[strongerinpress]

14 Labour MPs on why Britain's Black and Ethnic Minority voters must vote Remain

In an unprecedented intervention, 14 of Britain's leading black and ethnic minority (BME) Labour MPs including Tulip Siddiq, Chuka Umunna and Keith Vaz have joined together urge BME voters to vote to remain in the EU on 23rd June. In a piece on the Guardian website, the MPs warns that the economic consequences of leaving "would hit minority communities hardest." They add that a victory for the Tory right wing and Nigel Farage's UKIP would embolden those who want to scrap anti-discrimination laws and workers' rights, setting back progress for ethnic minority communities by "generations." The article concludes that staying in the EU will secure a "brighter future" with more jobs, higher wages and lower prices. ENDS Notes to Editors Link: http://gu.com/p/4yxvp/stw   Full text of piece: Why Britain’s BME communities must vote Remain Of the many myths peddled by those campaigning for Britain to leave Europe, the claim that Brexit would benefit non-European immigrant communities is amongst the most outrageous. The fact is, our communities’ legitimate concerns about the current immigration system lie at the door of the Tory Government, not the EU, and the consequences of leaving would hit minority communities hardest. The Leavers’ false claim is that, if we leave, there can be higher non-EU immigration while bringing down overall numbers. Let’s not be seduced by this lie from people who are anti-immigration and who have spent their lives campaigning against the interests of working people. Let’s start with the facts. Rather than being held back, non-EU immigration to the UK is rising and is higher than EU migration. Where there are restrictions, this Government has full control and EU membership does not prevent the UK from easing rules for non-EU migrants. The Tories could do this if they wanted – but they don’t. Indeed, since 2010 they have toughened eligibility criteria for Tier 1 migrants and introduced new restrictions. Where there are shortages in certain sectors, like our curry houses, it’s Government rules that are the route of the problem. Prominent Leave campaigner, Priti Patel, who is the Employment Minister, has responsibility in this area, so she is in fact the source of the problem while claiming to be the solution. It is simply wrong to argue that leaving Europe would strengthen our ties with the Commonwealth. The EU amplifies Britain’s ties with our historic Commonwealth partners: economically and culturally we are stronger In. Within the EU, Britain’s trade with the Commonwealth is flourishing as we have access to the EU’s free trade deals with 19 Commonwealth countries, and many more are in the pipeline. Our exports to those Commonwealth countries has increased by a whopping 66%. Being in Europe has enabled us to actively support Commonwealth interests, whether overturning an EU ban on Indian mangoes or securing better EU trade terms for Pakistan after floods in 2010 and 2011. It is for this reason that significant Commonwealth leaders have backed Remain. The Prime Minister of India, the Australian Prime Minister, New Zealand’s Prime Minister, Secretary General of the Commonwealth and the Canadian Prime Minister, have all said we are better off in and that being in Europe strengthens our ties. People rightly have concerns about the impact of immigration and we understand, but let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater. EU nationals, like non-EU nationals, overwhelmingly make a valuable contribution to our society, working hard, paying their way, setting up businesses and bringing up families who are as British as they are loyal to their home countries. What we want is a system that is fair - not a free for all. That is why we must make sure there is no undercutting of wages; must make sure those who are here are here to work; and that communities and services are strong enough to adapt to the arrival of new arrivals. This is complex and there is no one single answer. Leave campaigners want you to believe that if we leave the EU all our problems are solved. The opposite is true. Leaving exacerbates our problems. Every single credible economic institution has forecast that our economy would take a hit. Nine out of ten economists, the Bank of England, the International Monetary Fund and the Treasury all agree that we could return to recession, which would see people lose their jobs, push up prices in the shops, businesses forced to close and families’ financial security put at risk. Ethnic minority communities would not be immune to this pain: we would be at the sharp end of a recession. Those we represent don’t want to have to withstand another round of economic hardship just as our towns and cities are getting back on their feet after the financial crash. And this is a double threat, because look who would be in charge if we were to leave: an emboldened Tory right wing, led by Boris Johnson, in bed with Nigel Farage. These people are the friends of discrimination and division, not progress and protection for ethnic minorities. Do we really think UKIP, which wants to abolish anti-discrimination law and has sought to mainstream xenophobia in to British political debate and culture, and Boris, who wants to scrap workers’ rights and is on record with racist comments, will defend Britain’s minority communities? Of course not: we will be set back generations. And let’s be honest, the dirty tricks campaigning of Tory politicians in the Mayoral Election have no place in our progressive society. We stood up to his divisive campaign and we should stand up to Boris Johnson and the Leave campaigns’ myths on immigration too. A vote to Remain is not just a vote to keep UKIP and Boris at bay. It’s a vote for a brighter future. 3m jobs are linked to our trade with the UK – and 800,000 will be created thanks to the EU in the coming years. Our economy will grow faster as part of the world’s largest trading bloc, which lowers prices, increases wages and open us trading possibilities for British businesses large and small. Our voice in the world is louder from within the EU, whether in fighting terrorism, tackling climate change, peace-keeping or leading on international development. Britain’s ethnic minority communities are stronger, safer and better off in Europe. Signatories: Rushanara Ali: Bethnal Green and Bow Shabana Mahmood: Birmingham Ladywood Yasmin Qureshi: Bolton South East Thangam Debbonaire: Bristol West Virendra Sharma: Ealing, Southall Kate Osamor: Edmonton Seem Malhotra: Feltham and Heston Tulip Siddiq: Hampstead and Kilburn Keith Vaz: Leicester East Chi Onwurah: Newcastle upon Tyen Central Chuka Umunna: Streatham David Lammy: Tottenham Valerie Vaz: Walsall South Khalid Mahmood: Birmingham Perry Bar

14th May 2016 

[strongerinpress]

Alistair Darling slams Vote Leave's "fantasy" spending plans

Responding to Vote Leave's announcement that they will continue to match EU funding to farmers, universities and others if Britain leaves the EU, Alistair Darling, former Chancellor of the Exchequer, said:

“This is fantasy economics from the leave campaign as quitting Europe would wreck Britain’s economy and mean cuts to spending on vital public services, as just about every economic expert has said.

“The Institute for Fiscal Studies has said leaving would lead to a £40bn blackhole in the public finances and nine out of ten economists say leaving would damage the economy.

“The Leave campaign have had to abandon their key spending pledge after using misleading figures and have been caught pledging their claimed saving ten times over. This fantasy economics shows that leaving is too big a risk to take.”

/ends

NOTES TO EDITORS:

If Britain leaves the EU, Public services would be hit by £40bn in cuts. The IFS have highlighted how in the short term the UK would also face a £20-£40bn black hole in the public finances. Sources: The IFS: ‘Brexit and the UK’s Public Finances’, May 2016, link

The Leave campaign have made 24 spending commitments totalling over £113bn. This is over ten times the claimed £10bn net saving from our leaving Europe. These are detailed below.

New spending committed toCost (£m)

More health spending18,200

Hundreds of new schools   2,900

More primary school places in existing schools     461

More spending on scientific research  1,150

More public support for agriculture     145

New roads  1,520

Improving railways         560

Expanding regional airports       53

Reduce the deficit  5,000

Lower taxes  7,900

Lower business taxes     805

More housing     460

More spending on pensions18,250

Subsidising business to cope with tariffs   7,400

Cutting VAT main rate13,750

Removing domestic fuels reduced VAT rate  1,700

Reversing welfare savings  4,400

Reducing council tax17,200

Paying state aid to the Steel Industry     200

New submarines10,200

Trade missions         1.2

Research Grants  1,000

A "British DARPA"     296

Pothole repairs       53

Total113,604.20

Revenue lost

Net revenue loss after leaving40,000

Net impact on the public finances-153,604.20

13th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

Representatives of millions of public sector workers warn that public sector jobs and services are at risk if we leave the EU

Unions and medical colleges representing 6 million workers join with politicians to make an unprecedented warning over leaving Europe.

Labour say there could be more than half a million job losses across the public sector if we leave the EU.

60 former heads of the BMA and the medical royal colleges say Brexit is a “threat” to the future of the NHS.

TUC analysis shows leaving the EU could mean the NHS budget would be cut by a quarter.

Today [Tuesday], people representing millions of public sector workers warn that leaving the EU would cut jobs in the public sector, hammer the NHS budget, and damage the services on which millions of Britons rely.

Labour politicians, Union leaders representing 6 million workers, health experts and the TUC have united to warn of the threat to the UK public sector if Britain leaves the EU. This is an unprecedented warning from those who represent the NHS workers, teachers and council workers who keep our public services going and who working people rely on.

28 senior Labour and Union figures, including many former education and health secretaries, as well as Shadow Health Secretary Heidi Alexander and former TUC General-Secretary John Monks, present new research showing that a vote to leave could lead to over half a million job losses in the public sector.

Meanwhile, 60 past heads of the Medical Royal Colleges and the British Medical Association say a Leave vote would be a threat to the NHS. Trade union general secretaries representing 6 million people say in an open letter today that quitting Europe will mean “the NHS will suffer”, meaning “less money to fund nurses, midwives and hospitals”. And TUC analysis finds that leaving the EU could cost the NHS a full 25 per cent of its budget by 2020.

Leaving the EU could cost 525,000 jobs

28 senior figures from Labour and the trades unions point to new analysis which finds that leaving the EU could see 525,000 jobs lost in the public sector. Senior figures including Ed Balls, Charles Clarke, Alan Johnson, Jacqui Smith and John Monks say that if a vote to Leave results in a recession, as economic experts including the Bank of England have predicted it would, then the likelihood is that the government will further cut back on public spending, meaning more job losses.

Presenting the analysis in a joint statement, they said:

“Independent economic experts agree that leaving Europe could hit our economy. This includes the Governor of the Bank of England who warned we could go into recession.

“Britain’s vital public services like the NHS rely on a strong economy and continued investment.

“But if we leave the shock to our economy could see a £40bn black hole in our public finances, that would hobble our public services and affect workers on the front line.

“Leaving Europe is a leap into the dark and is a risk for Britain’s public services that we cannot afford to take.”

Health experts say leaving the EU is “threat” to the NHS

It comes as 60 former presidents and chairs of the Medical Royal Colleges and the British Medical Association (BMA) write an open letter warning of the threat to the NHS an economic downturn following a Leave vote would cause.

The 60 health experts say that if Britain leaves the EU:

“There would be an immediate large decline in national income, which can only worsen the existing financial crisis that faces the NHS.

“It is Brexit that is the threat to the NHS, not our membership of the EU.”

Union leaders write to warn of the consequences of leaving the EU

In an open letter, 12 trade union leaders representing 6 million people, including TUC General-Secretary Frances O’Grady and UNITE General-Secretary Len McCluskey, say:

“Right now, we're worried. Worried that the UK will vote to leave the European Union - and that will be a disaster for working people.

“With the UK worse off, the NHS will suffer too. There will be less money to fund nurses, midwives and hospitals.

“Vote for jobs. Vote for protections at work. And vote for a better future for your family. Vote Remain on 23 June.”

TUC shows Leave vote would devastate NHS budget

In a speech today in London, TUC General-Secretary Frances O’Grady will unveil new TUC analysis showing that a vote to Leave the EU could cost the NHS 25% of its budget by 2019/20. This is based on figures from respected think-tanks the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) and the King’s Fund.

/ends

NOTES TO EDITORS:

Story background: Leaving the EU could mean over half a million public sector employees losing their jobs

Economic experts are claiming that leaving the EU would result in recession and leave a black hole in public finances.

During the last recession, and the following austerity, the public sector workforce fell by almost 1 million people.

With economic experts predicting a £40bn black hole in public finances, a proportionate reduction in public sector employees would mean a fall in the number of public sector employees of 525,000.

From 2009-2015, the public sector workforce fell by 969,000 following the global economic recession and following austerity.[1]

During this time, the current budget deficit was reduced from £103.2bn (2009/10) to £40.5bn (2015/16).[2]

The IFS has predicted that public sector receipts could fall by up to £40bn.[3]

Assuming the decline in public sector employees would apply proportionately (i.e. only 64% of the percentage fall) would be needed in the event of leaving the EU, would mean the number of public sector employees would fall by 525,000.

The table below provides the regional breakdown:

Region2009201509-15    % fallProjected fall

North East297,000232,000-22%-32,000

North West729,000601,000-18%-68,000

Yorkshire and The Humber566,000464,000-18%-54,000

East Midlands395,000335,000-15%-33,000

West Midlands533,000449,000-16%-45,000

East of England477,000413,000-13%-35,000

London798,000723,000-9%-43,000

South East722,000633,000-12%-50,000

South West548,000439,000-20%-56,000

Wales356,000295,000-17%-32,000

Scotland639,000545,000-15%-51,000

Northern Ireland230,000211,000-8%-11,000

United Kingdom6,329,0005,360,000-15%-525,000

The research is presented by:

Heidi Alexander, Shadow Health Secretary

Ed Balls, former Education Secretary

Brendan Barber, former General Secretary of the TUC

Luciana Berger, Shadow Health Minister

Andy Burnham, former Health Secretary

Kay Carberry, former Assistant General Secretary of the TUC

Charles Clarke, former Education Secretary and Home Secretary

Vernon Coaker, former Education Minister

Ray Collins, former General Secretary of the Labour Party

Yvette Cooper, former Work and Pensions Secretary

Charlie Falconer, Shadow Justice Secretary

Caroline Flint, former Public Health Minister

Vicky Foxcroft, Labour MP and former Unite activist

Lillian Greenwood, Shadow Transport Secretary

Harriet Harman, former Acting Labour Leader

Peter Hain, former Work and Pensions Secretary

John Healey, former Shadow Health Secretary

Patricia Hewitt, former Health Secretary

John Hutton, former Work and Pensions

Geoff Hoon, former Defence Secretary

Alan Johnson, former Education Secretary, Health Secretary, and Home Secretary

Alan Milburn, former Health Secretary

John Monks, former General Secretary of the TUC

Lucy Powell, Shadow Education Secretary

Margaret Prosser, former President of the Trades Union Congress

George Robertson, former Defence Secretary

Jack Straw, former Home Secretary

Jacqui Smith, former Home Secretary

Full text of the medical letter

“Sir,

“We write as former presidents and chairs of the UK’s medical royal colleges and in the British Medical Association to set out why, if we care about the future of the NHS, we should remain in the EU.

“Rather than ruining the NHS, as some have claimed, immigrants play a large part in running it. Without the 10 per cent of doctors and 5 per cent of nurses who  come from other EU countries, not to mention even larger numbers of care workers, the NHS would face severe staff shortages.

“Moreover, far from being strangled by bureaucratic regulations, we have benefited from Europe-wide action on matters such as new infectious diseases (including the zika virus), environmental pollution, climate change, and antibiotic resistance — all of which are public health threats that do not stop at the Channel.

“We benefit from rapid access to new medicines because of the European Medicines Agency, based in this country. In addition, about 20 per cent of our medical research is now funded by the EU;  we receive considerably more back from the EU for this than we pay in. If we leave we can expect to lose a good proportion of this to other EU countries.

“Finally, rather than the discredited £350 million a week that Leave campaigners say would be redirected to the NHS, it seems far more likely that there would be an immediate large decline in national income, which can only worsen the existing financial crisis that faces the NHS.

“It is Brexit that is the threat to the NHS, not our membership of the EU.”

Full text of signatories to the medical letter

Sir Sabaratnam Arulkumaran, Past President, Royal College of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, and Past President, British Medical Association;

Sir Neil Douglas, Past President, Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh, and Former Chair, Academy of Medical Royal Colleges;

Baroness Hollins, Past President, Royal College of Psychiatrists, and Past President, British Medical Association;

Sir Michael Marmot, Past President, British Medical Association;

Professor Mike Pringle, Past Chair & Past President, Royal College of General Practitioners;

Professor Parveen Kumar, Past President, British Medical Association;

Sir George Alberti, Past President, Royal College of Physicians;

Mr Nicholas Astbury, Past President, Royal College of Opthalmologists;

Professor John Ashton, Past President, Faculty of Public Health;

Dame Sue Bailey, Past President, Royal College of Psychiatrists;

Prof Dinesh Bhugra, Past President, Royal College of Psychiatrists;

Dr Laurence Buckman, Former Chair, GPC, British Medical Association;

Dame Fiona Caldicott, Past President, Royal College of Psychiatrists;

Sir Kenneth Calman, Past President, British Medical Association, and Former Chief Medical Officer, England;

Sir David Carter, Past President, British Medical Association, and Former Chief Medical Officer, Scotland;

Professor John Cash, Past President, Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh;

Dr Hilary Cass, Past President, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health;

Dr John Chisholm, Former Chair GPC, British Medical Association;

Professor John Cox, Past President, Royal College of Psychiatrists;

Dr Mike Clancy, Past President, Royal College of Emergency Medicine;

Sir Alan Craft, Past President, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health;

Dr June Crown, Past President, Faculty of Public Health;

Professor Lindsey Davies, Past President, Faculty of Public Health;

Dr Neil Dewhurst, Past President, Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh;

William Dunlop, Past President, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists;

Sir Sam Everington, Former Chair, British Medical Association;

Professor Tony Falconer, Past President, Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology;

Professor Steve Field, Former Chair, Royal College of General Practitioners;

Baroness Finlay of Llandaff, Past President, British Medical Association;

Professor Clare Gerada, Former, Chair Royal College of General Practitioners;

Sir Ian Gilmore, Past President, Royal College of Physicians;

Professor Sian Griffith, Past President, Faculty of Public Health;

Professor Rod Griffiths, Past President, Faculty of Public Health;

Dr Iona Heath, Past President, Royal College of General Practitioners;

Dr John Heyworth, Past President, Royal College of Emergency Medicine;

Professor Walter Holland, Past President, Faculty of Public Health;

Dame Janet Husband, Past President, Royal College of Radiologists;

Professor Peter Hutton, Past President, Royal College of Anaesthetists, and Former Chair, Academy of Medical Royal Colleges;

Sir Barry Jackson, Past President, Royal College of Surgeons;

Sir Peter Lachmann, Past President, Royal College of Pathologists;

Professor Mayur Lakhani, Former Chair, Royal College of General Practitioners;

Professor Averil Mansfield, Past President, British Medical Association;

Prof Alan Maryon Davies, Past President, Faculty of Public Health;

Dr Hamish Meldrum, Past Chair, British Medical Association;

Sir Peter Morris, Past President, Royal College of Surgeons;

Dr Roger Neighbour, Past President, Royal College of General Practitioners;

Professor Adrian Newland, Past President, Royal College of Pathologists;

Lord Naren Patel, Past President, Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology;

Lord Ribeiro, Past President, Royal College of Surgeons;

Ian Ritchie, Past President, Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh;

Professor Robert Shaw, Past President, Royal College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology;

Dr Mike Shooter, Past President, Royal College of Psychiatrists;

Professor Andrew Sims, Past President, Royal College of Psychiatrists;

Prof Alwyn Smith, Past President, Faculty of Public Health;

Sir Richard Thompson, Past President, Royal College of Physicians;

Lord Turnberg, Past President, Royal College of Physicians;

Dame Margaret Turner Warwick, Past President, Royal College of Physicians;

Sir James Underwood, Past President, Royal College of Pathologists;

Professor JP Van Besouw, Past President, Royal College of Anaesthetics;

Sir Norman Williams, Past President, Royal College of Surgeons

Signatories to Union leaders’ letter

Frances O'Grady, General Secretary, Trades Union Congress

Len McCluskey, General Secretary, UNITE

Dave Prentis, General Secretary, UNISON

Tim Roache, General Secretary, GMB

John Hannett, General Secretary, Union of Shop, Distributive and Allied Workers

Cathy Warwick, Chief Executive, Royal College of Midwives

Roy Rickhuss, General Secretary, Community

Dave Ward, General Secretary, Communication Workers Union

Brian Rye, General Secretary, Union of Construction, Allied Trades and Technicians

Manuel Cortes, Transport Salaried Staffs Association

Gerry Morrissey, General Secretary, Broadcasting, Entertainment, Cinematograph and Theatre Union

John Smith, General Secretary, Musician's Union

14th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

Alistair Darling slams Vote Leave's "fantasy" spending plans

Responding to Vote Leave's announcement that they will continue to match EU funding to farmers, universities and others if Britain leaves the EU, Alistair Darling, former Chancellor of the Exchequer, said:

“This is fantasy economics from the leave campaign as quitting Europe would wreck Britain’s economy and mean cuts to spending on vital public services, as just about every economic expert has said.

“The Institute for Fiscal Studies has said leaving would lead to a £40bn blackhole in the public finances and nine out of ten economists say leaving would damage the economy.

“The Leave campaign have had to abandon their key spending pledge after using misleading figures and have been caught pledging their claimed saving ten times over. This fantasy economics shows that leaving is too big a risk to take.”

/ends

NOTES TO EDITORS:

If Britain leaves the EU, Public services would be hit by £40bn in cuts. The IFS have highlighted how in the short term the UK would also face a £20-£40bn black hole in the public finances. Sources: The IFS: ‘Brexit and the UK’s Public Finances’, May 2016, link

The Leave campaign have made 24 spending commitments totalling over £113bn. This is over ten times the claimed £10bn net saving from our leaving Europe. These are detailed below.

New spending committed toCost (£m)

More health spending18,200

Hundreds of new schools   2,900

More primary school places in existing schools     461

More spending on scientific research  1,150

More public support for agriculture     145

New roads  1,520

Improving railways         560

Expanding regional airports       53

Reduce the deficit  5,000

Lower taxes  7,900

Lower business taxes     805

More housing     460

More spending on pensions18,250

Subsidising business to cope with tariffs   7,400

Cutting VAT main rate13,750

Removing domestic fuels reduced VAT rate  1,700

Reversing welfare savings  4,400

Reducing council tax17,200

Paying state aid to the Steel Industry     200

New submarines10,200

Trade missions         1.2

Research Grants  1,000

A "British DARPA"     296

Pothole repairs       53

Total113,604.20

Revenue lost

Net revenue loss after leaving40,000

Net impact on the public finances-153,604.20

14th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

Former Tesco boss says quitting the EU's single market will mean higher food prices

Sir Terry Leahy, the former boss of Tesco, has warned that there is a  “major risk of recession”  from quitting the EU’s single market which would lead to food prices going up hurting British families across the UK.

Economic experts are clear that leaving Europe would result in higher prices, including from the National Farmers Union who have said food prices could increase by 8%.

This comes as Michael Gove and Boris Johnson say they want the UK to trade with the EU on World Tariff Organisation terms – the ‘worst of all worlds.’ This would mean tariffs on our trade, as well as damaging our economy, costing jobs and investment.

Rachel Reeves, Treasury Select Committee Member and Labour MP for Leeds West, commented:

“This is a clear warning from Sir Terry Leahy, and confirms the economic consensus that leaving Europe would push up prices for British families. Higher prices means that the wages of hardworking people will be stretched, putting further pressure on the cost of living.

“The Leave campaign have now admitted they want to see WTO tariffs on our exports and imports, which would cost trade, jobs, and investment, and would result in less money for our public services.

“It’s clear that the Leave campaign are content to risk jobs and growth but it is hardworking families who would pay the price. Leaving is too big a risk to take."

/Ends

Background

Sir Terry Leahy has urged the British people to remain in the European Union, highlighting how there is a “major risk of recession” and has said:

"The message is, don't take a leap into the unknown. There is a major risk of recession that the UK cannot afford, we could see capital flight and the pound fall.

"Food prices will go up if we vote for Brexit as the supply chain would be severely disrupted and we would be paying tariffs. Consumers are a big part of the recovery, and we should protect that recovery, not risk it."

Source: International Festival for Business, Liverpool, 13 June 2016

This latest intervention confirms what the experts have all being saying, that prices would be higher.

The National Farmers Union, have warned prices could increase for British families. Food prices would likely rise 8% if we traded with Europe under WTO rules. Consumers would be hit by tariffs being levied on imported food from Europe, while farmers would suffer as they would face tariffs on food exported to the EU. Currently, our farmers and families benefit from free trade across the continent.

HM Treasury have warned that quitting the single market would cause inflation to rise. HM Treasury, May 2016, link

Citi bank has warned that inflation could balloon to 3-4%. Financial Times, 8 Feb 2016, link

The Centre for Economics and Business Research have highlighted how food prices would rise. CEBR, 19 October 2015, link

The AA have warned drivers would pay more at the pump for Petrol.The Mirror, 17 Feb 2016, link

HM Treasury have warned how the depreciation of sterling would lead to the average holiday to Europe could rise by £230. HM Treasury, May 2016, link

HM treasury have also shown the impact of sterling depreciation alone would lead to the average spend on Food & drink and Clothing & footwear increasing by £220. HM Treasury, May 2016,link

NFU, April 2016,

link

This comes as Boris Johnson and Michael Gove have committed to the “worst of all worlds” model for the UK’s future trading relationship with the EU - adopting the WTO model. Writing in the Daily Telegraph, Boris Johnson highlighted a number of countries all trading with the EU on WTO terms:

“There is no need to be part of this expensive legislative machine in order to export goods or services into the EU. The latest figures show that between 1993 (the dawn of the single market) and 2015 there were 36 countries – including India, Russia, China, America, New Zealand, Canada, Brazil – who did better than the UK at exporting to the single market. They weren’t “in” it.

Boris Johnson, The Telegraph, 12 June 2016,

link

Michael Gove on BBC news yesterday cited Australia and Canada, both countries that currently trade with the EU on WTO terms:

Laura Kuenssberg: But votes are about the future, and as we talk this afternoon, ten days away from the vote, you can't tell voters how our economy would work. You can't tell voters how we could continue to trade with the rest of the EU.  You can't guarantee anything.

Michael Gove: All I want for the people of the United Kingdom is what people in Australia and Canada have, which is the chance to take back control of their own future. So in that sense, I am not suggesting that Britain boldly goes where no man has gone before.

BBC News, 12 June

Trading on World Tariff Organisation terms would be the worst of all worlds, leading to our economy being hit by £5,200 for every household in the country, and would mean tariffs on UK–EU trade. The average tariff on tobacco and cigars is 75%; for cars 10%; 12% on clothing; 40% on lamb, and 22% on fruit.

HM Treasury, April 2016, link

13th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

Leave.EU condemned for "despicable" and "shameful" tweet about Orlando shootings

Leave.EU, part of the campaign for Britain to leave the European Union, has been condemned by politicians from both main parties for releasing a tweet trying to use the Orlando attack as an argument to leave the EU. The tweet, since deleted, read: “The free movement of Kalashnikovs in Europe helps terrorists. Vote for greater security on June 23. Vote #Leave”. An attached infographic read: “Islamist extremism is a real threat to our way of life. Act now before we see an Orlando-style atrocity here before too long”. Responding, Nicky Morgan, Secretary of State for Education and MP for Loughborough, said: “Using the tragic deaths of innocent people to make a political point is simply shameful. “Leave.EU must apologise for the hurt they have caused and apologise immediately. “And Vote Leave need to condemn such despicable tactics and make clear that the Orlando attack has nothing whatsoever to do with the EU debate in this country”. Chris Bryant, MP for Rhondda, said: “Leave.EU’s tweet is completely out of order. Do they have no sense of common decency? They should take it down and apologise immediately. “The wider Leave campaign should condemn it in the strongest possible terms. If they do not, they will be endorsing the twisting of the murders of innocent people for political purposes”. /ends

13th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

Vote Leave advocates new trade tax

The two leaders of the Leave campaign, Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, have today cited countries they believe Britain’s trade relationship with the EU should emulate. Each of these countries has tariffs imposed on their goods trade with the EU as they trade according to WTO rules.

Inside the EU single market, 100% of UK-EU goods trade is tariff free. Any new tariff imposed amounts to a tax on trade that pushes up prices for businesses and consumers.

The ‘WTO model’ has been shown by numerous independent expert studies to be the one that would do the most damage to the UK economy putting trade, investment and jobs at risk.

Days away from the referendum, this is what Vote Leave are offering the British people.

Responding to the claims, Peter Mandelson and Sajid Javid said:

"This is a major admission from the Leave campaign leaders that they are content for tariffs to be imposed on trade, as they are at present for all the countries Boris Johnson and Michael Gove mention. This would push up prices for businesses and consumers.

"For weeks the Leave campaign have refused to come clean on their trading alternative and now we see they in fact advocate the worst of all worlds – standard WTO tariffs which are a tax on our exports and imports.

"Outside the EU's single market, trade and investment in Britain, which supports millions of jobs, would be hit.

"Leave campaigners are content to risk jobs and growth but it is hardworking families who would pay the price. Leaving is too big a risk to take."

/ends

Notes to editors:

Michael Gove and Boris Johnson in separate interventions tonight have said the UK should emulate the trade policies of: India, Russia, China, America, New Zealand, Canada, Brazil and Australia. Each trades according to WTO rules, without the tariff-free trade the UK enjoys within the EU single market.

Writing in the Daily Telegraph, Boris Johnson said:

“There is no need to be part of this expensive legislative machine in order to export goods or services into the EU. The latest figures show that between 1993 (the dawn of the single market) and 2015 there were 36 countries – including India, Russia, China, America, New Zealand, Canada, Brazil – who did better than the UK at exporting to the single market. They weren’t “in” it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/12/when-it-comes-to-the-single-market-you-dont-have-to-be-in-it-to/

Speaking on the BBC today, Michael Gove said:

Laura Kuenssberg: But votes are about the future, and as we talk this afternoon, ten days away from the vote, you can't tell voters how our economy would work. You can't tell voters how we could continue to trade with the rest of the EU.  You can't guarantee anything.

Michael Gove: All I want for the people of the United Kingdom is what people in Australia and Canada have, which is the chance to take back control of their own future. So in that sense, I am not suggesting that Britain boldly goes where no man has gone before.

BBC News, 12 June

12th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

Gordon Brown launches Labour fight-back

The Labour fight-back will be kicked off with a positive European reform agenda to create jobs, cut energy prices, clamp down on tax havens, protect workers' rights and strengthen our security against terrorism and illegal immigration. This will be supported by Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell, Tom Watson and Alan Johnson.

The ‘Leading not Leaving’ initiative will be unveiled by Gordon Brown at a speech in Leicester.

Mr Brown will say that Europe must be seen to deliver for nine million Labour voters, and that the United Kingdom "is in pole position" to champion change during its 2017 Presidency of the EU.

He will say that Labour is uniting behind a positive 10-day push before June 23rd.

Jobs, tax and security initiatives that would make Britain leaders in Europe are to be unveiled today [Monday] by former Prime Minister Gordon Brown with the full support of the current Labour leadership.

The ‘Leading not leaving’ initiative will be welcomed by Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell, Tom Watson, and Alan Johnson during 10-days of rallies, meetings and street events in the run-up to the June 23 referendum.

At a speech in De Montfort University, Leicester, Mr Brown will say:

“From now until 10pm on June 23rd, we will not rest and I will not stop explaining why nine million Labour voters have most to gain from remaining in the EU.

“Today I am setting out a positive agenda for Labour voters - reasons why Labour voters should vote Remain and the patriotic case for remaining in Europe.

“Voting to Remain is about a positive, stronger future and is the alternative to a Tory Brexit. It is stronger for jobs, for rights at work and maintaining a British voice on the world stage.

“But we shouldn’t just be a member of the European Union. We must be the leader of the European Union.

“Europe has been responsible for the social chapter which has guaranteed maternity pay, holiday pay, a maximum working week, rights of consultation for workers and rights to be transferred when the company you work for is taken over.”

Responding to Mr Brown’s proposals, Labour Party Deputy Leader, Tom Watson, will say:

“This referendum is vital to win for the country and Labour voters more than anyone else. Their jobs, rights and public services are at stake.

“If the Leave campaign wins, it will be a Tory Brexit that we face with all the consequences for jobs, pay packets and public services in Labour’s heartland areas. It won’t be those who are best off who are hit most by a Tory Brexit, it will be the least secure and most vulnerable in society.

“Gordon’s Agenda shows that Labour people can vote with confidence for what a reformed EU can and will do for working people”.

The proposals are:

1.            ACTION TO CREATE 500,000 JOBS

Our aim as a Labour Party is full employment in Britain and the fast reduction of unemployment right across Europe.  The UK European Union Presidency of 2017 can help achieve this aim through an agenda for reforms that will improve the digital economy (which can contribute 25 per cent of increased output), the energy market (15 per cent) and the service sector including financial sectors (just under 60 per cent).  Between them, they could create an estimated 500,000 new jobs in Britain in the next decade.

Britain should also benefit from a 16 per cent share of the European Union’s €315 infrastructure fund.  This €50 billion should be used to finance regeneration and rebuilding infrastructure in some of our hardest hit steel and industrial communities.

2.            ACTION TO IMPROVE LIVING STANDARDS THROUGH ENERGY PRICE CUTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS

A UK European Presidency next year is also ideally placed to champion the demand for a reformed European energy and environmental policy.  This could cut fuel bills for consumers, improve energy security and meet our carbon reduction targets through greater interconnections between states and most of all from greater progress towards a shared continental energy grid.  Here the renewable power we generate  - primarily North Sea wind and wave which is intermittent and variable – can be integrated, and waste avoided, in a single energy pool across Europe.  The wider the energy pool, the more extensive and the more efficient the use of wind and wave will be.

3.            ACTION AGAINST TAX HAVENS

While Britain raises taxes without foreign interference – only sales tax is subject to European wide bands – we cannot create a fair tax system without addressing the revenue losses from an estimated €1 trillion of European wealth held offshore in tax havens.  Acting alone as an island, and not together as a continent, we can never match the collective clout a united Europe can bring to bear in calling tax havens into line.  We should be leading the call for a European strategy that means automatic exchange of tax information and public registers of all companies and trusts in tax havens.  Unless progress is made, the UK Presidency should demand that the EU (a) blacklist;  (b) sanction and (c) where necessary, impose withholding tax on the havens that have become treasure islands for the tax-avoiding few.  This initiative would apply to companies who use transfer pricing as well as tax havens to disguise their true profits and exploit their global status by playing off one tax haven against another.

4.            ACTION TO PROTECT WORKERS’ RIGHTS

Europe has been responsible for the social chapter which has guaranteed maternity pay, holiday pay, a maximum working week, rights of consultation for workers and rights to be transferred when the company you work for is taken over.  By passing laws that apply across the European Union, we not only make sure that Europe has a social dimension – the only continent in the world that legislates social rights for its workers and is more than just a marketplace – but we also prevent the good paying employer and country being undercut by the bad, and the bad by the worst.

In the 1990s the most vulnerable workers were people forced to work long hours and those without statutory protection, such as mothers and pregnant women.  Now there is a new group of even more vulnerable workers on zero-hour contracts, whose job security is limited and who will remain vulnerable unless action is taken across Europe.  Zero-hour contract workers and all workers on inadequate and insecure contracts should have protection with minimum standards agreed across the European Union.  This would protect them against the undercutting of workers in some countries through unfair competition by others in a divisive race to the bottom that benefits only the exploitative employer.  Recently the Dutch Government have introduced new levels of protection for vulnerable workers.  We should work with the Dutch and other governments to make sure that across the continent workers have these minimum standards of protection and security in employment.

5.            ACTION TO ENSURE GREATER SECURITY

Through our own passport controls and border guards, Britain determines the degree to which its borders are open or closed.  Yet by two to one in a recent poll, British people agree on the need to expand cross-border co-operation to enhance our security.  In our Presidency, we should champion more sophisticated cross-border information and intelligence sharing and policing – including border-checks in Calais – to root out not just terrorist suspects but also people smugglers, criminal gangs and traffickers who profit from abusing the desperation of people who become illegal immigrants.

The biggest complaint people have about migration is about the failure to relieve the pressure on public services like the NHS and schools in places where populations are rising.  The last Labour government set up a migration fund to help communities cope.  There has been a European initiative to do likewise, but the funds are not sufficient to provide communities with the help they need. The UK Presidency should institute an enhanced solidarity fund for communities where migration trends have put undue pressure on hospitals, schools and other services.

/Ends

Notes to editors:

The document published by Gordon Brown on Monday is available as a pdf here:  

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/in/pages/688/attachments/original/1465737084/postivereformeuropev2.pdf?1465737084

The document published by Gordon Brown today [Monday], argues for:

·         Action to create jobs

·         Action to improve living standards

·         Action against tax havens

·         Action to protect workers’ rights

·         Action to secure greater security

13th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

Rachel Reeves - leave campaign "relaxed" about higher prices and lost jobs

In response to Nigel Farage this morning saying “so what?” if the value of Sterling falls, Labour’s Rachel Reeves, Member of the Treasury Select Committee, said: “The reckless Leave campaign are relaxed about the pound falling, which would mean prices rising and jobs lost. “Nigel Farage’s Leave campaign does not have working people’s interests at heart. They are complacent about another recession and the pain that brings for working families. “The Leave campaign are asking the British people to roll the dice on our country’s future, but it’s too big a risk to take.” /ENDS Notes to editors: Speaking on the Andrew Marr show this morning about the economic impact of leaving Europe, Farage said: "Even if sterling were to fall a few percentage points after Brexit, so what?"

12th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

Vote Leave "playing fast and loose with electoral law"

Labour MP Chris Bryant has reported Vote Leave campaigner Owen Paterson MP to the police for flouting electoral law on Twitter.

Paterson tweeted speculation about the contents of postal ballot papers, despite the Representation of the People Act’s requirement that political figures ‘aid in maintaining the secrecy of voting’ and do not ‘communicate to any person before the poll is closed.’

Bryant has passed this information on to both the West Mercia Police, the Electoral Commission and the local counting officer at Shropshire Council, urging them to investigate the specifics of the incident.

Labour MP Chris Bryant MP commented:

“Yet again Owen Paterson makes a shocking mis-step in his campaign, flouting electoral laws by commenting on the outcome of postal votes.

“The secrecy of the ballot paper is a fundamental part of British democracy. It is completely unacceptable for a senior figure from Vote Leave to play fast and loose with electoral law.

“This is the latest blunder from Vote Leave, after the discovery of their misleading copycat voter registration website last week, and it seems that it may infringe electoral law. I will be contacting the Commission and West Mercia Police to make sure they are aware of this incident and I expect them to investigate it fully.”

ENDS

Notes:

Paterson’s tweet is available here:https://twitter.com/Owen_PatersonMP/status/741610752230969344

Section 66 of the Representation of the People Act 1983 states:

(1) The following persons –

(a)          The Chief Counting Officer, and every Regional Counting Officer and Counting Officer, attending at a polling station in the United Kingdom,

(b)          every deputy of such an officer so attending

(c)           every presiding officer and clerk so attending,

(d)          every referendum agent, polling agent and counting agent so attending, and

(e)          every person so attending by virtue of any of sections 6A to 6D of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000

shall maintain and aid in maintaining the secrecy of voting and shall not, except for some purpose authorised by law, communicate to any person before the poll is closed  any information as to –

(i)            the name of any person who has or has not applied for a ballot paper or voted at a polling station;

(ii)           the number on the register of electors of any person who, or whose  proxy, has or has not applied for a ballot paper or voted at a polling station; or

(iii)          the official mark.

(3) No person shall –

interfere with or attempt to interfere with a voter when recording his vote;

otherwise obtain or attempt to obtain in a polling station information as to the referendum answer for which a voter in that station is about to vote or has voted;

communicate at any time to any person any information obtained in a polling station as to the referendum answer for which a voter in that station is about to vote or has voted, or as to the number or other unique identifying mark on the back of the ballot paper given to a voter at that station;

directly or indirectly induce a voter to display his ballot paper after he has marked it so as to make known to any person the referendum answer for which he has or has not voted.

Section 1.19 and 1.20 of the Electoral Commission’s guidance to EU Referendum proceedings state:

1.19 Duty to maintain secrecy at the opening of postal votes 1.19 Ballot papers will be kept face down throughout a postal vote opening session. Anyone attending an opening session must not attempt to see how individual ballot papers have been marked. It follows therefore that keeping a tally of how ballot papers have been marked is not allowed.

1.20 In addition, anyone attending a postal vote opening must not attempt to look at identifying marks or numbers on ballot papers, disclose how any particular ballot paper has been marked or pass on any such information gained from the session. Anyone found guilty of breaching these requirements faces a fine or imprisonment

The Act states that ‘if a person acts in contravention of this section he shall be liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale  or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months’.

Nicky Morgan and Stella Creasy contacted the Electoral Commission to complain about their misleading website on 7th June 2016.

11th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary: Leave Turkish visa claims 'completely untrue'

In a powerful joint statement, the Home Secretary and the Foreign Secretary have slammed Vote Leave’s claims about visa liberalisation for Turkish citizens.

Theresa May and Philip Hammond rejected the claims, reported in the Sunday Times, as ‘completely untrue.’

Home Secretary Theresa May MP and Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond MP said: “These are selectively leaked quotes from diplomatic telegrams designed to give a completely false impression that the UK is considering granting visa liberalisation to some Turkish citizens. That is completely untrue. “The Government's policy is, and will remain, to maintain current visa requirements for all Turkish nationals wishing to visit the UK, regardless of what arrangements other Member States in the Schengen area may make with Turkey. Schengen visas do not give anyone the right to access the UK. “The purpose of Diplomatic Telegrams is for our embassies around the world to feed back information on the position and views of foreign Governments. They are reports from our diplomatic posts, not statements of British Government policy. “As a full reading of these Diplomatic Telegrams shows, our overriding focus has been on working with the Turkish authorities to tackle illegal immigration via Turkey, because that is in our national interest. And it has been successful, with boat crossings from Turkey to Greece having fallen dramatically since the EU-Turkey deal was implemented.” ENDS

11th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

Leaving the EU threatens spending on the NHS, pensions and defence, Prime Minister and Chancellor warn

Public spending in three ring-fenced areas – the NHS, the pensions ‘Triple Lock’ and defence spending – will be under threat if Britain leaves the European Union, the Prime Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer have warned.

It follows a report by the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies, which said a vote to leave could create a black hole in the public finances of up to £40 billion in 2019/20. To fill a void of that scale in the public finances, extremely difficult decisions would be necessary and severe pressure would necessarily be put on previously protected budgets.

In an interview with the Observer, the Prime Minister warned that this would put enormous pressure on the NHS budget, while in an article for the Sunday Telegraph, he said that the pensions ‘Triple Lock’, which ensures that the state pension rises by no less than 2.5% a year, would also be at risk.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor make clear that the Government will deliver on their manifesto commitments to protect funding in these areas for the rest of this Parliament but, if we vote to leave the EU, that protection will be under threat from 2020 onwards.

And speaking to the Sun on Sunday, the Chancellor also warned that a vote to leave the European Union would lead to a fall in defence spending of between £920 million and £1.54 billion.

Speaking to The Observer, the Prime Minister said:

"At the election, we made a clear manifesto commitment to spend an extra £10bn on our NHS by 2020 - and that is a commitment on which we will deliver. But if we leave the EU, independent and respected experts like the IFS and the NIESR say that by 2020 we will face a black hole in our public finances of up to £40bn.

"In those circumstances, future funding for the NHS could be at risk. Our ability to ring-fence and protect spending on health could be at risk too. This is the cold reality of leaving the EU - that's why doctors, nurses and the boss of the NHS all say we will be stronger, safer and better-off in the EU."

And writing in the Sunday Telegraph, the Prime Minister said:

“One area we’d be forced to look at is pensions. We’ve made a special effort to protect pensioners. We said: pensioners should expect dignity and security in retirement.

“That’s why, in 2010, we introduced the Triple Lock. It means that the Basic State Pension will always rise in line with whichever is higher – earnings, inflation or 2.5%. And we went further: we protected the various benefits that pensioners receive automatically, like the free bus passes and free TV licences.

“We did all this in the expectation of a growing economy. But if we had a big black hole, we could struggle to justify this special protection any longer. In fact, even if we could justify it morally, it wouldn’t actually be affordable. Not when pensions represent a huge portion of public spending – over £90 billion this year - and when inflation is forecast to hit 4% if we leave Europe.

“So here is the reality: if we leave, the pensioner benefits would be under threat, and the Triple Lock could no longer be guaranteed in the long term.”

Speaking to the Sun on Sunday, Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne said:

"Let’s be clear, if we vote to leave then our country’s economy will be smaller and our country will be poorer and if that’s the case then there is less money coming into the government.

"That means you have less money to spend on vital public services, and the independent experts say that we’ve be between £20 and £40 billion short in the national finances.

"We'd have a big black hole and we’d have to fill that either by increasing taxes or by cutting spending or probably both. So we’d have a new dose of austerity, more years of public spending cuts and you’d have to start, I’m afraid, cutting key budgets like the defence budget.

"If you look at the numbers, the defence budget would have to be cut by between one and one and a half billion pounds.

"It's the last thing I want to do because I want the country to stay in the European Union, but if we leave the European Union Britain is smaller and so Britain’s armed forces will be smaller and that means fewer planes and ships and personnel to defend us. So it is both a hit to our national economic security but also our national security.

"Even if you could keep to your NATO commitment of 2 per cent of GDP, GDP would be smaller so 2 per cent of GDP would be smaller so there would be defence cuts.  At the moment the brilliant, brilliant British Army who we celebrate, particularly at this time when we are commemorating the sacrifice of the First World War, they do an incredible job for us. They have got a great plan now to give themselves the latest equipment, make sure our sailors have the latest ships, our brilliant RAF airmen have the latest planes but all of that would be up in the sky again because the country would be facing a big hole in the public finances.

"We've seen what’s happened in the past when that has been the case, you can’t leave the defence budget untouched."

/ends

Notes to Editors:

On the pensions ‘triple lock’.

The full text of the Prime Minister’s Sunday Telegraph article is below:

At last year’s election, our country – and many Telegraph readers – voted for security at every stage of life. Good schools, more jobs, lower taxes, homes that young people can buy, a well-funded NHS, and dignity and security in retirement.

In less than two weeks’ time, it’s whether to stay in or leave that is on the ballot paper. But the security argument still applies. If you vote to remain in Europe, we will have stability for our country and you will have certainty in your life. Our place in the EU’s single market will be assured, and businesses can get back to hiring, investing and expanding. Our country will be back on track, building the strong economy on which all of our aspirations depend. And there’ll be a majority Conservative government that is delivering for you, and on all our manifesto commitments.

But if you vote to leave, so many of our plans – and so many of your plans –  will be up in the air. If you think everything has been dominated by Europe recently, just wait. If we vote to leave, it won’t be creating jobs, building homes or improving the NHS that will be at the top of everyone’s agenda; it will be Europe. But this time it won’t be for just a few months; it will be for as long as a decade – potentially a lost decade for Britain.

I can hear people say, “A decade? Really?” But it took Greenland three years to negotiate an exit from the EU. And a British exit would be far more complicated because our economy and so many of our businesses are so deeply integrated within the single market. We’d then have to negotiate a new trade deal with the EU, which took Canada seven years, and is still not complete even today. Indeed, a decade is exactly what the head of the World Trade Organisation predicted it could take for Britain to leave only this week. And we’d soon become a country stuck on the hard shoulder, watching as others shoot past us in the fast lane.

We’d also have to contend with the painful short term shock.  The Bank of England, the IMF and 9 out of 10 economists think it’s likely we’d suffer an economic shock. It could mean a recession leading to potentially 500,000 lost jobs. We’d see a decline in the value of the pound, and of the value of the assets we own – like our homes.  And because we’d probably need to raise interest rates to help deal with the shock, mortgage rates would rise – perhaps by around £900 a year for the average homeowner.

Our public finances would also take a severe hit. The Institute for Fiscal Studies, one of the most respected economic organisations around, estimates that, if we leave, this shock would open up a black hole in our public finances of between £20 billion and £40 billion. Why? Because our economy will be smaller and unemployment will go up, meaning lower tax receipts and higher welfare spending. We’d then be on a permanently poorer trajectory for the future. And all this, in turn, will cause serious damage for the public finances.

I know what it’s like to fill black holes. I’m the Prime Minster who came into clean up the mess of the last recession. I still keep a copy of that note we found in the Treasury six years ago: “I’m afraid there is no money”: a permanent reminder of what happens when you lose control of your economy. I know how painful it can be for those that bear the brunt of cuts to public spending.

Today, the deficit is down by over two thirds, and we’re on course for a surplus: Austerity is coming to an end. But if we left Europe, it would have to carry on. Another £20 billion? Another £40 billion? There’s just no way we could find that sort of money through cuts to public services like policing or local government – it wouldn’t be possible to do it by cutting waste or making efficiencies. So leaving Europe would mean some invidious choices.

Again, I can hear people saying “there you go again, warning of dire consequences. How can you be so sure?” But when the forecasts are so clear – when there’s such a consensus – the truly far-fetched approach is to pretend that this none of this will happen.

One area we’d be forced to look at is pensions. We’ve made a special effort to protect pensioners. We said: pensioners should expect dignity and security in retirement. That’s why, in 2010, we introduced the Triple Lock. It means that the Basic State Pension will always rise in line with whichever is higher – earnings, inflation or 2.5%. And we went further: we protected the various benefits that pensioners receive automatically, like the free bus passes and free TV licences.

We did all this in the expectation of a growing economy. But if we had a big black hole, we could struggle to justify this special protection any longer. In fact, even if we could justify it morally, it wouldn’t actually be affordable. Not when pensions represent a huge portion of public spending – over £90 billion this year - and when inflation is forecast to hit 4% if we leave Europe. So here is the reality: if we leave, the pensioner benefits would be under threat, and the Triple Lock could no longer be guaranteed in the long term.

The good news is that this is all entirely avoidable. We can avoid this pain by voting to remain. I guarantee you: if we remain in the EU, our country will have the money to keep the Triple Lock. And we can look forward to more jobs, more homes and more opportunity for your children and grandchildren.

What can the Leave Campaign guarantee you? Nothing at all. These people are asking you to roll the dice with our future – with your future. And for what? What is the potential upside? It would have to be something pretty special to justify these kind of risks. But yet they tell us nothing about what the future would hold. I don’t think they deserve your vote – not when leaving is so risky, not when it’s such a leap in the dark.

So on June 23rd, I say: don’t risk our economic security or your family finances. Don’t let us go backwards again. Let’s vote to remain – and let’s look forward to a brighter future for you, and for every generation to come.

On defence spending.

Although the Government is currently planning to spend more than the 2% target in 2019/20, the independent IFS has said a vote to leave could create a black hole in the public finances of up to £40 billion in 2019/20 suggesting these numbers would be conservative estimates for the amount spending in the defence budget would need to be reduced by to keep public spending in check.

The IFS used NIESR estimates of the fall in the size of the economy in 2019/20 to work out their numbers. NIESR estimates that the economy would be between 2.1% and 3.5% smaller if Britain left the EU.

Currently 2% spending on defence in 2019/20 would mean spending £43.9 billion on national security, but if the economy was between 2.1% and 3.5% smaller this would mean spending £43 billion or £42.4 billion to meet the NATO target of 2%.

The Spending Review committed funding for a range of military assets, including 42 F 35 stealth fighters by 2023 with a reported cost of £70 million each; 9 Boeing P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft with a reported cost of £100 million per aircraft, and two new RAF Typhoon squadrons. If Britain voted to leave it’s unclear whether these commitments could be met.

12th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

Top housebuilders: Leaving EU will damage first-time buyers

17 top housebuilders, including Barratt Homes and Berkeley Group, warn leaving Europe will be bad for first-time buyers, putting the “dream” of home-ownership “at risk”.

Warn jobs could go in building materials industry if Britain leaves EU.

Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson accuses Leave campaigns of “fantasy economics”.

Today, 17 of Britain’s biggest housebuilders come together to warn that leaving the EU will make it harder and more expensive to build homes, which would mean first-time buyers would find it more difficult to get onto the property ladder.

In an open letter, they argue that “a vote to leave will create considerable uncertainty for Britain”, meaning that “investment will suffer as confidence in the economy waves”, making it harder for housebuilders to raise the funds to undertake new development.

They also argue that the supply chain, which employs “millions of people across the UK”, would be damaged, with a vote to leave disrupting the production and import of materials like bricks. They conclude that leaving the EU would be a “risk” and therefore they support Britain remaining in the EU.

The 17 firms – Metropolitan, Notting Hill Housing, Canary Wharf Group, The Larkfleet Group, A2Dominion Group, Family Mosaic, Peabody, Genesis Housing Association, The Berkeley Group, Barratt Developments, Norfolk Homes, Crest Nicholson, Hopkins Homes, L&Q, Pocket Living, Cast, and Wates Group – employ over 34,000 people.

Mark Vlessing, Founder and CEO of Pocket (starter-homes specialists):

“Remaining in the EU is critical for first time buyers. The uncertainty caused by Brexit will destabilise the supply of mortgages, our construction workforce will be severely depleted causing further construction cost escalation and developers will respond by committing to fewer housing starts. Nobody wants this, least of all our first time buyers who today are actively choosing the UK to build their futures in.

Commenting, Stephen Stone, CEO of Crest Nicholson, said:

"Government support has brought much needed stability to the housing market. The industry has responded by growing volumes and creating many highly-skilled jobs, apprenticeships and new career opportunities for young people. Homebuyers have confidence of future employment and easy access to mortgages, which helps them come to the decision to buy a new home. This is the housing environment today and anything which undermines it - including Brexit - would not be welcomed and could force us to revisit our investment decisions."

Ruth Davidson, the leader of the Scottish Conservative Party, said:

“The job of politicians is to do everything we can to help people get on in life – to buy that first home, providing stability and a place to raise a family.

“It’s clear that following the fantasy economics of the Leave campaign would put this universal dream at risk. Families are better off in Europe, and they can’t afford a vote to leave.”

/ends

NOTES TO EDITORS:

Full text of the letter, and signatories:

“We are developers and housebuilders working throughout the country to build more, much needed, housing to ensure millions of people can fulfil their dream of buying their own home.

“What any developer requires is confidence and continued support from their financial investors - and those investors need certainty over wider market conditions. There is now a clear consensus that a vote to leave will create considerable uncertainty for Britain. We know what this will mean: investment will suffer as confidence in the economy wavers. That is the last thing Britain’s developers and house-builders need.

“Leaving the EU would also have an impact on the UK’s housing supply chain companies, which employ millions of people across the UK. This could disrupt the production and import of the supplies needed for building such as bricks and blocks. This will further delay and add costs on Britain’s house builders.

“Britain’s strong and open economy is the vital foundation we need to build Britain’s homes. But this is precisely what leaving the European Union puts at risk.

“So, we support the UK staying within a reformed EU.”

Brian Johnson, CEO, Metropolitan

Kate Davies, chief executive, Notting Hill Housing

Sir George Iacobescu - CEO – Canary Wharf Group

Karl Hick - CEO – The Larkfleet Group

Darrell Mercer - CEO - A2Dominion Group

Brendan Sarsfield - CEO - Family Mosaic

Stephen Howlett - CEO – Peabody

Neil Hadden – CEO - Genesis Housing Association

Tony Pidgley - Chairman – The Berkeley Group

David Thomas - CEO - Barratt Developments

Philip Makepeace – Managing Director - Norfolk Homes

Stephen Stone - CEO - Crest Nicholson

James Hopkins – Executive Chairman - Hopkins Homes

David Montague - CEO - L&Q

Mark Vlessing – Founder and CEO – Pocket Living

Mark Farmer – Founding Director and CEO - Cast

James Wates – Chairman – Wates Group

11th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

Dyson wants to have his cake and eat it when it comes to the EU

Sir James Dyson wants to have his cake and eat it when it comes to the EU. He:  

Supported joining the Euro – threatening to move jobs if we didn’t join.‘“It's suicidal for the UK not to join the euro. Why should we go on exporting at a loss? We're facing unfair competition,” he said. Asked about the prospect of developing future operations abroad, Dyson, who last week unveiled a new type of washing machine as his latest invention, said: “We have a small factory in Malaysia which is responsible for between 5 and 10 per cent of our output. Developing that could be a possibility in the future, but we could look to make our products anywhere.”’ Observer, 5 November 2000, link

Wants to keep free trade and free movement. ‘[Dyson] said he would want to keep “European free trade and free movement of peoples”’ This is Money, 21 November 2014, link

Wants workless foreign students to be allowed to stay in Britain. “The reason these engineers go home is because we do everything we can to make them unwelcome. They must find work within a few weeks of completing their studies, or we revoke their visas. If they do find work, we permit them only a fixed-term contract. Their employers, too, face high fees and an avalanche of paperwork. These are the world’s most promising engineers. We ought to be encouraging them to stay, not waving them goodbye.” James Dyson, Express, 3 February 2014, link

Only wants to leave now because he thinks vacuum cleaner regulations mean that some vacuum cleaners are more powerful than they claim. James Dyson has suggested that Britain should leave the EU, over a dispute about vacuum cleaner energy efficiency regulations…“When the ErP (Energy related Products) legislation was first mooted, we were campaigning for lower limits – in fact we wanted a 700 watt limit,” said Mr Dyson. “The other manufacturers held it at 1,600 watts, and it will go down to 900 watts in 2017, but we were the only manufacturer campaigning for small motors, because high power doesn’t equate to efficient cleaning.” Telegraph, 5 September 2014, link

Leave campaigners in contrast have said they don’t want any energy efficiency restrictions on vacuum cleaners. “The EU has also taken control of the household appliances your family can use. It has banned high-powered vacuum cleaners. Brussels also plans to outlaw British toasters and kettles but has delayed this until after the referendum to evade scrutiny from the British public. If we vote ‘remain’, unelected bureaucrats will continue to decide which household appliances we can use. These problems will only get worse if we vote ‘remain’” Vote Leave, Energy briefing, link

Opposes trade unions and wants looser employment laws. ‘The UK needs shorter factory leases and looser employment laws if it is to thrive in manufacturing, the industrialist Sir James Dyson said…“I don't think trade unions have been helpful because they show things as divisive.”’Guardian, 1 March 2016, link

Took £1.4 million from Brussels in 2014. Dyson was a director of Beeswax Farming (Rainbow) limited until March 2014 – and is the ultimate controlling party of the business according to the latest company accounts. This company received £1.4 million in European Common Agricultural Policy payments in 2014. Beeswax Farming (Rainbow) Annual report 2014, link; Defra, CAP Payments search, link

11th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

Britain Stronger In Europe and political parties to mobilies unprecedented cross-party ground support this weekend

This weekend, more than 10,000 volunteers at a ground-breaking 2,002 grassroots events will take to towns, cities and villages across the UK for the biggest weekend of campaigning to keep Britain in the EU so far. From Orkney to Gibraltar, campaigners from Britain Stronger In Europe and from the political parties will be out in force speaking with the public about why Britain is stronger, safer and better off in the EU. The strength and depth of the Britain Stronger In Europe ground campaign means that it is now the fastest-growing grassroots movement in the UK. The swelling of support eclipses that of Vote Leave who are set to have just 400 events this weekend. Will Straw, Executive Director of Britain Stronger In Europe, said: “Each week we are inundated with volunteers offering to do their bit to support the campaign. That passion and generosity now means that in six short months we have become the fastest-growing grassroots movement in the UK, an incredible achievement and one that we are harnessing this Saturday with the biggest cross-party day of campaigning so far. “With less than two weeks to go until Britain makes the biggest decision in a generation, it is more important than ever for us to take this support to the streets and demonstrate to the great British public why we are stronger, safer and better off in Europe than we would be on our own.”

11th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

13 Nobel prize winners warn leaving EU poses "key risk" to British science

13 Nobel science laureates including Peter Higgs warn leaving EU poses "key risk" to British science

Criticise claims made by Leave campaign as "flawed" and "naive"

Point to survey showing 83% of UK scientists want to stay in EU

Today (Saturday) 13 British Nobel laureates in science have come together to warn that staying in the EU is vital for UK science.

The letter adds to the overwhelming consensus among experts that Britain is better off in Europe, including a recent survey which found nine in ten economists agree leaving the EU would damage the UK economy.

Signatories include Peter Higgs, awarded a Nobel Prize for his discovery of the Higgs boson particle; Andre Geim and Konstantin Novoselov who were awarded for discovering how to create the revolutionary material graphene; and former President of the Royal Society Sir Paul Nurse who was awarded for research into cell cycles which hugely advanced cancer research.

The letter warns that the loss of EU research funding poses a "key risk to UK science" and criticises the Leave campaign's claims that this funding could be replaced as "flawed" and "naive."

It concludes: "Being part of the EU is good for British science and that is good for Britain."

ENDS

Notes to Editors

The signatories of the letter are:

Professor Peter Higgs - awarded Nobel Prize in Physics in 2013 for work on the theory of the Higgs boson particle

Sir Paul Nurse - awarded Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2001 for research into cell cycles which hugely advanced cancer research

Sir Andre Geim and Sir Kostya Novoselov - awarded Nobel Prize in Physics in 2010 for groundbreaking work on graphene, a material expected to revolutionise manufacturing

Dr Tomas Lindahl - awarded Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 2015 for research into DNA repair that has revolutionised cancer research

Sir John Gurdon - awarded Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2012 for pioneering research in nuclear transplantation and cloning

Sir Martin Evans - awarded Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2007 for research into embryonic stem cells

Sir Tim Hunt - awarded Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2001 for discoveries of protein molecules that control the division of cells

Professor John O’Keefe - awarded Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2014 for pioneering research into neuroscience

Dr Sydney Brenner - awarded Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 2002 for work on molecular biology

Sir John Sulston - awarded Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 2002 for sequencing of the worm genome which paved the way for research into the human genome

Sir Richard Roberts - awarded Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1993 for research into gene-splicing

Sir John Walker - awarded Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1997 for research into enzymes

A poll of nearly 2000 researchers conducted by Nature in March found 83% were in favour staying in the EU (Nature, 30 March 2016,

link

)

Full text of the letter below:

Sir

Science drives our prosperity, health, innovation and economic growth.  It should be front and centre in the EU debate.  We are concerned that those commenting on science for Brexit lack experience in scientific leadership and achievement, and are putting the superb UK research endeavour in jeopardy.

Inside the EU, Britain helps steer the biggest scientific powerhouse in the world. The EU contains a critical mass of expertise, with more than one in five of the world’s researchers moving freely within its boundaries. It helps provide scientific agility, has some of the finest minds and facilities in the world, and invests heavily in research, people and infrastructures.

EU decisions about scientific policy, funding and regulatory frameworks affect science the world over, and are influenced by British scientists. On the inside, Britain has access to people and funding and wields global scientific influence, far greater than we have alone.

The prospect of losing EU research funding is a key risk to UK science.  Brexit assertions that the Treasury will make up this shortfall are naive and complacent, given that successive governments have allowed Britain to languish well below the OEDC and EU averages in its research investment as a proportion of GDP.

The Brexit claims that the UK could still access funding from outside the EU are also flawed, given such access will almost certainly be conditional on embracing the very principles Brexit rejects, especially freedom of movement.  Science thrives on permeability of ideas and people, and flourishes in environments that pool intelligence, minimise barriers, and are open to free exchange and collaboration.

The EU provides such an environment and scientists value it highly.  That is why a recent survey in Nature showed that 83% of UK scientists want Britain to stay in the EU. We may be an island, but we cannot be an island in science.  Being part of the EU is good for British science and that is good for Britain.

Dr Sydney Brenner

Nobel Laureate, Physiology or Medicine 2002

Sir Martin Evans

Nobel Laureate, Physiology or Medicine 2007

Sir Andre Geim          

Nobel Laureate, Physics 2010

Sir John Gurdon

Nobel Laureate, Physiology or Medicine 2012

Professor Peter Higgs

Nobel Laureate, Physics 2013

Sir Tim Hunt

Nobel Laureate, Physiology or Medicine 2001

Dr Tomas Lindahl    

Nobel Laureate, Chemistry 2015

Sir Kostya Novoselov

Nobel Laureate, Physics 2010

Sir Paul Nurse

Nobel Laureate, Physiology or Medicine 2001

Professor John O’Keefe

Nobel Laureate, Physiology or Medicine 2014

Sir Richard Roberts    

Nobel Laureate, Physiology or Medicine 1993

Sir John Sulston

Nobel Laureate, Physiology or Medicine 2002

Sir John Walker

Nobel Laureate, Chemistry 1997

11th June 2016 

[strongerinpress]

No Single Market access for UK after Brexit, Wolfgang Schäuble says

Today, German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble has confirmed that were Britain to leave the EU, it would need to leave the Single Market. This would rule out a Norway-style trading relationship with the EU.

Mr Schäuble said: “That won’t work…It would require the country to abide by the rules of a club from which it currently wants to withdraw. If the majority in Britain opts for Brexit, that would be a decision against the single market. In is in. Out is out. One has to respect the sovereignty of the British people.”

Commenting, Former EU Trade Commissioner and Business Secretary Peter Mandelson said:

“This finally knocks on the head the Leave campaign’s claim that we can leave the EU and still enjoy the benefits of the single market. We cannot leave the club and continue to use its facilities.

“Being outside the single market wold be a hammer blow to the UK economy. Our future trade will be hit and our manufacturing sector, which relies on the single market’s free movement of goods and people, will be at risk.

“This is the cold reality of Brexit that the British people must face. If we leave we lose the economic gains of being the world’s largest free trade zone, putting jobs and livelihoods at risk.”

/Ends

NOTES TO EDITORS:

Wolfgang Schäuble’s comments are reported here:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/10/no-single-market-access-for-uk-after-brexit-wolfgang-schauble-says

Questions for the Leave campaign:

Will you admit that leaving the single market would mean tariffs being imposed on goods trade, which will push up costs for businesses and consumers?

Will you admit that leaving the single market would mean some service sectors being excluded from a trade deal, putting jobs at risk?

What precise trading arrangement do you believe is preferable to the single market, and what evidence do you have for this?

What is your response to Hitachi, Airbus, Siemen’s and GKN, who say that leaving would put jobs and investment at risk?

Leave campaigners cite Germany, but Germans make clear leaving would be detrimental

Michael Gove:

“I think it would be very difficult for any German Finance Minister to go to BMW and to say, ‘I’m afraid you’re going to have to lay off workers because I want to punish the British for being democratic by erecting trade barriers.” Michael Gove, Marr, 8 May 2016, link

“As our European friends adjust to the referendum result they will quickly calculate that it is in their own interest to maintain the current free trade arrangements they enjoy with the UK. After all they sell far more to us than we do to them…German car manufacturers, who sell £16.2 billion more to us each year than we sell to them, will insist their Government maintains access to our markets…the idea that the German government would damage its car manufacturers - and impoverish workers in those factories - to make a political point about Britain’s choices...is ridiculous.”Vote Leave,19 April, link

Boris Johnson: “I ask you – would the Germans discriminate against our bicycles, if they thought we would discriminate against their BMWs?...Of course not, so let us say knickers to the pessimists and the merchants of gloom and do a new deal that will be good for Britain and good for Europe.” Boris Johnson, Guardian, 15 April 2016, link

Chris Grayling: “They say that the tariffs would be too high between the EU and Britain and we would not be agree new trade agreements.  That seems to me to be extraordinarily improbable. Millions of jobs around the EU depend on selling goods and products to UK consumers. We buy far more from other EU member states than they do from us. Does anybody seriously believe that French farmers will stand idly by while they are separated from their markets in the UK? Or German car makers from their UK dealerships.” Chris Grayling, Vote Leave press release, 17 March 2016, link

10th June 2016