News archive – 2015

Posted on 2015-11-25 | 05:27

Speaking about proposals that the UK should take part in bombing Syria, Roger said:

"I voted against Britain participating in military action in Syria and I also spoke against this in the House of Commons. I have not changed my position.

"ISIS is a homicidal organisation which has no respect for human life other than for those who are totally committed to its own perverted view of Islam – as the recent Paris bombings confirm – but I am not convinced that dropping an increasing number of bombs on areas controlled by ISIS in Syria is going to stop carrying out their reign of terror throughout the world. On the contrary the continual bombing is terrifying the half a million plus Syrian people who are trapped in ISIS held areas and is a massive contributor to refugees fleeing from Syria which are causing enormous problems for western countries.

"Of course ISIS needs to be destroyed because they could kill anybody but there are already bombs being dropped by America, Russia and France and Britain’s contribution towards helping our ally, France, would be far better directed towards us using our expertise in breaking up terrorist cells in western countries and in giving intelligence and logistical support to those elements fighting in Syria against ISIS.

  "Furthermore I believe that no fly-zones need to be created in Syria so that innocent civilians can seek refuge in them and if there were to be a UN Mandate approving no fly-zones then I will be happy for the UK to take part in policing them. "

Posted on 2015-11-17 | 05:03

Roger sends his solidarity and deepest sympathies to the people of Paris following the appalling terrorist attacks on Friday. His thoughts are with the families of those killed and injured.

He commented: “This massacre was an act of war against France, and an attempt to undermine the French people’s way of life and our own. We cannot allow this to happen. The French values of freedom of thought, religion and conscience, their separation of church and state, and their welcoming and acceptance of people from all over the world are shown to be even more precious following this crazed act of terror and intolerance.

“I was in Baku in Azerbaijan on an all-party parliamentary visit when the attacks took place. I and my Parliamentary colleagues went to the French embassy in Baku to express our sympathy with the people of France, and to join with the mourners there. People in the UK and around the world are united in our support of France and our condemnation of those with no respect for human life. The value we place on all human life, regardless of people’s nationality, race or religion, will not be conquered by acts of terrorism.”

Posted on 2015-10-05 | 10:14

Roger has written to the Minister of State for Skills, Nick Boles MP, to protest against the Government’s plans to further slash funding for adult and further education. Roger’s constituents contacted him to express their concern about proposed cuts to this sector of 25% or 40%, and the impact this would have on local colleges such as Fircroft which provide essential skills for adults. Roger believes that to lose any education provision would not only damage individuals who would be denied the chance to gain essential skills, but would also have a negative effect on wider society, employment, business and the economy.

He commented: “These proposed cuts are all too typical of this Government’s entire approach to the public sphere. Instead of seizing opportunities to invest in our people and our country and build a strong economy, they see even a sector as crucial to education as just a target for cuts.”

In his letter, Roger wrote: “It is extremely worrying that the Government are even contemplating making further cuts to the adult education budget. This sector currently receives just 6% of the overall education budget, and it has already suffered from significant cuts. I cannot state strongly enough the short-sighted, counter-productive and deeply foolish nature of attempting to save money by cutting adult education.

“In order to build a strong economy, the UK needs a well-educated workforce. Money spent on education is not wasted—it is a positive investment in our country, our citizens and our future economic success. To deprive people of access to learning, particularly for essential skills such as maths and English, is to remove their ability to fully participate in our society, let alone contribute to the economy.

“People in my constituency are particularly concerned about the possible closure of an excellent local college, Fircroft. This college offers courses to people who would not otherwise have been able to access them, enabling them to improve their careers and build a better life for themselves and their families, as well as make a contribution to the prosperity of this country. I am very concerned about the possible impact of these cuts on Fircroft as well as other colleges in Birmingham and around the country.”

Roger has asked the Minister for a guarantee that the propsed cuts will not lead to the closure of Fircroft.

Posted on 2015-09-30 | 01:13

The switch from Disability Living Allowance (DLA) to Personal Independence Payment (PIP), which is billed by the Government as a way to “focus support on those with greatest needs”, is little more than an excuse to grab back financial support from disabled people.

People with an illness or disability are currently able to claim DLA to help them cover the extra costs associated with their health condition, such as specialised transport. However, the Government is now transferring all existing DLA claimants to PIP, with the claim that this is a way to focus resources on those who most need them.

However, it is not the case that PIP will simply refocus the DLA budget. The Government’s own impact assessment for this change sets out that the switch will cut the total spend for this benefit by £2,240 million, or 20% of working age DLA expenditure. While it might be the case that some people with severe disabilities may receive slightly more, this will be outweighed by the huge number of disabled people who either receive less on PIP than they did on DLA, or who now receive nothing at all despite still having the same costs associated with their health condition.

Roger commented: “Once again, DWP shows its utter viciousness towards disabled people. Cutting a fifth of the DLA budget will cause huge financial hardship and suffering to people with serious health and mobility problems, inclding my constituents. This is not a “refocussing” or a better way of targeting support—it is a cut.

“I have said this many times, but will say it again: disabled people did not cause the deficit. A decent, civilised society accepts that it has a duty of care towards those with serious health problems, and does not attempt to make them shoulder the burden of paying for a debt which they did not cause. It is utterly disgraceful that the Government are once again attacking the most vulnerable in society. If they want to raise revenue, I suggest taking action on corporate tax avoidance, not making disabled people’s lives more difficult.”

The switch of DLA claimants on to PIP is due to begin in Birmingham in October. Roger advises constituents who are told that they will receive a lower rate of PIP than their previous DLA entitlement to challenge DWP’s decision if they feel that it is unfair or inaccurate, and if necessary to go through the mandatory reconsideration and appeal process. Constituents who need help or support with this are welcome to get in touch with Roger by email to [email protected] or by phone to 0207 219 5191.

Posted on 2015-09-16 | 01:27

Speaking to members and activists in Hall Green after the election of Jeremy Corbyn as Leader of the Labour Party, Roger said:

“We certainly live in interesting times and are sailing in unchartered waters. As I have made clear I did not nominate any of the candidates for Leader because I had reservations, albeit different ones, about each of the four candidates. I wish there had been a ‘Barbara Castle’ figure standing because it is about time the Labour Party had a woman leader and I would have happily voted for her. The two women candidates on offer were not, in my opinion, in the same league as Barbara Castle and I do not particularly rate either of them.

"Andy Burnham is a nice guy who I like. He actually gives the impression that he is listening to you when you talk to him but, unfortunately, he is totally vacuous and is very much a ‘Westminster careerist’ and this is something the general public do not like. Jeremy Corbyn has a number of views which I subscribe to. I agree with him about the need to end the neoliberal economic agenda which has been the prevailing economic orthodoxy since the time of Thatcher and Reagan. I also agree with him that the justification for austerity has got nothing to do with economics but everything to do with the Tories intent to roll back and dismantle the state.

"I agree with Jeremy that Trident should not be renewed and I also agree with him about the need to bring the railways back into public or community ownership. I do not agree with him about NATO which, in my opinion, has been the most successful mutual defence alliance in history and never attacked anybody between the time it was sent up in 1948 and the ending of the Cold War. The mistake that NATO made afterwards was, at the behest of the Americans, in becoming the ‘world’s policeman’ which caused massive problems within the alliance amongst its member countries. I also do not agree with his views on immigration because I support a policy of balanced migration.

"My main reservation about Jeremy was, however, that his election would result in a coordinated vicious attack on him by the Tory press and media and this is exactly what has happened. Only time will tell whether he can come through this.

"There is no doubt that his campaign ignited tremendous interest and enthusiasm and this is to be very much welcomed and on the basis of him receiving 59% of the vote (almost exactly the same vote that I received in the General Election!) he is entitled to be given an opportunity of putting together his own Cabinet and team, which I hope will be broad based, and to win the support of the Parliamentary Labour Party for his distinctive views.

"I was happy to nominate and vote for Tom Watson as Deputy Leader and was delighted he was elected.”

Posted on 2015-09-09 | 12:19

Speaking in advance of the vote in Parliament on whether to allow assisted dying on Friday, Roger said:

"The issue of ‘assisted dying’ is an extremely contentious one and there are deeply held views on both sides of the argument. For some the argument is a moral one in that deliberately ending a human life is wrong because life is sacred. There is also understandable concern that doctor assisted dying is a first step on a slippery slope where the vulnerable could be threatened and where premature death becomes a cheap alternative to palliative care.

"For others it is about the right of an individual to choose whether to end their life or to suffer unbearable pain, misery and suffering.

  "My own view, on balance, is that an individual should have the right to choose providing proper safeguards are built in and individual doctors are not obliged to participate in something which they have moral and ethical objections to. In the state of Oregon in America they have had a law, since 1997, called the ‘Death with Dignity Act’. It allows (but does not oblige) doctors to prescribe lethal doses to patients with less than six months to live who asked for them. A second doctor has to agree that the patient has less than six months to live and there is also a cooling off period of 15 days.

"The Bill being proposed by Rob Marris is similar to the ‘Death with Dignity Act’ in Oregon and it has the additional safeguard that the medical assessment of the two doctors has to be verified and checked by a Judge. I think this is sensible.

"I will, of course, listen to the arguments being made both for and against the Bill but my inclinations are to support the Bill because I believe in the right of an individual to end their life and not to have to endure suffering in the final months of their life."

Posted on 2015-08-10 | 12:37

Roger has welcomed the recent sentencing of trader Tom Hayes to fourteen years’ imprisonment for conspiracy to defraud by rigging the Libor rate, and hopes it will be the first of many such convictions. However, he is concerned that the very sizeable assets accrued by Hayes from his fraudulent activities have not been seized by the court.

Hayes was paid £1.3m for the three years he spent working at UBS, and then received £3.5m for just under a year’s work at Citi. He also received a £2.2m bonus. This is money that was essentially stolen from hard-working individuals and businesses, who as a direct consequence of illegal Libor-fixing were forced to pay higher interest charges, higher mortgage rates and higher foreign exchange rates.

Commented Roger: “Why should Hayes be able to serve his sentence and then retire to enjoy large sums of money which were accrued by fraud, dishonesty and breaking the law? His behaviour was essentially a form of theft from the bank’s customers and, like any other fraudster, I do not see why he should be able to keep money which was acquired illegally.”

“I am aware that banks including UBS have already paid a significant amount in Libor-related fines, which has been given to military charities. However, I remain concerned that the individuals involved have not been subject to proceeds of crime legislation which could see their personal illegal gains seized and used directly to compensate the very large number of people who have lost out financially from Libor fixing, or to fill in some of the huge hole in public finances which was created by the banks’ irresponsible and greedy behaviour.”

Roger has written to the Justice Secretary to ask whether there will be a court order to seize Hayes’ assets, or any attempt to reclaim those assets using proceeds of crime legislation.

Posted on 2015-07-17 | 05:42

Roger is supporting Sotheby's workers who were suspended the day after they carried out a protest for sick pay and to keep the London Living Wage, and volunteer-run trade union UVW is continuing to fight for their reinstatement. Roger has tabled an Early Day Motion to support these workers, which has been signed by Labour, SNP and Independent MPs.

The EDM states: “That this House condemns in the strongest possible terms the employment practices of Sotheby's and its cleaning contractor Servest, concerning cleaners and porters who are members of the trade union United Voices of the World (UVW); is appalled that Sotheby's and Servest consider peaceful protest to be an act of misconduct; further condemns Sotheby's decision to ban from the site cleaners and porters who took part in a lawful, peaceful protest to call for a real Living Wage, contractual sick pay and an end to trade union victimisation; calls on Sotheby's to backdate the London Living Wage to 1 November 2014 and confirm it will remain a Living Wage employer on 1 November 2015; further calls on Sotheby's to provide contractual sick pay rather than Statutory Sick Pay, which only provides £35 for the first week when an employee is off sick and £88.45 per week from there on, which means that the cleaners and porters are constrained to work when sick or to allow their families to go hungry; believes that it is disgraceful for such a wealthy company dealing in luxury goods to pay poverty wages to essential workers; and calls on Sotheby's to reinstate the cleaners and porters who have been banned from the site for exercising their right to protest lawfully and peacefully and to pay all staff the London Living Wage.”

In a joint letter to Sotheby’s Chairman, Domenico De Sole, on 17 July, Dave Anderson MP, Ronnie Campbell MP and Roger Godsiff MP said: “We are writing to you as Members of Parliament to express our great concern about the treatment of low-paid workers at Sotheby’s.

“We understand that members of the trade union United Voices of the World have been suspended from their jobs for asking for contractual sick pay and to remain on the London Living Wage when it increases slightly in November. Without the living wage and sick pay, these cleaners and porters—without whose labour Sotheby’s would be unable to function—will be forced to work when ill or injured or allow their families to go hungry. We find it utterly deplorable that such a wealthy, profitable company, which deals in luxury goods, is willing to deprive these hard-working employees of the means to afford even the basic necessities of a decent life. While we are aware that these employees are contracted out by Servest, we do not consider that this absolves Sotheby’s of responsibility for paying them decently.

"It is also extremely worrying that, following the protest on 1 July, employees who took part were forced to hand over their passes and escorted off the premises. This was a peaceful, legal protest, and it is outrageous—not to mention illegal—that Sotheby’s is attempting to force workers out of their jobs for calling for decent pay and working conditions. It appears that Sotheby’s justification for these removals is that the protest 'put the business at risk', which seems to be somewhat invalidated by the fact that Sotheby’s sold £130 million worth of paintings at auction that same evening.

"It is not the actions of these workers but Sotheby’s own employment practices which is severely damaging its reputation. It is, quite frankly, obscene that a company which makes millions in profits and pays its CEO $7 million per year refuses to pay its staff enough to live on with decency and dignity. A company’s reputation will not be enhanced by the public knowledge that it mistreats and impoverishes its own staff. We urge you to engage with the workers’ representation and work with them to meet the very reasonable request that staff will continue to be paid the London Living Wage and will receive decent sick pay.”

United Voices of the World general secretary, Petros Elia, said: “Sotheby's is famous for selling masterpieces for millions, so the contrast with cleaners just scraping by could hardly be greater. Their treatment of these four hard-working cleaners has been utterly outrageous. We thank Roger Godsiff for bringing this motion and call on MPs of all parties to support it, to send a message loud and clear that such cold corporate behaviour is simply unacceptable.

“Astonishingly, last year, the Sotheby's cleaners actually had their hourly wage cut. UVW helped them to fight for and win the London Living Wage, although only from April, despite the current rate of £9.15 per hour coming into effect on 1 November 2014. Sotheby's refuse to backdate it or pay contractual sick pay. They also refuse to commit to paying the full London Living Wage when it increases in November this year.

“On the evening of Wednesday 1 July, four members of our union – Percy, Barbara, Marco and Jorge – took part in a peaceful protest outside Sotheby’s auction house on London’s Bond Street. The next day, all four were denied entry to work. Our protests are always peaceful yet Sotheby’s employ extra security staff. It must be costing them far more than the relatively small sums we’re asking for. One of the cleaners has been there for six years, a loyal employee, but apparently Sotheby's couldn’t care less.”

A petition on Change.org has over 25,000 supporters. It is time for Sotheby's to start listening to their workers and treating them with respect!

Posted on 2015-07-08 | 11:42

He said: “A lot of my constituents are low-paid workers. Many are paid the minimum wage and some receive even less. They work very long hours and some have two or three jobs to bring in enough money to feed their families and pay the bills. Even then, some of them cannot afford to put food on the table seven days a week and have to endure the humiliation of going to food banks with their families.

“These low-paid workers are not shirkers or skivers, lazy or feckless; nor, as a matter of interest, are they the people who caused the financial and banking crisis in 2008. If the curtains on their houses are drawn at 7 or 8 in the morning, it is not because they are skiving or being lazy, but because they only got home from work after midnight. These are the people in my constituency who rely on working tax credits to top up their poverty pay, and it is they who suffer if tax credit support is reduced or abolished.

“I agree with the Prime Minister that employers should pay the living wage, but many of them do not and will not unless they are forced to do so. If the Government are serious and want to save money on tax credits, they must turn the statutory minimum wage into a statutory living wage. Indeed, the Prime Minister should understand that argument, because Steve Hilton, who was his adviser until recently, has advocated exactly that. I hope very much indeed that that is what the Government will do. I suspect that they will offer incentives to employers to pay the living wage, but by doing so they would just be subsidising employers—they would not save money.

“In a different world we would have unions that were strong enough to bid up their members’ wages, but they are not strong enough. Conservative Members smile and laugh whenever unions are mentioned. Unions have a traditional role of negotiating better terms and conditions for their members. The Conservative party hates trade unions. Indeed, it has made it absolutely plain that it will bring in even more draconian restrictions on them, so trade unions will not be able to do their traditional job of bidding up wages. Therefore, it is down to the Government—if they are serious—to turn the minimum wage into a living wage. Is that what Treasury Ministers intend to do?”

He concluded: “Low pay is a national scandal. It is not the fault of hard-working, low-paid families in my constituency or anywhere else in the country. It is the Government’s responsibility to address this issue.”

Posted on 2015-07-06 | 01:04

Roger is one of the signatories to a letter published in the Guardian which opposes any further austerity for Greece and calls for debt cancellation.

He commented: “The people of Greece have already suffered through years of incredibly harsh austerity. All this has brought to their country is more poverty and misery, with the economy shrinking and failing to function properly due to the savageness of the cuts.

“I do not believe that there is any moral or economic case for inflicting more austerity on Greece. Any more cuts will be counter-productive, and will only cause the country and its people to become poorer and even less able to pay these debts.

“Any further bail-out funds which Greece receives should now go towards investment, support for the poorest and building a productive, functioning economy and a tax system in which the richest and big business pay their fair share. These funds should not be gobbled up by the country’s creditors with no benefit at all to Greek citizens.”

You can read the article in the Guardian here.

Posted on 2015-07-02 | 04:37

Roger has joined the Trussell Trust and FareShare in a food donation appeal at Tesco to support local food banks. The Neighbourhood Food Collection is aiming to provide at least four million meals to people in need this summer.

Volunteers will be collecting food locally at branches of Tesco between Thursday 2 July until Saturday 4 July, and Roger will be joining them at the Sheldon store on Saturday. The collection is particularly important in summer months, when many parents on free school meals face a tough time feeding their children over the long school break. Roger is encouraging constituents to join the volunteer teams or to donate food during their weekly shop.

Said Roger: “The Trussell Trust and food banks in Birmingham do vital work in feeding people who would otherwise go hungry, including some of my own constituents. I have had to refer some extremely vulnerable people to food banks after they were let down by state support systems that failed to function adequately. A particularly appalling case was a family with refugee status who had a severely disabled child, who due to DWP’s utter lack of care or responsibility were almost left without food over a weekend. I was able to refer them to a local food bank, which responded with compassion and provided this family with the food they needed until their benefits were paid the following week.

“Despite my great admiration for the work done by food banks, I do not believe that anyone should have to rely on food aid to survive, particularly in a country as wealthy as the UK. The state has a responsibility to support those who are too ill to work or who are looking for work in a very tough jobs market, and employers have a responsibility to pay their workers enough to live on with dignity and without needing food hand-outs. Sadly, at present both are failing to fulfil these responsibilities.

“Although I am pleased to be able to take part in this food collection drive and I appreciate the efforts made by all those involved in it, I would like to see a future in which everyone has secure access to food and no one is at risk of food poverty or in need of hand-outs.”

Posted on 2015-07-01 | 05:01

Roger has condemned the Conservative Government’s expected plans to slash tax credits in the Budget next week.

Said Roger: “The Government’s plans to cut tax credits will cause huge amounts of misery and financial hardship to working people whose wages are too low for them to survive on without Government help. These people are absolutely not ‘shirkers’ or ‘skivers’—they do essential jobs for very little money and simply do not earn enough to live on without help.”

A wide range of people, including shop workers and carers, currently receive tax credits as, despite working full time, their wages are too low to pay for rent, food and other essentials. This money is essentially a handout from the taxpayer to employers which refuse to pay the living wage. However, Roger believes that the Government urgently needs to sort out the problem of poverty pay that is too low to live on before they can begin to think about cutting tax credits. He commented:

“The Coalition Government refused to bring the minimum wage up to a living wage, leaving a large number of people earning too little to live on without tax credits. They are now planning to take away this essential support without taking any action to increase these workers’ wages to bridge the gap.

“The Conservative Party made a rash, un-costed and utterly un-thought out pre-election pledge to cut welfare by £12bn. Now that they are in power, they are scrabbling for ways to take this huge amount of money out of the pockets of UK citizens who desperately need it to pay for their basic living costs. It is widely anticipated that the Budget on 8 July will include cuts to working tax credits and child tax credits, which will have a brutal effect on some of the poorest people in our society—and this from the same Government which insisted on cutting the top rate of tax to ensure that the rich pay less!”

“This shows once again why we need strong trade unions which are able to fight for their members’ pay and conditions. Without collective bargaining, workers’ wages are pushed downwards while CEOs and shareholders receive an ever-larger slice of the pie. I do not believe that it is fundamentally right for the UK taxpayer to provide handouts to corporations which refuse to pay the living wage. However, the way to tackle this is to bring in legislation to make the minimum wage a living wage before cutting tax credits. It should be remembered that many people who use food banks are the ‘working poor’ who, even with tax credits, struggle to feed their families seven days a week.”

“I will vote against any cuts to tax credits or to any other form of essential state support for those who are ill, disabled, trying to find work or working hard for too little money. However, I remain deeply concerned that the Conservatives will push through these cuts, leading to an appalling increase in poverty and inequality in our society. We need to urgently ask ourselves what kind of society we want to live in. Do we want a society in which many workers struggle along in desperate poverty, unable to properly feed and clothe their children, despite working long hours for minimum pay, while those at the top get even richer? Or do we want a fairer and more equal UK, in which all work pays enough to survive on with dignity and fully participate in society?”

Posted on 2015-06-29 | 01:09

People who are currently receiving Disability Living Allowance, even those who have a lifelong or degenerative condition, will need to reapply for Personal Independence Payments over the next two and a half years. During this time, the new benefit PIP will be rolled out to all existing DLA claimants, who will receive a letter telling them that their DLA will be stopped and inviting them to apply for PIP.

Commented Roger: “It is really important that all existing DLA claimants keep an eye on their post, and take all the necessary steps to apply for PIP as soon as they are notified that their DLA will be stopped. Otherwise, they may find themselves in a gap between the two benefits, and temporarily not in receipt of either.

“The Government is transferring people from DLA to PIP with the intention of cutting the bill for disability benefits, so it is likely that some DLA claimants will receive a lower rate of PIP than they did of DLA. My advice is always to challenge DWP’s decision if people feel that it is unfair or based on an inaccurate assessment, and if necessary to go through the process of mandatory reconsideration and appeal. My office will be happy to provide advice and support to DLA claimants who are having problems with the process of transferring to PIP.

“I am entirely opposed to the Conservative Government’s plan to save money by cutting the total spend on disability benefits, as this will be done not by making the service more efficient but by removing the support which vulnerable people—many of whom are too ill to work—rely on to survive, to be mobile or to be independent. However, given that the Government are going ahead with this transition, I am keen to ensure that my constituents make the transition from DLA to PIP with as little stress and financial difficulty as possible.

“Constituents who have problems with the PIP application process are welcome to get in touch with me, either by email to [email protected] or by phone to 0207 219 5191.”

Posted on 2015-06-25 | 03:04

Roger is supporting the Back-Off campaign to create ‘buffer zones’ outside British abortion clinics to ensure that women who require abortions are not subject to threats or harassment.

Said Roger: “I have always supported the right of women to choose whether they wish to have an abortion and I deplore the intimidation being used by some groups who are protesting outside establishments where abortion services are provided. I most certainly support the ‘Back-off’ campaign to ensure that women’s reproductive rights and freedoms are not threatened by abusive groups.”

Posted on 2015-06-24 | 12:11

Roger has tabled an Early Day Motion and a series of Parliamentary Questions to the Government to push them for action on the cost to the taxpayer of the royal family. Research by Republic found that the real cost to the hard-pressed UK taxpayer of the royal family’s indulgent lifestyles was an astonishing £334 million, around a third of a billion pounds. This equates to £18.5m for each “working” member of royal family.

Said Roger: “This is a huge amount of public money to waste on what is essentially a very poor value tourist attraction, particularly given the ongoing context of severe public spending austerity. As a country, how can we continue to pay these sums to a tiny group of super-wealthy individuals, even as we cut the services ordinary people rely on to survive? I have heard from my constituents how much they are struggling with the rising cost of living. Why should they have to subsidise the royal family’s ridiculous lifestyles and undemocratic set of privileges?”

“I believe that we need a UK where all citizens are equal and hereditary privilege has been abolished. Everyone should have the same start in life, and no one should be able to live a life of massive luxury and extravagance which is funded by hard-working taxpayers.”

Roger has tabled Written Parliamentary Questions to the Government to urge them to provide full public disclosure of the royal family’s tax arrangements and to stop allowing the royals to pay tax only on a voluntary basis—a privilege afforded to no other UK citizens. He has also tabled an Early Day Motion calling for publicly funded bodies such as the royal family to be subject to Freedom of Information legislation. This would mean that the public would be able to read all of Prince Charles’ lobbying letters to Ministers, and for the accounts and spending of the royals to be open to proper public scrutiny. You can read the full text of this motion here.

Posted on 2015-05-29 | 06:34

Commenting on Labour’s defeat in the election, Roger said:

“You may ask what special insight I have that others don’t - and the answer is none. However, I have fought 14 General and Council elections and won 12 times, and in my Hall Green Birmingham seat – which the Lib Dems expected to take in 2010 – my vote increased by 26.9% to 28,147; my majority increased from 3,700 to 19,818 and there was a swing of more than 10% from Tory to Labour. And, just for the record, I am not standing for Leader or Deputy Leader nor for any position within the Party or in Parliament. I am just expressing my own views on why we lost so badly.

“First, the Ed factor. From the day of his election as Leader the wider public did not take to him and did not see him as ‘Prime Ministerial’. However, they did not particularly like Ted Heath when he was Tory Leader but he still beat Harold Wilson in 1970. Ed deserves credit for keeping the Party together during the last five years – even if, in doing so, he made compromises which contributed to the defeat on the 7th May. There were certainly some strange decisions made by him and his closest advisors, such as the “Edstone”, but these were not the decisive mistakes.

  “The biggest mistake was putting forward a minimalist agenda – lots of ‘nice’ sensible polices which had won approval from ‘nice’ people in focus groups – while steering clear of bold radical policies for fear of alienating the electorate. The Tories had no such inhibitions, and chucked around bold policies. They offered pensioners ‘freedom’ to control their pension pots; promised to raise the inheritance tax threshold to £1 million; promised housing association tenants the right to buy their properties at a discount and the electors the right to a referendum on Europe. Radical policies did not do them any harm, but where were our radical polices? What vision did we offer the electorate to inspire them to vote for us?

“So far as the economic argument is concerned we did not just lose it – we did not even challenge the Tories and Lib Dems. I accept that during the six months after the 2010 defeat when the Party was preoccupied with electing a new leader the Tory/Lib Dem Coalition made hay with the phrase ‘we are having to clear up Labour’s economic mess’, in which they were assisted by Liam Byrne’s suicide note. But, crucially, during the next four years, and throughout the campaign, we refused to lay the blame at the door of those who caused the 2008 financial crisis – the bankers and financial institutions in American and the UK who gambled with ordinary people’s money and savings – and then had to be bailed out by the taxpayer!

“Because we would not blame these City institutions – either for fear of being accused of being ‘anti-business’ or because we would have had to admit that we had been wrong to embrace the neoliberal economic agenda introduced by Mrs. Thatcher in the 80s and carried on by Blair and Brown with their ‘light touch regulation’ of City institutions - we ended up in a ridiculous situation where the Labour Party took full responsibility for the 2008 crash. We accepted the Tory argument that the Labour Government had spent too much and we signed up to the ‘austerity agenda’! A fat lot of good this did us as the bankers, hedge funds and City institutions – who could not believe how naïve we had been in letting them off the hook – lined up to rubbish our policies and to back the Tories spending and tax policies and pour money into their campaign coffers.

“In my election campaign I continuously used the following statement in nearly all my election material: ‘The 2008 financial crisis was not caused by ordinary people. It was not caused by nurses or teachers; local government workers; people working in the private sector; small businessmen; students or retired people. It was caused by the greed of a small group of individuals in the banking and financial sector –but everybody is now paying the price.’

“For what it is worth I also campaigned for a referendum on whether we should stay in the EU; for balanced migration; for taking the railways back under public ownership; for scrapping Trident and HS2; and for small shareholders to be given a majority on the remuneration committees of all publicly listed companies to stop the plundering of profits by senior executives. I don’t know whether these commitments had any affect – but they certainly did not do me any harm, as the result showed!

“Our total failure to defend our economic and spending record from 1997 to 2008 and to place the blame for the financial crisis on the banks and City institutions who abused their privileged positons provoked incredulity among a diverse range of people. Paul Krugman, a renowned Nobel prize-winning economist, circulated an excellent rebuttal of the austerity agenda during the election campaign, while lamenting the fact that the Labour Party seemed incapable of challenging Tory myths. The Permanent Secretary at the Treasury gave an interview halfway through the campaign in which he categorically said the 2008 financial crisis was caused by the lack of regulation of banks and financial institutions and not by overspending. Kitty Ussher, the ultra-Blairite former Treasury Minister, recently said Labour was making a terrible mistake by admitting that the 2008 crash was caused by overspending – because it was simply not true!

“So there you have it. Whoever is chosen to lead the Party is going to have to decide in which direction to take it. For what it is worth I think we should be bold and be prepared to embrace new, innovative and radical ideas while holding true to the core beliefs on which the Party was founded. Before the usual suspects jump up and say ‘this would be taking the Party to the left and from there it cannot win’, perhaps I can make it clear that being radical has nothing whatsoever to do with ‘left’ and right’. For anybody to suggest that radical must mean ‘left’ is silly and factually incorrect as Mrs. Thatcher – very much a radical – proved.

“What I am absolutely convinced of, however, is that if we plant our standard in the ‘soggy centre’ of British politics and try to be ‘all things to all people’ then we will end up like the Lib Dems and we will be outflanked on both the left and right by UKIP, the Greens and the anti-austerity and anti-neoliberalist SNP, and we would suffer a similar result to the one we have just experienced. “Perhaps we should remember what Harold Wilson – who won 4 out of 5 elections – said: ‘the Labour Party is nothing if it is not a crusade’.”

Posted on 2015-05-11 | 03:14

At the recent election Roger was returned as the MP for Hall Green with a massive increase in his majority. He gained an overall majority with 59.8% of the vote, up 26.9% from 2010.

Roger and his team are looking forward to resuming our service for the people of Hall Green. Thank you very much for all the support that you gave to Roger on Thursday and for your messages of support and congratulations!

After winning the election, Roger commented: “I am very grateful to the people of Birmingham Hall Green for returning me to Parliament with an increased majority. I will do my best to serve my constituents and to campaign for a better, fairer UK.

“I campaigned on a platform of fully nationalised public services, a living wage for all work, and a strong social safety net to protect those too ill to work and those looking for work. Despite the Conservative victory for the politics of fear and even harsher austerity, I received a clear mandate from my constituents to continue to fight against policies that victimise the most vulnerable in our society while allowing the wealthiest 1% and multinational corporations to avoid contributing anything like their fair share.

“With a Conservative Government in power, it will be even more important to make a strong case for social justice and a fair society which protects the vulnerable and ensures a decent standard of living for all, rather than ever-increasing wealth for a small minority. While the Labour party must support enterprise and small and medium sized businesses, we must not fall into the trap of blindly appeasing big business’ demands for ever-lower taxes, or allow workers’ rights to be eroded. I will continue to campaign for all work to pay enough to live on with dignity, and for a limit to executive pay.

“The Tories now intend to cut an appalling £12 billion from benefits which are already tightly squeezed. As pensions will be protected, the brunt of this will fall on those too ill or disabled to work, and on working families whose wages are too low to live on. I am extremely worried that this will lead to greater poverty and misery for people who, through no fault of their own, are already struggling. The Conservatives’ constant mantra that the recession was caused by Labour’s overspending on benefits is simply not backed up by the facts—it was the super-rich, not the struggling poor, who caused the financial crash. I will not vote for any legislation which inflicts further cuts on citizens who work hard in poorly-paid jobs, or who are trying to find work in a very tight jobs market, or who are disabled and cannot work.

“I will campaign for clean, renewable energy, and against fracking and other forms of environmental destruction. I will also continue to oppose further privatisation and fragmentation of our NHS, and to call for our public services to be run for the public good, not private profit. The public sphere is not a drain on the UK—it is a vital part of this country that we all rely on, and we need to protect it.”

Posted on 2015-03-26 | 04:31

Roger applauded the Supreme Court's decision that Prince Charles' lobbying letters to Ministers must be released under Freedom of Information legislation as a triumph for democracy and transparency.

He commented: "It is ridiculous that in 2015 we have a hereditary head of state with no accountability to citizens or to Parliament, and no requirement that he is competent or suitable for the role. However, given that that is what we have, then at the very least we as citizens must demand transparency about Charles' role and whether he is damaging his own position by lobbying Ministers.

"The former attorney general blocked the publication of these letters on the grounds that their contents might undermine Charles' position of political neutrality and thus his suitability for the role of king. In my view, this is a very strong argument that the letters should be published. If Charles has damaged his own neutrality by his meddling, then we as citizens should have the right to know about this and to decide whether we want him 'ruling' over us."

Rather than standing up for the principle that power should be held accountable to citizens, David Cameron responded to the ruling by saying that he wanted to change the law to increase Ministers' powers to veto the release of information. Nick Clegg's position was to prioritise the "privacy" of Charles' correspondence over the right of UK citizens to know exactly what he is lobbying their elected Government about.

Said Roger: "It beggars belief that Prime Minister and his deputy are more concerned to guard the already-damaged reputation of the heir to the throne than to ensure proper accountability to the people they are elected to serve. UK citizens are not given a choice about whether they want vast amounts of taxpayers' money to be wasted on Charles' extravagant lifestyle. They should at least be allowed to know whether he has disqualified himself from office by his meddling and lack of political impartiality, and to decide whether or not they want him to be king."

Posted on 2015-03-16 | 03:24

The 17th March is commemorated as St. Patrick’s Day in memory of Patrick the son of Calpurnius, a Roman-British army officer, who was born in the 4th century AD. Having originally being sold into slavery by pirates he escaped and went to Ireland where he spent 20 years travelling throughout the country establishing Monasteries and setting up schools and Churches and winning converts for Christianity.

Although originally a Catholic Holy Day St. Patrick’s Day has evolved into a secular holiday which is celebrated by Irish people of all religious faiths as a celebration of the Irish culture and I extend greetings to all my constituents of Irish descent on this happy occasion.

Posted on 2015-03-13 | 03:24

Roger is standing up for drivers in Birmingham, Hall Green, as new research commissioned by MoneySuperMarket shows that they could be losing out on savings of up to £1,665,8371 a year on their car insurance because of unfair practices by insurers.

With a total national waste of £1.3 billion as drivers are coaxed to not shop around, Roger is calling on insurers to clean up their act and be up front with customers when they automatically renew their car insurance policies. 62 per cent of consumers say auto-renewals deter them from shopping around for a more affordable policy. And almost six million drivers (23 per cent) automatically renewed their car insurance with their existing provider when their policy was last up for renewal, without checking a single other quote.

The report shines a light on the poor practices of insurers, revealing that people often have no idea that they’re agreeing to auto-renewal when they first buy their policy, and would have no way of opting out even if they did. When renewal time arrives, the letter or email they get from their insurer can be confusing and misleading, and even conceal significant changes to their policy. Cancelling an auto-renewed policy can be difficult and costly, with some providers charging cancellation fees or driving customers to expensive premium rate telephone numbers. Most insurers do not provide an online cancellation process.

Commented Roger: “It’s unacceptable that drivers in Birmingham, Hall Green are being ripped off by £1,665,837 because of unclear and unfair practices by the car insurance industry. This is money many can’t afford to waste. Insurers must start being much clearer with their customers about auto-renewals, to put drivers back in control of their insurance. People shouldn’t have payments automatically taken from their accounts unless they have given their explicit consent and know how to stop them.

“This report shows that some people may be double charged, driving underinsured or simply paying too much without realising it. And the over-55s, those with less money, and people not on the internet suffer more than most. Insurers need to do more to ensure this doesn’t happen, rather than happily keen on over-charging people just because they can.”

Posted on 2015-03-09 | 12:57

Roger congratulates the Bangladeshi team on their superb victory over England, which means that they will progress to the next stage of the world cup while England come home.

He commented: “English cricket with all its financial resources, compared to many of the other countries – its central contracts for highly paid players; batting coaches; bowling coaches; fielding coaches; psychologists; masseurs; and other associated hangers-on have contrived to produce an England team which has won one match out of five in this world cup – and an ignominious exit home.

  “A massive clear out of the administrators and highly paid hangers-on would surely be appropriate!”

Posted on 2015-03-01 | 01:49

St. David’s Day is the time of great celebrations for all Welsh people. St. David, or Dewi Sant, as he is known in the Welsh language is the patron saint of Wales. e was Celtic a monk, abbot and bishop, who lived in the sixth century and during his life he was the archbishop of Wales and one of early many saints who helped spread Christianity among the pagan Celtic tribes of western Britain.

Said Roger: “As Welsh people celebrate St. David’s Day and daffodils are proudly worn, I extend my congratulations and greetings to all people of Welsh decent who live in my constituency and wish them well on this happy occasion.”

Posted on 2015-02-27 | 02:06

Roger warmly applauded the Sotheby’s staff, including cleaners and porters, who formed a union and successfully fought for their right to the London Living Wage and better working conditions.

Volunteer-run trade union United Voices of the World successfully negotiated with Contract Cleaning and Maintenance (London) Limited to achieve a substantial pay rise to the full London Living Wage of £9.15 per hour, and the increase will be backdated to 1 November 2014.

United Voices of the World general secretary, Petros Elia, commented: "Sotheby's is famous for selling masterpieces for millions of pounds, so the contrast with cleaners on poverty wages could hardly be greater. These hardworking people were also subject to a host of other injustices, which are sadly all too common in the cleaning sector, including a cut in hours and pay resulting in more work for less money and aggressive managers who never faced disciplinary sanctions.

"We began by submitting a collective grievance to the contractor, CCML, but this was flippantly dismissed. We then secured an Early Day Motion in Parliament strongly condemning such employment practices and calling on Sotheby's to resolve the dispute. That helped to raise awareness of the cleaners' complaints, as did writing to several hundred of Sotheby's employees. A protest scheduled for Sunday 22 February seems to have been the catalyst for this comprehensive settlement, which was achieved without having to resort to strike action.

Roger was one of the signatories to the EDM. He commented: "The fantastic success of this campaign shows what can be achieved when workers form a union and fight for their rights. I congratulate these workers on having finally gained what they were entitled to all along--a pay packet they can actually live on. It is extremely encouraging to see that workers have the power to take on unfair, exploitative systems and win. I am hopeful that more low-paid workers will be inspired to unionise and demand fair pay, decent working conditions and respect."

Posted on 2015-01-26 | 01:01

There was a recent vote in Parliament to commit up to £100 billion on renewing Britain’s Trident Nuclear Missile system. Roger voted against – and he explains why:

“There are 2 arguments put forward for why the UK has a so-called independent nuclear weapons deterrent. Both are myths.

“The first myth is that the system is ‘independent’. The UK has 4 nuclear submarines. Each can carry up to 8 missiles and each missile can carry up to 5 nuclear warheads. The UK does not own the missiles. It leases them from America where they are made, maintained and tested. Our 4 submarines have to go to the American naval base in Georgia to have the missiles fitted. Therefore our nuclear deterrent is totally dependent on America.

“The second myth is that the UK would lose its seat on the United Nations Security Council if it did not have nuclear weapons.This really is nonsense. When the United Nations was set up in 1945 the 5 permanent members of the Security Council, who have a veto, were the victors of the Second World War. Of the 5 countries only America had nuclear weapons. To suggest that a country has to have nuclear weapons in order to be a member of the Security Council is totally untrue.

“This country, like other developed countries, does face threats to its security – from rogue states, international terrorist groups and from groups within our society who want to destroy it. These threats internationally are best met by our membership of NATO. America, with its nuclear arsenal, was a founding member, and it has been the most successful mutual defence pact in history keeping the peace of Europe for over 50 years. The cornerstone of the NATO pact is that an attack on any member is an attack on all.

“Furthermore the only way of dealing with threats from domestic terrorist groups is to be continually vigilant and to make sure our police and internal security organisations are properly funded to disrupt their activities. This happened some years ago in White Street, Sparkbrook, where a terrorist cell planning to set off bombs in central Birmingham was monitored and the premises raided before any atrocity was carried out. The individuals involved were all convicted and received long prison sentences.

“Committing £100 billion to renew our nuclear deterrent is ridiculous at a time of austerity when so many of our services, including conventional defence forces, are being dramatically cut. This is why I voted against renewal.”

Posted on 2015-01-18 | 05:46

Roger has tabled a series of Early Day Motions and Parliamentary Questions to protest the damaging effects on patient care of the privatisation and fragmentation of the National Health Service.

The EDMs draw attention to the problems which occur when private companies are allowed to cherry-pick those NHS services they believe they can make a profit from, then send patients back to the NHS when things go wrong. Private health company Vanguard won a contract to provide cataract surgery to Musgrove Park Hospital, which was forced to terminate the contract after more than half of the patients who underwent surgery suffered from serious complications, which the NHS then had to treat at taxpayer expense. The injured patients are now forced to take legal action against Vanguard.

Commented Roger: “If NHS patients were aware that having their surgery done by a private company which had been subcontracted by the NHS was more likely to result in complications, they simply would not agree to undergo surgery at a private hospital. It is unacceptable that people’s health and even lives are being put at risk by the failed experiment of privatisation. It is simply not possible for private health companies to make what they regard as an acceptable profit from NHS contracts unless they undercut on safety standards and provision for emergency care, leaving the NHS to pick up the pieces when companies provide poor or dangerous care.

“In 2012-13, there were more than 2,600 emergency admissions to the NHS from the private sector. These private companies take the money for carrying out surgery then dump patients back on the NHS when complications occur. This means that the shareholders make a fat profit at the expense of the UK taxpayer and of their patients’ well-being. The NHS should, at the very least, have the powers to recoup costs resulting from private contractors’ ineptitude.”

The safety record of private hospitals is extremely worrying. Figures obtained from the Care Quality Commission show that just over 800 patients died unexpectedly in private hospitals in England between October 2010 and April 2014, and there were more than 900 serious injuries. Yet because private health companies are not subject to the same transparency and disclosure rules as the NHS, it is impossible to carry out a like-for-like comparison on statistics such as death rates and infections to see just how much more dangerous private hospitals are than those run by the national health service. In the EDMs Roger tabled, he calls for the same level of scrutiny, regulation and protection of patients' safety to be applied to private patients as currently exist for NHS patients.

Roger said: “The recent Hinchingbrooke Hospital disaster shows the effects of privatising the NHS. Hichingbrooke was the first hospital to be privatised, and Circle Group pulled out of the contract when it found it to be insufficiently profitable. Unlike the NHS, private companies have a duty to maximise shareholder profits and will therefore prioritise this over patient wellbeing and public health”.

Roger’s EDMs highlight the fact that Circle Group has previous form in making a mess of NHS contracts. The group took over Bedfordshire's £120 million Musculoskeletal Service, which led to a 30 per cent reduction in referrals to the Bedford Hospital Trust. This undermined not only the ability of the A&E department to see and admit trauma patients, but also the Trust’s ability to pay and retain consultants. Nottingham University Hospitals Trust will no longer be able to provide acute adult dermatology, including skin cancer and emergency care after losing six of its eight consultants. Five of these consultants left rather than transfer to Circle over concerns about job security and that a profit-driven provider would not offer opportunities for academic research or training.

Roger continued: “The NHS is already an extremely cost-effective way of providing healthcare. By allowing private companies to get their greedy hands on NHS contracts, less money will be spent on healthcare and more will be wasted on management and advertising costs, not to mention on profits. Why should a single penny of UK taxpayers’ money—which should be spent on healthcare—be wasted on fattening investors’ shareholder value or corporate returns? Citizens have a right to demand that their taxes are spent on public services, not wasted on fattening greedy, incompetent corporations which lack any concern for public health or patient safety.”

Roger also tabled Written Parliamentary Questions to ask the Government what proportion of GP practices are privately owned and what research has been done into the differences in quality—such as survival rates and waiting times—between privately owned and NHS GP practices. He also asked how much admissions to the NHS from private hospitals which could not cope with emergencies are costing the NHS, and what proportion of private health companies which have taken on GP contracts have left the contract early when they found that it was not sufficiently profitable, sometimes leaving citizens with no local GP service. To all of these questions, the Department of Health’s answer was the same: it “does not hold this information centrally”.

Said Roger: “It is extremely worrying that the Department of Health is not fulfilling its responsibility to collect data on the effects of the decision to privatise many vital parts of the NHS. If the Government do not require data to be collected to enable the results of privatisation to be examined, how will MPs or doctors be able to compare the safety and value for money of private versus public provision?

“If the Government insist on continuing with a policy of privatisation which has so far been utterly disastrous, it should at the very least bother to collect data to compare the two modes of provision. That the Government decline to do so leads to the suspicion that Ministers at the Department are reluctant to subject the performance of private healthcare companies which take on NHS contracts to proper public and parliamentary scrutiny. I believe that to do so would clearly show that the NHS is the more cost-effective and safer way of providing good quality public healthcare, and would therefore destroy any arguments in favour of privatisation and fragmentation.”

Posted on 2015-01-08 | 11:51

Speaking after train fares were raised above inflation yet again, Roger said:

“Do you feel that you are getting a fair deal from your energy suppliers, water companies or train operators – or do you reckon you are being ripped-off? If so you aren’t alone. Since these three utilities were privatised under previous Tory Governments the consumer – you and me – has seen the cost of electricity, gas, water and train fares rocket – far outstripping the rate of inflation and the measly increase in wages and salaries of most people. But, of course, some people have benefitted.

“The top managers of all these utility services have seen their salaries and bonuses increase massively as they have generated rich profits for the new owners by sacking staff, slashing costs, increasing charges to the consumer and outsourcing ‘customer service’ functions to call centres on the other side of the world!

“So are you, the customer, getting a better deal? Energy companies say there is competition between them – but this is smoke and mirrors. They act like a cartel – following each other in raising prices when they say the cost of energy has risen on world markets – but how often do they reduce their prices when the cost of world oil or gas is plummeting – as it is now!

  “And what competition is there among water companies? Answer – none. They are monopolies. Try asking your provider, Severn Trent, if you can switch to Anglian Water and see what they say!

“Finally, railways. Britain’s railways, built by the great Victorians, were the envy of the world. In 1992 the Tory Government, led by John Major, privatised them – something Mrs. Thatcher resolutely refused to do. Since then the train operating companies have received vast subsidies to run the railways while distributing huge profits to shareholders. And, of course, the managers have had their share with high salaries and bonuses! The subsidy – paid by the taxpayer – is now vastly more than it was when the railways were in public ownership! So much for the benefits of privatisation.

“The great Victorians, like Joseph Chamberlain in Birmingham, recognised the limitations of unrestricted unregulated markets and ‘crony capitalism’. That is why Chamberlain initiated a programme of building up the public infrastructure which Brummies were, and are still, proud of.

“I applaud what Joseph Chamberlain did and I want our public services brought back under the control of the people and taken away from the clutches of avaricious predators who have done nothing to give better value to you – the customer and taxpayer.”

Posted on 2015-01-08 | 01:44

Ched Evans was a high profile professional footballer prior to being convicted of rape. He served part of his sentence and has now been released on licence. He has shown no remorse and insists he was wrongly convicted.

Roger chairs a large football charity which engages with 10,000 young people every week and has won national and international awards for its work, and he is strongly opposed to allowing Ched Evans to resume his professional football career in the UK.

Says Roger: “I very much support programmes to rehabilitate offenders and this includes finding them employment. But to allow a convicted rapist – who is now on the Sex Offenders List – to resume his employment in such a high profile profession, with footballers viewed as ‘role models’ by many young people, would be wrong and perverse, particularly as he has not admitted that his behaviour was utterly wrong and reprehensible.

“Would it be considered appropriate, for example, to allow a convicted paedophile who worked in a children’s home to resume similar employment when they were released? Of course it would not.

“Ched Evans is entitled to find employment but it would be totally wrong of any professional club in the UK to employ him because it would send out completely the wrong message to young football supporters who idolise their heroes on the pitch.

“Any professional football club which employed him should be rightly condemned as putting greed and profit above morality.”

Posted on 2015-01-05 | 04:33

Roger is one of a group of MPs and MSPs who have condemned recent violence in Venezuela by far-right opposition groups, which aim to oust the country’s elected government. The group also support the Venezuelan president’s calls for peace and dialogue.

The group of UK politicians condemned the sanctions against Venezuela which were suggested by some members of the US congress. They commented: “We agree with the Organisation of American States in its call for "respect for the principle of non-intervention in the internal affairs of states and its commitment to the defence of democratic institutionalism of the state of law”. They therefore disagree with all external interference, including sanctions which could contribute to the impoverishment of the people of Venezuela.

Commented Roger: “There is no point in rushing into economic sanctions which will isolate Venezuela from the international community while pushing its citizens into economic hardship. The right to peacefully protest must be protected, as must the right of a democratically elected government to run the country without outside interference. The priority for all sides must be the wellbeing, prosperity and right to self-determination and freedom of expression of the people of Venezuela.”

Posted on 2015-01-02 | 06:30

Roger has produced a number of leaflets setting out his priorities for the 2015 election. These set out his position on the big issues which will dominate the political agenda in the run up to the general election: the economy, Britain and the EU, HS2 and the train service, the NHS, TTIP and the UK after the Scottish referendum.

These leaflets can be accessed using the following links:

Economy

European Union

HS2

NHS

TTIP

UK after Scottish Referendum

Rip-off Britain

Benefit sanctions

Trident renewal

Immigration

Roger’s position on the economy is that it must work for ordinary people, not only the wealthy few. He believes that the European Union must be reformed to ensure that economic migration does not lead to a race to the bottom on workers’ pay and employment rights. He thinks that HS2 is a waste of money which should be spent on the whole UK public transport network. He is in favour of full renationalisation of the UK rail network and of the NHS, because he does not believe that essential public services should be run to make a profit for fat-cat shareholders.

Roger is against the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Treaty because it would make it easier for corporations to sue governments for bringing in legislation to protect workers’ rights, health or the environment, and would also contribute to the further privatisation of our public services. He supports devolution where this is the wish of the citizens concerned, and believes that people in all parts of the UK should be able to access the same devolved powers, should they want to do so.

Commented Roger: “As we approach the 2015 election, I will be campaigning for public services including the NHS and rail to be run for public good, not private profit. Why should commuters and the UK taxpayer be used to make fat profits for greedy multinational conglomerates, rather than for the good of all in the UK?”