one specifically for adult learners to help pay for training and skills courses delivered online, at local FE colleges and in community centres and libraries will help people access quality courses and aid their career development. Cable announced in his speech that a Commission on Life Long Learning will be set up to explore this policy idea further.

There's a lot of detailed recommendations and I'd refer those interested in finding out more to check out the policy document here: https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/libdems/pages/42359/attachments/original/1518080686/Every_Child_Empowered_-_Policy_Paper.pdf?1518080686

NHS, Social Care and Mental Health:

Our NHS remains greatly under-pressure and little practical action has been taken by the Tory Government to try and alleviate such pressures. The Tories may claim that health spending is at record levels but it has not been enough given the rise in demand for services. They and previous governments have failed to prepare adequately for the ageing of our population. A&E waiting times are now the highest they have ever been: only 85% of patients in England were seen under 4 hours. The United Lincolnshire Hospitals Trust missed its waiting time target by 25% and has missed every target for A&E and cancer care for every year since 2014. For Lincolnshire residents, this is extremely concerning. The Lib Dems F18: The NHS at 70 motion recognises the pressure that NHS Trusts are under and are calling on the Tory Government to provide £4bn that the NHS will need for 2018/19 financial year, with an addition £2bn of funding given to local authorities to fund social care. Additionally, the Lib Dems want to see the introduction of a special NHS passport to allow 59,000 NHS professionals from the EU an automatic guaranteed right to remain following Brexit and for bursaries for student nurses to be reintroducted to encourage more British people to decide to train to be a nurse and thereby reduce the nursing shortage in hospitals and care homes across the country.

Mental Health care has not improved satisfactory under this Tory Government. Waiting times for referral remain far too long, demand for Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services has increased, with 1 in 5 children who have been referred to local CAMHS services being rejected for treatment :that's a total of 39,652 children (https://www.nspcc.org.uk/what-we-do/news-opinion/1-in-five-5-children-referred-to-local-mental-health-services-are-rejected-for-treatment/). This is concerning given that 1 in 10 children in England between the ages of 5 and 16 suffer from a mental health condition and up to 20% of children will experience a mental health condition in any given year. NHS CAMHS are currently only funded to meet 25% of cases but that is expected to increase to 33% by 2021. The Government has committed to recruiting 1,700 more therapists and supervisors and to ensure that an extra 70,000 children and young people are able to access CAMHS but it is unclear whether such targets will be achieved.

Norman Lamb has been a passionate campaigner for better Mental Health service provision and thus I'm not surprised to see some concrete policy suggestions being offered in F18: the earmarked £1.3bn of spending being brought forward to improve mental health service provision, ending out-of-area placements, very important for people living in rural areas such as Metheringham and the protection and promotion of community pharmacies. Perhaps the most radical suggestion, and one that has been made by Lamb for years, is the creation of a cross-party committee to look at funding the NHS and Social Care system long term. Raising the level of income tax by 1p in the £1 to fund social care short-term would help alleviate funding pressures but there has to be a sustainable long-term solution found and it's in the political interests of all parties concerned to find such a solution. Let's see if that happens anytime soon. I'm not holding my breath.

Housing:

Britain needs a housing revolution in order to ensure that every person has a suitable and safe roof over their head regardless of their socio-economic circumstances. It's ridiculous to think that the peak of house building in the UK was 1968 and that in 2018 we face a situation where 125,000 children are classed as homeless and rough sleepers are dying out on our streets, despite the best efforts of compassionate individuals and organisations such as The Nomad Trust, LEAP and Lincolnshire YMCA to help them. Access to decent housing should be viewed as a human right. A house should be a place to call home, not an investment to feel obligated to upkeep with no families living in it to bring the place to life. Yet the Government (when in coalition with the Lib Dems between 2010 and 2015 and afterwards) more than halved the state housing development budget for local councils and housing associations from £11bn in 2010 to £5.3bn last year. The Local Government Association revealed that local councils and their communities had granted nearly twice as many planning permissions (321,000) as the number of new homes that had been completed (183,000) last year. The issue is not with planning permission being granted, it's with housebuilders not building enough homes once they have planning permission granted.

It's good to see the Lib Dems reaffirm their commitment to building 300,000 houses a year in England by 2022 and to scrapping the draconian housing borrowing cap. I agree with the Lib Dems that local authorities must be able to access loans to build and invest in quality affordable and social housing, including “borrowing from the Public Works Loan board to buy land for housing and build affordable and social housing on the same terms they are currently borrowing to purchase commercial property” (https://www.libdems.org.uk/spring-18-f4-local-government-housing). I also believe local authorities should be given the right to scrap Right To Buy in their area, when assessments of local need have been carried out. Any proceeds from the sale of council houses by local authorities should be used to find new social housing for homeless families and I'd argue also to acquire adapted social housing for disabled residents who have been on the council house waiting list for more than 2 years. Councils should also have powers to monitor housing developments, to ensure that “poor door” practices are abandoned. Redevelopment of housing estates must not lead to a decrease in social housing: one of the best ways to prevent this from happening would be to introduce a (I believe legal) “right of return for all residents on the same terms as their pre-regeneration tenancy” (https://www.libdems.org.uk/spring-18-f4-local-government-housing). Such policies would benefit residents first and foremost and help to ensure community cohesion is maintained post the end of regeneration projects. I'd only add that PM May's suggestion of changing the use of empty retail properties in inner city areas would be beneficial to adopt and that the EDMO legislation strengthening should allow local authorities the opportunity to compulsory purchase empty retail property for the expressed purpose of creating social housing for the homeless and low income families with children. Landbanking is also an issue that needs to be resolved: it's not right that developers can be allowed to purchase land for the specific purpose of building new homes and then not start to build them within a 2 year period. Perhaps there needs to be compulsory purchases made if landbanking continued beyond a 2 year slot.

Rural Affairs:

I have spoken to numerous rural voters who do feel the issues that they raise are being ignored by the current Conservative government. In Lincolnshire, we have had streetlights turned off in villages and hamlets across the county and it has made some residents feel too scared to walk to the pub or to visit their friends at night for fear of being mugged, assaulted or worse. The safety of our county's residents has to trump ideologically driven efficiency savings but our Conservative controlled County Council has failed to listen to concerns and reverse the policy in full. I've spoken to rural residents in the Sleaford and North Hykeham constituency worried about the continued closure of Grantham A&E at night and wondering whether it will eventually be downgraded or closed through the implementation of Lincolnshire's Sustainability and Transformation Plans, forcing them to travel for an hour just to get medical attention at Lincoln County Hospital's already under-pressure A&E. I'm pleased to see the adoption of motion F8: A Rural Future: Time To Act by conference delegates, which includes a specific commitment to “increasing the availability of affordable housing” through the reduction of second home ownership (allowing local authorities to increase tax on second homes through a stamp duty surcharge or an increase in council tax rate). The installation of Superfast broadband which is defined as being “over 30 Mbps download speeds and 6 Mbps upload speeds” should continue to be a priority, so businesses and households in Chapel St Leonards have an ability to access the internet at the same speed as those based in Lincoln.

I would like to see the introduction of a Young Person's Bus Discount Card, for all young people aged 16-21 living in rural areas which provides then with 2/3 discount on bus fares. This will allow young people to be able to afford to travel across Lincolnshire, visiting friends, joining community youth clubs and attending training sessions, which will help reduce their sense of rural isolation. I agree with the notion of creating more community centre hubs providing a multitude of services to residents but would like to see investment come from central Government in order to facilitate such creation. Local authorities are overstretched and do not have the financial resources spare to shoulder the majority of the financial burden for these projects.

I agree with proposals to increase Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) payments to help maintain woodlands and forests, reduce soil erosion and uphold animal rights. Investment in flood prevention in rural constituencies and launching a National Fund for Coastal Change are also sentient policy ideas which clearly demonstrate eco-friendly credentials.

Voter Engagement and Equality and Diversity:

Cable talked of the need to improve diversity within the Lib Dem party in his speech, a comment which I respect him for making and one which I hope will be taken on board. The Lib Dems are doing well in local council by-elections across the country at the country at the moment, with residents listening to key policy ideas and buying into their vision for an open, tolerant and inclusive society. Credit for this success has to go to local campaigners, councillors and candidates who engage with voters and current non-voters on the doorstep, listening to their concerns and not immediately judging them their Brexit vote. This work needs to continue to grow in order to increase the number of MPs at the next General Election. Increasing awareness of the policy platform is half the battle. I'd argue that Lib Dems should set up more central meetings, held at village halls and community centres, liaising with local third sector organisations and allowing people to be honest, open and frank about their views. Organising meetings in care homes would be innovative and demonstrate that the party cares about all voters: after all, Brexit may lead to a reduction in sustainability staffing levels which will then affect them directly.

It was great to see a renewed commitment to advocating for electoral reform, making the case for the introduction of a right to vote for 16 and 17 year olds and supporting the private members bill put forward by Labour MP Peter Kyle. There's also a campaign being run to raise awareness that EU citizens can vote in local elections. More campaigning should be done on the need for House of Lords reform to build support for the creation of an elected House of Lords (or change of name...e.g. to a Senate or something similar). Supporting devolution of powers to local authorities (including those on housing proposed under F4) should be a priority too and may win over more skeptical voters.

It was amazing to see via Twitter and by watching some of the Spring Conference via YouTube the wealth of speakers who had been invited to talk about their personal experiences and ideas for the future. A motion put forward by Jess Insall, a member of LGBT+ Lib Dems on gender neutral school uniforms, arguing that schools should present uniform options that can be worn by pupils of all genders was praised and passed by delegates for being inclusive and feminist. There was no mainstream platforming of transphobic views masquerading as real feminism by trans exclusionary radical feminists. The party can build on their record for inclusion through further engagement with working class rural people, especially in constituencies such as Sleaford and North Hykeham, Gainsborough, Grantham and Stamford, Boston and Skegness and Louth and Horncastle. Engagement with habitual Conservative voters through promotion of rural policies and building up a reputation for economic credibility will also prove fruitful, as will engagement with suburban voters particularly with a number of young, passionate and thoughtful candidates standing in this year's local elections.

Back Away from the Brexit:

Of all the policy suggestions and motions passed at this year's Spring Conference, perhaps the one which will garner the most attention from ordinary people and the mainstream leader is the Lib Dem's commitment to an Exit From Brexit. I've spoken to voters and non-voters across Lincolnshire over the past few months about their views towards Brexit and it's clear there is still a lot of passion emanating from Remain and Leave voters, with no overall consensus as to the best way forward. Non- referendum voters feel that the debate hasn't moved on since June 2016 and a number are concerned about the potential economic and cultural effects Brexit may have on Lincoln and Lincolnshire. Even the most ardent of Leave voters I have spoken to have occasionally expressed their concerns. I remember talking to a very forthright retired plasterer, who believed in the need to take back control of sovereignty from Brussels but worried about whether his pension contributions could decrease if the Tory government did not secure “ more beneficial” free trade agreements with the US Trump administration or Commonwealth member states. A young lady, who works at a care home in Lincoln and voted Leave in 2016 told me that she was worried her workload may increase if the home couldn't replace the carers who had decided to leave the UK or were thinking of leaving the UK once Brexit happens afters March 2019. A young guy who is a very committed Conservative didn't like the fact that food prices may rise following a No-Deal situation, where the UK will have to rely on World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules in order to keep our economy alive. For certain elements of the mainstream media and Tory Brexiteers to deny such levels of anxiety about the potential consequences of Brexit exist, even in Leave voting areas such as Lincoln, is to deny the reality of the situation. It is inevitable that some voters will decide to change their mind, and would vote Remain in another referendum. More importantly though it is vital that the main political parties have strategic plans in place that will help mitigate any potential negative economic and cultural effects of Brexit. The Tories never talk of such plans, only making passing references to their Impact War Chest and hoping that a deal can be secured that allows them to maintain a veneer of economic competence. The Lib Dems have spelled out some policies but I personally feel more work needs to be done to craft policies that can be enacted in the event Brexit does happen. Better to be prepared and hope that Brexit doesn't happen in a No Deal form or even better, doesn't happen, than to fail to prepare for the No Deal Brexit. Perhaps such policies will be formulated and announced once a draft trade deal has been secured by Double D et al. But don't hold your breath that they can secure a trade deal, let alone a good one.

Whichever way Brexit is spun, whether it's a “take back control” or a “jobs first” type, it looks like it is going to lead to a contraction of the economy and potentially further cuts to our public services. As Mr Cable made clear in his speech, such measures would hurt the most vulnerable in our society who rely on effective public service provision for support. Jeremy Corbyn has pretty much committed the Labour Party to leaving the Single Market, remains very cagey about what a Customs Union that's not the current EU Customs Union would look like and has dismissed out of hand calls for a referendum on the Brexit deal. I don't know whether the Labour position will evolve as we get closer to the day of Brexit but one positive advantage for the Lib Dems is that they have a very clear Brexit position and are not afraid to stick to it.

Conclusion:

The Lib Dems have a lot of work to do if they are to regain seats at the next General Election. The Survation poll currently puts them at 9%, whilst Labour have seen a surge in support, placing them at 44% (http://uk.businessinsider.com/survation-labour-popularity-surge-7-point-lead-poll-conservatives-2018-3). Such poll numbers may be optimistic in both cases and may change upwards or downwards as the nature of the Brexit deal becomes clear. The motions passed at the Lib Dem Spring Conference, and the passion for a liberal future expressed by speakers, including Mr Cable may go some way towards changing voters' minds. It'll be interesting to see what new policies are developed in time for the Autumn Conference....unless a General Election happens before then. Who knows in our currently unpredictable political climate?

Reflections on 2017 & Hopes for 2018

The festive period is a traditionally a time for reflection for many Christians, other people of faith, agnostics and atheists alike; a period where we consider the thoughts we have had and the actions we have taken over the last year and decide whether we need to amend our behaviour to be more compassionate, helpful people in the following year. 2017 has certainly been a challenging one for liberal minded people, with the seemingly unstoppable ascendency of Trumpian and Alt-Right thought and the continuation of division along Brexit voting lines, with discussions proving less than fruitful at times. Reminding ourselves of Jesus' birth and the compassion he demonstrated to people seemingly very different from himself should remind us of the need for dialogue, for breaking down erected stereotypes in order to try and establish common ground on which to build a brighter, happier future. So here's my reflections on 2017 generally and some of my hopes and recommendations for 2018.

Brexit and Politics:

When examining the situation of folks in the UK, you can see that people from both sides of the Brexit referendum hope to see positive changes made to the working and living conditions of people in the UK, although they may differ on how best to deliver that long-lasting change. I believe it's true to say that the Brexit referendum was used as an attempt by some as a way of cementing blame for the lack of UK economic security and ability to destiny-shape on the EU. However, it wasn't our membership of the EU that contributed wholly to the decline of our industrial heartlands; neither is it the fault of the EU that we continue to have low productivity growth a decade after the banking crash. Successive governments have failed to deliver appropriate industrial strategies designed to maximise the potential of small and medium sized businesses based in rural as well as urban constituencies. The Conservative government has spent too much time focussing on designing and implementing short-term austerity measures and not enough time co-ordinating an industrial strategy that is bold and wide-reaching. Establishing maths schools and Universal Technical Colleges is all well and good but there has to be jobs in regional areas for graduates of those schools to go and funding still needs to be place for young people to become apprentices in enterprising small and medium sized businesses located near to where they live. It shouldn't be the case that young people feel they have to migrate to larger cities to find sustainable work and it isn't right that small and medium sized business owners are not getting the real targeted help they need to expand and take on local talent. Brexiteers tell us that Britain outside the EU will present many free trade opportunities for businesses yet little evidence is out there that convinces small and medium sized business owners that those opportunities will benefit them directly. It's time to stop focussing on massaging the egos of corporate hedge fund managers and Nigel Farage and instead come up with ideas that will benefit businesses based in places like Skegness and Metheringham first.

Brexit wise generally, I have no idea whether the trading negotiation outcome will be anything near to the favourable trading conditions we currently have with the EU. I still remain convinced that our interests are best served by being a member of the Single Market and Customs Union but that option is only available if we decide to remain within the EU. A Survation poll conducted for the Mail on Sunday and released earlier this month found that out of the 1,003 respondents, 50% said they “support the holding of a referendum asking the public if they accept or reject the negotiated deal” (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/britons-majority-in-favour-of-public-vote-on-final-brexit-deal-uk-politics-a8089161.html) The most recent BMG Research poll for The Independent has indicated a continuation in the shift in attitude towards Brexit itself, with 51% of 1,509 respondents stating they wish the UK to remain a member of the EU and only 41% saying they still want the UK to leave (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-second-referendum-latest-poll-remain-ten-points-leave-bmg-a8114406.html). I believe a 2^nd referendum on the terms of the Brexit deal should be on the cards but at the moment it looks unlikely to happen (Jeremy Corbyn remains quiet on the subject but I'm still unsure as to why he is so reluctant to advocate for a 2^nd referendum and Keir Starmer doesn't seem to believe it would be a worthwhile policy idea to back at least in public). What is certain is that voters need to be realistic about the UK's current economic prospects outside of the EU trading bloc; thus far, they look less than optimistic. Inflation is already hitting people's pockets. The British Retail Consortium has warned that prices could rise unless existing trade deals can be replicated: tariffs on clothes from Turkey could increase from 0 to 12% and duties on Icelandic fish could end up being 11% when they are only 3.4% currently. The Government is clearly worried about the potential economic impact of Brexit (whether there is a deal with the EU or not) too; I wonder why Chancellor Philip Hammond is so reluctant to publish the Brexit impact reports that have been created by the Treasury; would the analyses revealed by data modeling (tax funded by the way) be too hard for die-hard Brexiteers to swallow? Or perhaps the Tories are so arrogant as to presume that not many people outside Westminster would not be bothered reading them? (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/26/philip-hammond-urged-publish-treasury-brexit-impact-studies). I hope next year that there will be a more concillatory attitude demonstrated by proponents of Brexit; one that acknowledges the concerns of Remain voters and works towards securing economic prosperity for everyone in the UK, not just people like Farage or Rees-Mogg.

The UK General Election and ensuing events have brought with them hope, disappointment and satisfaction. I have certainly more hope for a better future for the UK given the wide-ranging ideas that were contained in the Labour, Lib Dem, Greens and Women's Equality Party manifestos. There's no shortage of proposals that could be implemented (and lord knows whether the Tories will ever be bothered to implement them what with their current preoccupation with Hard Brexit) and there are some amazing MPs who are and I suspect will continue to try and make a difference to the lives of those who are Just About Managing to keep their heads above water financially speaking. I've been impressed by the wonderful Marsha de Cordova, who has become Labour's first dedicated Minister for Disabled People and Dawn Butler, Shadow Secretary of State for Equalities who both happen to be sassy, intelligent women of colour and who could both one day be viable candidates in the next Labour Leadership race.

However, I can't say that I've been entirely happy with all of Labour's policy announcements or the actions of certain Labour MPs (who shall remain nameless in this blogpost) this year. I'm still not convinced that Labour should be focussing efforts on renationalisation of our utilities (certainly not in their first term back in power anyways). Equally I am beginning to get the sense that Corbyn is in danger of developing a credibility gap (albeit primarily with older liberal minded voters at the moment) on the issue of Brexit; it's a gap that could continue to grow if Corbyn avoids discussing issues resulting from Brexit head-on. I can understand his reluctance to nail his colours to a particular mast; he doesn't want to alienate pro-Brexit voters based in Northern and Midland constituencies including ones that Corbyn want to win back like Mansfield (majority of 1,057) and Stoke-on-Trent South (majority of 663) yet at the same time he doesn't want to upset liberal minded voters in metropolitan constituencies and risk losing Scottish gains from the SNP including Midlothian (majority of 885) and Glasgow North East (majority of 242). The example of how Lincoln voted in the June General Election however should give Corbyn and his team some food-for-thought: Karen Lee, a nurse and City Councillor for Carholme Ward managed to defeat a hard-line Brexiteer Tory partly because of her willingness to talk openly about the UK remaining a member of the Single Market to protect jobs and workers' rights at hustings held across the city. I need not remind politicos in the Labour party that Lincoln constituents voted to Leave the EU in the Referendum yet there was an increased turnout at the polls in the 2017 GE compared with the 2015 GE which increased the number of voters for both Labour and the Tories and I would surmise that Labour won because Remain voters were energized to turn out and vote to turf out the Brexiteer. If it happened in Lincoln, it could happen in other constituencies that had similar voting percentages in the Brexit referendum. A recent poll conducted by YouGov for the Best for Britain campaign group also gives an indication of the anti-Brexit sentiments of Labour voters across the UK. The poll of 1,075 people who said they intend to vote Labour at the next General Election found that 63% would be delighted or pleased if Labour declared they will stop Brexit and remain in the EU, with only 21% opposing such a policy decision. 24% of respondents also said they would change their minds and vote for another party if Labour decides to proceed with the Brexit process (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/dec/27/labour-voters-could-abandon-party-over-brexit-stance-poll-finds). Despite such emergence of anti-Brexit sentiments in the polls, Corbyn has kind of made hints recently that he himself won't back calls for a second referendum although Deputy Leader Tom Watson has said that “nothing has been ruled out” (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/jeremy-corbyn-says-labour-does-not-back-second-brexit-referendum_uk_5a44c3d7e4b025f99e19b252?utm_hp_ref=uk-politics). There is a real risk that a reluctance to allow voters to either have the final say on the Brexit deal or vote in a second referendum will alienate swing voters who had voted Remain in the EU Referendum in order to appease Brexiteer socialist and communist elements. I would argue that Corbyn should not only be advocating for at least a referendum on the deal but also push vigorously against the Tory version of Brexit that will leave voters who are classed as Just About Managing worse off. Corbyn has a duty to continue to fight to protect workers' rights from being eroded (in addition to continuing to talk about the new rights he would introduce including the banning of unpaid internships over 4 weeks and the banning of zero hours contracts). He should not be afraid to be more vocal about the potential danger economic or otherwise that may result from a Tory driven Hard Brexit. He needs to be promoting the efforts of Labour MPs to challenge the Government approach and his questions at Prime Minister's Questions need to framed more around questioning the Tory Brexit approach; for example, critiquing the Government over their hoarding of money for a No Deal Brexit when local authorities are seeing yet another deep cut to their funding streams, forcing them to push up council tax bills to help pay for local policing. The “constructive ambiguity” approach that Corbyn has adopted will only be effective for a short while longer; he needs to make a brave choice before his opportunity to enact social change passes him by.

Disability Rights:

Disabled people in Lincoln and across the UK have continued to bear the brunt of austerity measures this year:

• Just this month the High Court ruled that a change to the Personal Independence Payment affecting people with mental health conditions was unlawful and discriminatory (164,000 people should have received a higher amount of PIP) http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-refusal-hand-164000-people-11733688
• Loss of benefits has led to people having to crowdfund for basic equipment including wheelchairs (http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/philip-hammond-disability_uk_5a39671de4b0578d1beb73a7).
• The Government was publicly rebuked by the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities (CRPD) for its lacklustre approach towards fostering better rights for disabled people, concluding that the Government was “guilty of grave or systematic violations of the rights of persons with disabilities” (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/sep/04/austerity-disabled-people-rights-uk-un-government). 60 recommendations were made within a 17 page report and there's little indication these recommendations have been used to inform Government policy going forward
• More children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities are being home schooled in part due to a lack of school places (1,000 children are on the waiting list) https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/nov/30/uk-education-disabled-children-home-school-inclusion
• Chancellor Hammond was caught on record blaming an increase in disabled workers for the productivity crisis despite the fact that disabled people currently only make up 11.4% of the total number of workers in the UK and that for all the Tory bravado about improving employment figures, the “disability employment gap” between disabled workers and non-disabled workers has moved very little between July and September 2010 (31.26%) and April and June 2017 (31.35%) (http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/philip-hammond-disabled-people-workforce-responsible-for-productivity-problem-a8099436.html)
• Research by Scope has found that workers with a disability have to make 60% more applications to find a job compared with jobseekers without a disability.

It's really not good enough. Affirmative action needs to be taken to help empower disabled people and that means giving disabled people like myself and others the tools to enact change. I'm very much in favour of Marsha de Cordova's suggestion that there should be a public awareness campaign led by disabled workers which would include encouraging more small and medium sized businesses in rural areas to consider taking on apprentices who happen to have a learning disability or who are on the autistic spectrum and encouraging small and medium sized business owners and managers to attend training sessions so they are aware of the measures they can take to make reasonable adjustments in the workplace and understand the Access to Work Scheme. Equally the Tory Government should be made to promise that existing disability rights being brought into law through the Great Repeal Bill will not be eroded for the duration of this Parliament and to consider adopting aspects of the EU Accessibility Act which “would set new accessibility standards across Europe for ticketing and check-in machines for bus, rail and air travel, as well as for computers, ebooks and ecommerce” (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/dec/12/marsha-de-cordova-disabled-minister-equality-battles and read more about the EU Accessibility Act here: http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=1202).

All public spaces and business premises, especially shops and restaurants should be accessible for disabled shoppers yet this is currently not the case; research by Scope has revealed that 75% of disabled people and their families had left a retail outlet or business premises because there were not making provisions for them, even though there is an existing legal requirement that businesses make reasonable adjustments to cater for disabled customers (https://news.sky.com/story/high-street-chains-exposed-on-shopping-trip-with-disabled-person-11184435). I hope the Government will consider strengthening the Equality Act so there is a duty on businesses that are customer-facing to have accessible facilities. That may send the necessary message to those businesses attempting to stall on making their premises more accessible.

Youthquakin':

The word of 2017 as decided by the Oxford English Dictionary is “Youthquake” and I have to say that I've been impressed by the sheer number of young people across the UK who have decided to make their voices heard, whether by attending anti-Trump and pro Feminism marches, by being brave enough to come out and talk about their ideas and opinions, risking bullying and harassment and discrimination as a result and by choosing to vote in the General Election. Very few political and cultural commentators thought that Corbyn's campaign could have energised and empowered so many but very few would now dare to underestimate the power of the Millennial and Generation Z vote. What was incredible in my own constituency was listening to a group of sixth form students choosing to debate vigorously and openly a few days before the election. Their passion for wanting to be part of the driving force that they believed could enact social change was truly inspiring and I am no longer as despairing for the future of the country at the end of the year than I was at the start because I know that even in a possible post-Brexit Britain there shall always be young people willing to stand up for liberal virtues of compassion, and openness.

Young people can generate some truly inspiring ideas and be amazing campaigners in their local communities and on a national level. Too often there are narrow-minded people out there who refuse to listen to them just because they consider them “too young” to be politically active. This cultural attitude needs to change. My hope is that in the coming year will see a commitment made by more liberal Conservative MPs towards giving young people aged 16 and 17 the right to vote and putting in place the education they need to help empower them to consider going to the polling stations. It cannot possibly be acceptable for a 16 year old to pay National Insurance, get married (albeit with parental consent) and not have the ability to help shape the policies that affect their day-to-day lives. Rather than disillusioning young people in our sixth form colleges, further education colleges and who are on an apprenticeship, we should be encouraging them to enjoy being citizens and that means continuing to energise them to vote.

LGBTQIA+ Rights:

Not much progress has been made on improving rights for non-binary or intersex people in the last year despite vigorous campaigning by activists. A national LGBT survey has been commissioned by the Government which is designed to help inform decision making going forward. There was meant to be a review of the Gender Recognition Act 2004 to make it easier for trans people to obtain a Gender Recognition Certificate but that seems be parked now till at least spring 2018 and the release of the LGBT survey results because of fears expressed by radical feminists and right wing media types. It seems 2017 has been defined by a real flaring-up of stereotyping and vitriol against trans and non-binary people with certain elements of the mainstream media (particularly The Sunday Times) eager to fan the flames of discord. A moral panic on heat so to speak has ensued. Some of the articles that have been published do betray a lack of even basic knowledge of legislation or terminology on the part of the journalists who wrote them whereas others were quite clearly crafted in a radical feminist vein, honestly reflecting the views of the writer. Whilst I am someone who understands the value of living in a society that respects freedom of speech and the right of newspapers to vet what they print relatively free from government control, I have at times this year questioned the judgment of some of the editorial teams involved and would caution them in the future not to give out the appearance of favouring a particular ideology (Radical Feminism is an ideology, after all) in order to pander to a particular group of readers. As the ever insightful David Levesley pointed out in his iNews opinion-ed “The media needs to stop weaponising children in their crusade against trans people”, the never ending stream of opinion-eds by cisgender people has been mostly unhelpful; trans rights campaigner Ashley Talbot stated quite rightly: “I have plenty of opinions about things but I don't have free reign to write about them in national newspapers and then claim I'm being silenced when people point out how offensive it is” (https://inews.co.uk/opinion/comment/media-needs-stop-weaponising-young-children-crusade-trans-people/). I am not naive enough to surmise that articles questioning trans people's right to be themselves will stop in their entirety but I do hope there will be more newspaper editors willing to publish articles penned by non-binary activists, experts and ordinary hard-working people or maybe perhaps editors who will consider taking on more non-binary columnists and journalists to better reflect the experiences of non-binary people across the UK. The talent is out there; editors just need to be bothered enough to seek them out. In the meantime, cis (and some trans) people opinion-eding should read the existing oeuvre of non-binary people and educate themselves before presuming to pass judgment on them. Think before you write!!!

Money:

The amount of income that working class people have across the UK to spend continues to be unsatisfactory. Latest figures released by the Trade Unions Congress (TUC) demonstrate just how woeful wage growth is in the UK compared with other countries: a study of OECD figures has revealed that the rate of wage growth in the UK will be “the lowest of any wealthy nation” with workers “seeing their earnings decrease by 0.7% in 2018 when inflation is taken into account (https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/dec/29/uk-to-sink-to-the-bottom-of-oecd-wage-growth-index-in-2018). The Resolution Foundation has also concluded that wage growth in real terms will stagnate in 2018, although they acknowledged the increase in the National Living Wage will help workers marginally. This is very worrying news for young workers already struggling to afford to pay their rent, utilities and food bills who hoped that the Conservatives would have introduced radical policies to help them in light of the GE result. The Lloyds survey conducted in November only confirms the nation's current feelings regarding the economy: “63% feel negative about the current state of inflation, up 14% since last November” and “2/3 feel negative about the UK economy” (https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/dec/27/zero-real-wage-growth-britain-end-2018-forecasts).

Low wage growth has inevitably meant more households turning to loan companies to provide them with the money necessary to pay for car repairs or rent deposits. Recent Labour research using statistics from the Office for National Statistics which includes student loan debts has found that “unsecured debt is on course to exceed £15,000 per household next year” (https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/dec/27/uk-household-debt-john-mcdonnell-warns-alarming-increase). The Guardian has already examined unsecured consumer credit debt and discovered there are 8.3m people in the UK classed as having a problem debt. Action is going to have to be taken to bring this number down, whether it be limiting access to credit for those who have already borrowed a certain amount of unsecured debt or are struggling to maintain payments and scrapping or at least capping the interest rate on consumer loans, including student loans (or at least scrap the 3% rate above inflation which is at 3% and costing students currently around £3,000 a year) so people are not saddled with an increasing burden which they may never have the means to pay off, thereby costing the taxpayer even more money (a proposal already suggested by David Willetts, the former universities minister who engineered the plan to raise fees to £9,000 a year).

Housing and Homelessness:

I have always believed that every person living in the UK deserves a comfortable, safe and secure place to live. Yet events this year have shown that we are far from achieving this dream of universal comfortable housing. The tragedy of the Grenfell Tower fire demonstrated the inadequate fire safety and building regulations we currently have in the UK as well as the chronic shortage of affordable housing in metropolitan consistencies and the reluctance of certain housing organisations and local authorities to listen to and take action on legitimate safety concerns raised by tenants. There needs to be a cultural shift in the way social and council housing is managed as well as ensuring that high rise buildings of any nature have essential fire safety features built-in to their design. As the Lib Dems called for at their Autumn Conference, all high rise buildings should have sprinker systems fitted as standard, with fire retardant cladding fitted and annual fire drills planned for all residents (https://www.libdems.org.uk/conference-autumn-17-f21-safe-building-standards-for-all-homes). 

Councillors and managers of housing associations should also be held more accountable for their actions and forced to resign in the event of mismanagement, including ignoring tenant's valid safety concerns.

Thousands of people remain homeless in the UK at the end of this year. Current figures released by the Department for Communities and Local Government show that 15,290 households were accepted by local authorities as being homeless between the 1^st July and 30^th September with 79,190 households in temporary accommodation, up 65% from 48,010 in December 2010 (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/dec/14/number-homeless-households-risen-official-figures). Many more families are classed as hidden homeless, sofa surfing with family members, friends and colleagues whilst they try and find an affordable place to call home. The number of homeless households with a family member with a mental health condition has risen from 3,200 in 2010 to 5,470 in 2017 and the number of homeless households with a family member with a physical health condition has risen from 2,840 in 2010 to 4,370 in 2017. Tens of thousands of young people have approached councils in England, Scotland and Wales because they are homeless or at risk of being made homeless. Figures released by 234 councils as a result of a Freedom of Information request by the Lib Dems have shown 45,000 18-24 year olds have approached their local authority in the past year yet with more than 100 councils not sharing information on youth homeless, the figure could be as high as 70,000 (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/dec/25/tens-of-thousands-of-young-people-affected-by-homelessness-data-shows). The Government wants to block these young people from routinely collecting housing benefit, claiming that benefit payouts aren't sustainable (an ageist and heartless move from a Government that has implemented numerous ill-thought out, discriminatory policies) and instead are trying to minimise the effects of this policy decision by contributing to a “Fair Chance Programme” which has already been in place since September 2015 and will end in the next year and which only helps those young people defined as NEET (not in education, employment or training). The Fair Chance Programme interim reports have admitted that “securing and sustaining suitable accommodation (tenancies) for young people was widely seen as a prerequisite to progressing towards education, training, volunteering and employment outcomes” (p4) and the number of young people on the programme is small -1,909 young people were recorded as being on the programme as at December 2015 but pleasingly 1,637 had entered accommodation by December 2016 with 81% of those having achieved “a 6 month sustained tenancy”...https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/660583/Fair_Chance_Fund_interim_report_Year_Two.pdf). https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fair-chance-fund-evaluation-interim-reports

Short-term piecemeal solutions are not going to help reduce the problem of homelessness. The Government should commit to building far more council houses than they have currently announced: new council homes with the cheapest rents are only being built at the rate of 6,800 a year (https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/dec/27/housing-crisis-could-radically-alter-uk-politics-says-ex-whitehall-chief-bob-kerslake) and these homes should have 5 year guaranteed tenancies as standard. Eviction is still the primary cause of homelessness (as a result of families not being able to pay the rent due to housing benefit cuts or losing their job) and local authorities should be given more funding to intervene now and pay outstanding rent arrears in order to prevent evictions, especially of families who are beholden to the Universal Credit system (which needs administrative change to become more efficient and process claims faster).

More thoughts:

2017 has taught me the continued value in trying to be compassionate to others who may not share the same views on life as myself. It can be hard to have the wherewithal to sit down with those who may never accept my gender identity as being separate from my sex assigned to me at birth or accept that I have an emotional attachment to my European and liberal identity that will never be severed, regardless of where Brexit happens in the end or not. I remember having an interesting conversation with an older gentleman in my ward, Birchwood who could neither accept my wish for the UK to remain in the EU nor my non-binary status. He did however want to talk to me about the value of a strong community: “it's a shame that people don't talk to their neighbours much anymore.....my Mum and Dad used to invite Mrs Samuels (the next door neighbour) to tea every Wednesday afternoon and they were always going to baptisms and marriages and funerals a few times a month. Everyone in the street looked out for each other. I don't know my neighbours next door at all...they just seem to play loud music a lot. I do feel lonely sometimes; I wish they'd come and speak to me”. The recent report on Loneliness, published by the Jo Cox Commission on Loneliness made clear that the experiences of the gentleman I met were repeated across the UK: over 9 million adults said they are often or always lonely and according to Age UK, 3.6 million people in the UK aged 65 and over said that the television was their main source of company. Loneliness isn't something that affects older people either: Action for Children figures reveal that 47% of 17-25 year olds who are using Action for Children services have experienced problems with loneliness (https://www.ageuk.org.uk/globalassets/age-uk/documents/reports-and-publications/reports-and-briefings/active-communities/rb_dec17_jocox_commission_finalreport.pdf). There's far more we need to do as a country to tackle loneliness, with people across the country being empowered to set up community based projects that bring people together, whether through volunteering their skills or attending a tea dance or cookery class. In order for such projects to be viable, there needs to be a sustainable source of funding and I hope in the next year the Government will implement the recommendations of the Loneliness report and create an “innovation and spread fund” to provide seed funding for new community based projects as well as allowing existing projects to scale-up. I know such funding would be invaluable for projects based in Lincoln, particularly those that help to facilitate intergenerational dialogue and I would love to set up a project myself encouraging people from different political and social backgrounds to meet up and come up with their own community based projects; breaking down barriers and empowering people should be what I focus on in the next year – in the vein of Jo Cox, Jesus Christ and other inspirational folks with JC initials.

Conclusion:

Next year I hope there will be more of an effort to implement some of the solutions offered to the issues that have been so prevalent this year. We can all play our part in trying to reduce prejudice, stigma and suffering, whether that be volunteering for a few hours a week to help a local charity or third sector organisation with the planning and provision of services, spending some of our time speaking to others who do not share and may never share our own outlook on life and participating in local (and potentially national elections) to help shape policy ideas for the UK going forward. The best of humanity is often demonstrated in times of crisis and hardship and the resolve and kindness of many families who are Just About Managing towards others regardless of their background should be celebrated. The country continues to be plagued by low wage growth and unsustainable work opportunities; a report issued by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation stated that just under 400,000 more children and 300,000 more pensioners are considered to be in poverty than 5 years ago and 1 in 5 people living the UK are now classed as living in poverty. Yet kindness and compassion has not been rationed by people who find themselves in reduced circumstances. Those of us fortunate to have a stable household income stream, food and drink a plenty and opportunities to go out on leisure activities like shopping and clubbing without worrying about the heat and lighting bill should be proud to learn from those who have little but never seemingly complain about their situation. Christians have a responsibility to fight against poverty and whilst at times it may seem hopeless, hope for a brighter, better future is what keeps us strong. Brexit may be happening at the moment which many of us do not agree with but we should not give up trying to help others. Such compassion will be greatly appreciated in the coming year.